Environmental impact of shipping

Short description: Ocean pollution

Container ships in port

Template:Pollution sidebar

The environmental impact of shipping include air pollution, water pollution, acoustic, and oil pollution.[1] Ships are responsible for more than 18% of nitrogen oxides pollution,[2] and 3% of greenhouse gas emissions.[3]

Although maritime transport is the most energy-efficient method to move a given mass of cargo a given distance, the sheer size of the industry means that it has a significant effect on the environment.[4] The annual increasing amount of shipping overwhelms gains in efficiency, such as from slow-steaming. The growth in tonne-kilometers of sea shipment has averaged 4 percent yearly since the 1990s,[5] and it has grown by a factor of 5 since the 1970s. The fact that shipping enjoys substantial tax privileges has contributed to the growing emissions.[6][7][8]

## Contents

* 1 Ballast water
* 2 Sound pollution
* 3 Wildlife collisions
* 4 Atmospheric pollution
* 4.1 Conventional pollutants
* 4.1.1 Localized air pollution
* 4.2 Greenhouse gas emissions
* 4.2.1 Decarbonization of shipping
* 5 Oil spills
* 5.1 Types and causes of oil spills
* 5.1.1 Accidental oil spills
* 5.1.2 Intentional oil spills
* 5.2 Spatial distribution and frequency of oil spills
* 5.3 Impact of oil spills
* 5.4 Governance of oil spills
* 5.4.1 Oil spill management
* 5.4.1.1 OPA90 and Erika I, II, III
* 5.4.1.2 Port state control
* 5.4.1.3 Monitoring
* 5.4.1.4 Contingency planning and emergency training
* 6 Wastewater
* 7 Solid waste
* 7.1 Plastic Pollution
* 7.1.1 Causes and Sources of Plastic Pollution
* 7.1.1.1 Direct Discharge Pollution
* 7.1.1.2 Indirect Pollution
* 7.1.2 Environmental and Ecological Impacts of Plastic Pollution
* 7.1.2.1 Impacts of Large Plastic Debris
* 7.1.2.2 Microplastic and Nanoplastic Pollution
* 7.1.3 Mitigation Efforts and Limitations
* 7.1.3.1 International Governance Framework
* 7.1.3.2 Efforts by National Governments
* 7.1.3.3 Regional Governance Initiatives
* 7.1.3.4 Technological and Policy Advancements
* 8 Bilge water
* 9 International regulation
* 10 Issues by region
* 10.1 Asia
* 10.2 European Union
* 10.3 United Kingdom
* 10.4 United States
* 11 See also
* 12 References
* 13 Further reading
* 14 External links

## Ballast water

Main article: Earth:Ballast water discharge and the environment

A cargo ship discharging ballast water into the sea

Ballast water discharges by ships can have a negative impact on the marine environment.[1] Cruise ships, large tankers, and bulk cargo carriers use a huge amount of ballast water, which is often taken on in the coastal waters in one region after ships discharge wastewater or unload cargo, and discharged at the next port of call, wherever more cargo is loaded.[9] Ballast water discharge typically contains a variety of biological materials, including plants, animals, viruses, and bacteria. These materials often include non-native, nuisance, invasive, exotic species that can cause extensive ecological and economic damage to aquatic ecosystems along with serious human health problems.

## Sound pollution

Noise pollution caused by shipping and other human enterprises has increased in recent history.[10] The noise produced by ships can travel long distances, and marine species who may rely on sound for their orientation, communication, and feeding, can be harmed by this sound pollution.[11][12]

The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species has identified ocean noise as a potential threat to marine life.[13] The disruption of whales' ability to communicate with one another is an extreme threat and is affecting their ability to survive. According to a Discovery Channel article on Sonic Sea Journeys Deep into the Ocean over the last century, extremely loud noise from commercial ships, oil and gas exploration, naval sonar exercises and other sources has transformed the ocean's delicate acoustic habitat, challenging the ability of whales and other marine life to prosper and ultimately to survive. Whales are starting to react to this in ways that are life-threatening. Despite sonar's military and civilian applications, it is destroying marine life. According to IFAW Animal Rescue Program Director Katie Moore, "There's different ways that sounds can affect animals. There's that underlying ambient noise level that's rising, and rising, and rising that interferes with communication and their movement patterns. And then there's the more acute kind of traumatic impact of sound, that's causing physical damage or a really strong behavioral response. It's fight or flight".[14]

## Wildlife collisions

Carcass of a whale on a shore in Iceland

Marine mammals, such as whales and manatees, risk being struck by ships, causing injury and death.[1] For example, a collision with a ship traveling at only 15 knots has a 79% chance of being lethal to a whale.[15] Ship collisions may be one of the leading causes of population decline for whale sharks.[16]

One notable example of the impact of ship collisions is the endangered North Atlantic right whale, of which 400 or fewer remain.[17] The greatest danger to the North Atlantic right whale is injury sustained from ship strikes.[15] Between 1970 and 1999, 35.5% of recorded deaths were attributed to collisions.[18] From 1999 to 2003, incidents of mortality and serious injury attributed to ship strikes averaged one per year. From 2004 to 2006, that number increased to 2.6.[19] Deaths from collisions has become an extinction threat.[20] The United States' National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) introduced vessel speed restrictions to reduce ship collisions with North Atlantic right whales in 2008, which expired in 2013.[21] However, in 2017 an unprecedented mortality event occurred, resulting in the deaths of 17 North Atlantic right whales caused primarily from ship-strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.[17]

## Atmospheric pollution

Exhaust gases from ships are a significant source of air pollution, both for conventional pollutants and greenhouse gases.[1]

### Conventional pollutants

Air pollution from ships is generated by diesel engines that burn high sulfur content fuel oil, also known as bunker oil, producing sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate, in addition to carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons which again leads to the formation of aerosols and secondary chemicals reactions including formations of HCHO[22] and ozone in the atmosphere.[1] Diesel exhaust has been classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a likely human carcinogen. The agency recognizes that these emissions from marine diesel engines contribute to ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment (i.e., failure to meet air quality standards), as well as adverse health effects associated with ambient concentrations of particulate matter and visibility, haze, acid deposition, and eutrophication and nitrification of water.[23] EPA estimates that large marine diesel engines accounted for about 1.6 percent of mobile source nitrogen oxide emissions and 2.8 percent of mobile source particulate emissions in the United States in 2000. Contributions of marine diesel engines can be higher on a port-specific basis. Ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) is a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur contents. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in Europe and North America is of a ULSD type. However, bunker oil is still available, and large marine engines are able to switch between the two types simply by opening and closing the respective valves from two different on-board fuel tanks.

In 2016, the IMO adopted new sulfur-emissions regulations for implementation by larger ships beginning in January 2020.[24][25][26]

Of total global air emissions, marine shipping accounts for 18 to 30 percent of the nitrogen oxides and 9% of the sulfur oxides.[2][27] Sulfur in the air creates acid rain which damages crops and buildings. When inhaled, sulfur is known to cause respiratory problems and even increases the risk of a heart attack.[28] According to Irene Blooming, a spokeswoman for the European environmental coalition Seas at Risk, the fuel used in oil tankers and container ships is high in sulfur and cheaper to buy compared to the fuel used for domestic land use. "A ship lets out around 50 times more sulfur than a lorry per tonne of cargo carried."[28]

Cities in the United States like Long Beach, Los Angeles, Houston, Galveston, and Pittsburgh see some of the heaviest shipping traffic, which has left local officials desperately trying to clean up the air.[29] Increasing trade between the United States and China is helping to increase the number of vessels navigating the Pacific and is exacerbating multiple environmental problems. To maintain the level of growth China is experiencing, large amounts of grain are being shipped to China. The numbers of shipments are expected to continue increasing.[30]

In contrast to sulfur emissions (which depend on the fuel used), nitrous oxide emissions are primarily a function of combustion temperature. As air contains over 70% nitrogen by volume, some of it will react with oxygen during combustion. Given that those reactions are endothermic, a higher amount of nitrous oxides will be produced at higher combustion temperatures. However, other pollutants, particularly unburned or partially burnt hydrocarbons (also known as hyperfine particulates or soot), will be more common at lower combustion temperatures, so there is a trade-off between nitrogen oxides and soot.

Other than replacing ambient air with pure oxygen or some other oxidizing agent, the only ways to significantly reduce the nitrogen oxide emissions are via passing flue gasses through a catalytic converter and/or diesel exhaust fluid treatment, whereby an aqueous solution of urea reacts with the nitrous oxides in the flue gas to produce nitrogen, carbon dioxide and water. However, both those options add cost and weight. Furthermore, the urea in diesel exhaust fluid is usually derived from fossil fuels, and therefore it is not carbon neutral.

A third option entails the use of wet scrubbers that essentially spray seawater through the exhaust column as it is pumped through a chamber. Depending on the detailed engineering-design attributes of the wet scrubber, these devices can wash out the sulfur oxides, soot and nitrogen oxides from the engine exhaust, thus leaving a sludge that contains soot and various acidic compounds (or neutralized compounds, if alkaline substances are mixed in with the scrubbing liquid beforehand).[31] This material can then be either treated via an on-board device (closed-loop system), or it can simply be dumped overboard (open-loop system). The discharged material has been shown to harm marine life, especially in nearshore settings.[32]

In a recent study, the future of ship emissions has been investigated and reported that the growth of carbon dioxide emissions do not change with most common alternatives such as ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) or liquefied natural gas (LNG) as well as growing volume of methane emission due to methane slip through the LNG supply-chain.[33] Methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide per unit volume, and is only slowly broken down in the environment by various chemical, photochemical and  biological processes.

#### Localized air pollution

Cruise ship haze over Juneau, Alaska

One source of environmental stresses on maritime vessels recently has come from states and localities, as they assess the contribution of commercial marine vessels to regional air quality problems when ships are docked at port.[34] For instance, large marine diesel engines are believed to contribute 7 percent of mobile source nitrogen oxide emissions in Baton Rouge and New Orleans, Louisiana. Ships can also have a significant impact in areas without large commercial ports: they contribute about 37 percent of total area nitrogen oxide emissions in the Santa Barbara, California area, and that percentage is expected to increase to 61 percent by 2015.[23] Again, there is little cruise-industry specific data on this issue. They comprise only a small fraction of the world shipping fleet, but cruise ship emissions may exert significant impacts on a local scale in specific coastal areas that are visited repeatedly. Shipboard incinerators also burn large volumes of garbage, plastics, and other waste, producing ash that must be disposed of. Incinerators may release toxic emissions as well.

In 2005, MARPOL Annex VI came into force to combat this problem. As such cruise ships now employ CCTV monitoring on the smokestacks as well as recorded measuring via opacity meter while some are also using clean burning gas turbines for electrical loads and propulsion in sensitive areas.

### Greenhouse gas emissions

Maritime transport accounts for about 3% of all greenhouse gas emissions, primarily carbon dioxide.[35] According to the World Bank, in 2022, the shipping industry's 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions make it "the sixth largest greenhouse gas emitter worldwide, ranking between Japan and Germany."[36][37][38]

CO2 Emissions Distribution by Vessel Type, 2012–2023[39] Year  | Tankers  | Dry bulk and general cargo  | Container  | Other

|
|
|
|

2012 | 25.04%  | 28.57%  | 27.80%  | 18.59%
2013 | 24.61%  | 28.77%  | 27.47%  | 19.15%
2014 | 24.50%  | 28.87%  | 27.18%  | 19.45%
2015 | 25.03%  | 28.42%  | 26.99%  | 19.56%
2016 | 25.31%  | 28.33%  | 26.83%  | 19.53%
2017 | 25.62%  | 28.06%  | 26.91%  | 19.41%
2018 | 25.76%  | 27.42%  | 27.09%  | 19.73%
2019 | 26.41%  | 27.22%  | 25.84%  | 20.53%
2020 | 27.38%  | 28.13%  | 25.35%  | 19.14%
2021 | 26.71%  | 28.28%  | 26.13%  | 18.88%
2022 | 27.28%  | 27.56%  | 25.35%  | 19.81%
2023 | 28.55%  | 27.52%  | 24.03%  | 19.90%
The group "other" includes vehicles and roll-on/roll-off ships, passenger ships, offshore ships and service and miscellaneous ships.

#### Decarbonization of shipping

This section is an excerpt from Decarbonization of shipping[ edit ]

There is a trend in shipping to transition to Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) with claims of associated GHG reductions.[40][41] Environmental groups (e.g., Stand.earth and the Clean Arctic Alliance[42]) and some climate scientists warn that LNG could be a "climate shipwreck."[43] The biggest concern is unburned methane escaping into the atmosphere referred to as methane slip.[44] One study[43] by Stand.earth states Methane is roughly 80 times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas over a 20-year period.

## Oil spills

Oil spills are the most commonly known form of environmental pollution by ships.[45]

### Types and causes of oil spills

The economically important shipping industry[46][47][48][49] contributes heavily to the oceans' oil pollution.[45][48][49] The marine transportation of oil is particularly risky.[50][51][52][48] Soto-Onate & Caballero (2017), therefore, regard oil spills as a significant negative externality of the economy.[50] Oil spills can be categorized as accidental or intentional.[53][54][49]

#### Accidental oil spills

Accidental spills are the result of e.g. ship collisions, fires or groundings.[55][56][54][49][48][51][45][53] Various partly interrelated factors are underlying causes of these accidents. These include human factors such as discipline, and competence of the crew,[57][53][49][45][51] management by e.g. the shipping company,[51] ship factors such as technical installations,[51][45] and environmental factors like difficult to navigate areas.[51]

#### Intentional oil spills

Intentional spills can be operational.[54][55][53] Although less studied and publicized, they make up for more marine pollution.[50][49] They usually involve not properly managing oily residues or ballast and bilge water by e.g. illegally cleaning the ship's tanks at sea.[58][54][55][48][49][53] It is regarded as a way for ship operators to cut costs by not complying with international conventions.[53][49][45] Moreover, it is common to also classify minor spills caused by human error and negligence as intentional.[45][53]

### Spatial distribution and frequency of oil spills

Oil spills are not restricted to certain regions but can occur globally.[59][60][56] Nevertheless, studies have shown that oil spill density is positively correlated with shipping density, i.e. spills more often occur where maritime traffic is intense – along major shipping lanes, coastlines, and close to ports or oil infrastructure.[53][49][52] This is related to a higher risk of accidents.[49] Intentional spills are, moreover, likely to occur in 'clusters'[53] and beyond national jurisdiction to avoid detection or because of inadequate reception facilities in ports. Lastly, zones characterized by war or political instability experience more oil spills.[60][49]

While scholars highlight the decrease of oil spills over the last decades,[54][60][48][50][49][51][52][53][56][57] oil pollution from shipping remains an environmental risk.[54][48][50][51][52][47] In the past decades several major accidental spills like the grounding of Exxon Valdez (1989), which despite considerable rescue efforts substantially harmed the marine environment off of Alaska,[61] or the Sanchi oil spill (2018) – "the most serious and most polluting oil tanker accident [in] the 21st century"[51] – occurred.[56] Concerning the number of intentional oil spills, a high number of unknown cases is expected.[53] It is estimated that intentional oil spills make up for 45%, while accidents only contribute to 8% of marine oil pollution.[49]

Currently, various trends could increase the risk of oil spills again. Among these are the growing oil trade and bigger tankers.[46][48][52][49] Even though not studied conclusively,[62] climate change might, moreover, make accidental spills more likely because of more intense and frequent storms at sea and melting ice.[63][60][46][47] Lastly, the growing problem of shadow fleets transporting oil on sub-standard, old, and anonymously owned vessels without proper safety, insurance and compliance standards, and engaging in dangerous ship-to-ship transfers exacerbate the risk of oil spills.[64][65][46][63]

### Impact of oil spills

Oil spills are regarded as devastating and irreversible for marine ecosystems and biodiversity.[48][51][60][50] Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are in crude oil, are toxic for marine life. The difficult to clean PAHs can remain in the marine environment and sediment for years.[61] PAHs can hinder the marine life's development, reproduction, and resistance to diseases.[61] Affected are, among others, fish, seabirds, mammals, invertebrate communities, and reefs.[63][45][52][60][53][50][49][51] The impact depends on various factors: Oil spills by oil tankers will have substantially larger environmental consequences than those of other ships.[48] Moreover, currents, the geographical area and its ecological sensitivity, the type and amount of spilled oil, weather conditions and seasons, e.g. breeding seasons, influence how devastating the individual oil spill is.[55][49][45][52][60][53][51] The exact quantification of impacts,[51] the assessment of long-term consequences of oil spills and the measurement of impacts of intentional spills remain difficult.[53] Even though less oil is released at once in the case of the latter, their continuous nature and frequency translate into substantial consequences, particularly in sensitive areas.[49][53]

### Governance of oil spills

Oil Spills are governed by a hierarchical and multi-level system formed by various actors.[53] The evolution of the system can be divided into three phases: The first phase (1950s-1970s) laid the foundation for a governance system. Starting in 1954 with the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution at Sea by Oil (OILPOL54), a variety of technical and institutional measures were adopted. In the second phase (1980s-1990s), this system was strengthened, and in the third phase (21st century) supplemented.[48] Major oil spills such as Torrey Canyon (1967), Exxon Valdez (1989), Erika (1999), and Prestige (2002) were crucial in this process.[63][45][52][60][48][50] They revealed defects of the system and led to improvements.[60][50]

#### Oil spill management

Oil spill management is conducted and influenced by a variety of actors. At the international level, the United Nations (UN) agencies International Maritime Organization (IMO) and International Labor Organization (ILO) are prominent. The IMO is regarded as the main intergovernmental organization in the maritime domain.[63][45][53][48] It is e.g.  involved through IMO conventions such as MARPOL 73/78,[48] guidance documents such as technical papers about oil spill response,[66] and by supporting the implementation efforts in developing countries.[48]

However, regional and national levels are also important in oil spill governance: State and supranational actors influenced the system's evolution. The United States of America (USA) and the European Union (EU) are credited with pushing international regulation, concerning e.g. compensation and the phasing out of single hull tankers, forward by lobbying in the IMO or taking unilateral action.[54][53][50][48] Balances of power between countries play an important role in how the system develops.[50]

Moreover, states take on important tasks within the current framework. They are e.g. responsible for the implementation of the international regulations at the national level.[50][53] Specific responsibilities apply to flag, port, and coastal states.[65][53][48]

Regional organizations and cooperation are also part of oil spill governance. The latter can aim at monitoring,[53] capacity building, and national preparedness.[67][68][69] Examples for regional organizations are the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA),[70][53][48][49] the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM),[70][53] the UN Environment Program (UNEP) Regional Seas,[70] the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO),[70][45] and the Northwest Pacific Action Plan Marine Environment Emergency Preparedness and Response Regional Activity Centre (NOWPAP MERRAC).[70]

Lastly, non-state actors influence oil spill management. The oil and shipping industry have contributed concerning Research and Development (R&D)[60] and regulations.[49] Moreover, ports have created proactive frameworks and initiatives such as EcoPorts.[71][45] Private actors are also active in data and monitoring efforts.[49] Non-state actors in the field, moreover, include non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Sea Alarm and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).[70]

A variety of governance measures concerning oil spills exist. They represent a mixture of institutional and technical,[48] as well as incentive-based and command-and-control measures,[53] which address prevention, in-process, and ex-post management.[48] Several international conventions contain regulations on the international level.[48] Regulations aimed at prevention of oil spills are included in OILPOL54 and particularly its successor the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL73/78),[58][60][45][48][57] which "remains the primary legal instrument for the prevention of pollution from ships".[45] Moreover, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS74) and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) contain preventative measures. The can be institutional such as tanker equipment inspection, oil pollution discharge requirements, and a ship reporting system or technical. Examples of the latter are top loading, the inert gas system, segregated ballast tanks, crude oil tank cleaning and a stability meter.[48] The most salient regulation in that regard, however, is the command-and-control requirement to build new tankers with a double hull structure and to phase-out single hull tankers to lower the risk of accidental spills, which was agreed upon in the amendment to MARPOL in 1992.[54][53][48]

International Conventions also address in-process management of oil spills. SOLAS74 for example requires a fixed deck foam system in case of fires, and emergency towing arrangements as technical measures. The International Convention on Salvage (1989), furthermore, introduces salvage compensation for those coming to the rescue in case of accidents. In case of oil spills, it includes exceptions to the 'no cure, no pay' principle, that would only allow for compensation if the rescue was successful.[72][48] The International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-Operation (OPRC) by the IMO promotes oil spill emergency preparedness and international cooperation.[48][73]

International conventions also concern ex-post regulations. The Nairobi Convention on the Removal of Wrecks (2007) regulates shipwreck removal to reduce environmental impacts.[48] To protect victims of oil spills an international compensation and liability system was established by the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC) and International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (FC).[74][48][50] The CLC defines shipowners as the sole and strict liable party in case of oil spills, puts limits of liability in place, and requires compulsory insurance. The FC creates a fund financed by the oil industry that steps in when the compensation by the CLC is not enough. This system has been adjusted and expanded over time.[48][50] Scholars argue that these measures, while primarily ex-post management tools, can also be seen as preventative, because of e.g. requirements by insurance companies.[50][48]

##### OPA90 and Erika I, II, III

After the Exxon Valdez spill (1989), the USA established its own comprehensive system[60][57] with the Oil Pollution Act (OPA90).[55][53] It, among others, featured a requirement for double-hulled tankers in US ports even before the IMO addressed this in its MARPOL amendment (1992).[55][48][53] Moreover, it set up a compensation and liability system.[50][53] The latter is regarded as stricter than the international CLC/FC system because of, among others, higher limitations, easier lost limitations rights, and holding other parties than the shipowner liable.[57][48][50]

The three legislative packages Erika I, II, and III, agreed upon by the EU after the Erika (1999) and the Prestige (2002) oil spills,[50] are a further example of comprehensive governance to prevent and mitigate accidental oil spills.[48] It concerns, among others, Port State Control (PSC),[48] compensation and liability,[50][48] as well as ship monitoring.[48]

##### Port state control

There are various approaches centering around ports: PSC "has become the most important measure".[53] The Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) established a regional PSC system in Europe and Canada to inspect foreign vessels.[53][48] In 2011, the system shifted from random ship selections to risk-based ones targeting high-risk ships, thereby incentivizing ship operators to be classified as low-risk.[53] Ports, moreover, need to have adequate reception facilities, and in the EU, moreover, a waste reception and handling plan,[53] so that vessels can dispose of their oil waste there.[53][48] In ports of the Baltic Sea, the "No-Special-Fee" system was agreed upon. By not charging specifically for the use of port facilities, the system aims at incentivizing disposing oily residues at the proper facilities instead of carrying out intentional oil spills at sea to cut costs.[53] These initiatives such as PSCs do not only have local but also extraterritorial regulatory effects.[75]

##### Monitoring

Enabled by technological advances[52][50] monitoring and surveillance with flights or satellite technology can be used to identify and reduce intentional[49][53][58] as well as accidental spills.[45][55] Moreover, monitoring and data collection is advised to facilitate emergency responses[48][49] as well as compensation and potentially the identification and conviction of perpetrators.[50] While monitoring of intentional spills is no longer a focus of the IMO,[53] satellite monitoring is e.g. still practiced by EMSA[53] or the USA and Canada.[45] Monitoring efforts are more successful, when states are vulnerable because of shipping lanes in their territorial waters or their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), only a limited area needs to be monitored, and only number of states needs to be involved.[53]

##### Contingency planning and emergency training

To prepare for oil spill emergencies contingency planning and emergency training are utilized.[73][60] Contingency plans determine, among others, risk assessments, operational procedures and responsibilities in case of oil spill emergencies.[76][77][78] States furthered their efforts in contingency planning in response to the OPRC.[78] The IMO supports these efforts. Contingency planning needs to be adjusted to the specific national context.[73] Concerning the Western Indian Ocean, the Western Indian Ocean Island Oil Spill Contingency Planning from 1998-2006 for example aimed at preparing emergency responses by island states like Mauritius.[67] In contingency planning and risk assessment, oil spill models can be used.[45]

The established management measures are credited for the reduction of oil spills.[52][50][49][48][45] Despite recognizing the success of these measures,[48][50] several shortcomings and necessary improvements have been pointed out:

Some of the criticism is related to specific measures such as the CLC/FC. Among others, this critique echoes that holding other parties than the shipowner liable is not possible, its liability limits are too low to cover the costs of oil spills, and environmental damages are often not valued. Scholars, therefore, recommend moving to an international system closer aligned with OPA90.[48][74][50] Another example is the criticism of contingency planning as insufficient,[60] often too standardized, and lacking valuable information.[78]

Moreover, the system's partly voluntary status and lacking enforcement is criticized.[53][49][51][45][50] States that are not part of the international system are difficult to include in oil spill governance.[45][50] Moreover, the use of Flags of Convenience (FoC) is problematic due to their low safety standards.[55][48][53] Zhang et al. (2021) recommend changing the ship registry and strengthening PSC to address this problem.[48] Further and joint monitoring as well as improved and consistent open-access data collection can be a way to counter enforcement gaps concerning intentional spills.[49][53]

The heterogeneity of countries is another obstacle to effective management. Different national contexts translate into varying national interests and stances towards stricter regulation.[50][53] According to Hassler (2016), to achieve proactive states it is crucial that the state's cost-benefit analysis is positive.[53] The national context is also prominent concerning capacities: States with lower capabilities, know-how and experience perform worse in all stages of oil spill management such as flight surveillance, emergency response and compensation.[53][50] Even though capacity building could theoretically help, the Wakashio oil spill (2020) showed that these initiatives were not sufficient. They are hindered by their focus on short term and technical action, fragmentation, and training difficulties.[68][67] Other scholars emphasize the need for a greater focus on human and management factors, e.g. through training, supervision, and awareness building.[45][48][51] Lastly, decarbonization is proposed as a way to reduce the risk of oil spills.[47]

## Wastewater

Blackwater is sewage, wastewater from toilets and medical facilities, which can contain harmful bacteria, pathogens, viruses, intestinal parasites, and harmful nutrients. Discharges of untreated or inadequately treated sewage can cause bacterial and viral contamination of fisheries and shellfish beds, producing risks to public health. Nutrients in sewage, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, promote excessive algal blooms, which consumes oxygen in the water and can lead to fish kills and destruction of other aquatic life.

Greywater is wastewater from the sinks, showers, galleys, laundry, and cleaning activities aboard a ship. It can contain a variety of pollutant substances, including fecal coliforms, detergents, oil and grease, metals, organic compounds, petroleum hydrocarbons, nutrients, food waste, medical and dental waste. Sampling done by EPA and the state of Alaska found that untreated greywater from cruise ships can contain pollutants at variable strengths and that it can contain levels of fecal coliform bacteria several times greater than is typically found in untreated domestic wastewater.[79] Greywater has potential to cause adverse environmental effects because of concentrations of nutrients and other oxygen-demanding materials, in particular. Greywater is typically the largest source of liquid waste generated by cruise ships (90 to 95 percent of the total). Estimates of greywater range from 110 to 320 liters per day per person, or 330,000 to 960,000 liters per day for a 3,000-person cruise ship.[80]: 15

A large cruise ship (3,000 passengers and crew) generates an estimated 55,000 to 110,000 liters per day of blackwater waste.[80]: 13 The cruise line industry dumps 970,000 litres (255,000 US gal) of greywater and 110,000 litres (30,000 US gal) of blackwater into the sea every day.[1]

MARPOL annex IV was brought into force September 2003 limiting untreated sewage discharge to ships travelling at minimum 4 knots and more than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land, so that no visible solids or discoloration in the water are visible. In some areas stricter regional rules apply.[81]

Modern cruise ships are often equipped with a membrane bioreactor type treatment plant for blackwater and greywater, such as G&O, Zenon or Rochem bioreactors which produce near drinkable quality effluent to be re-used in the machinery spaces as technical water.

## Solid waste

Solid waste generated on a ship includes glass, paper, cardboard, aluminium and steel cans, and plastics.[1] It can be either non-hazardous or hazardous in nature. Solid waste that enters the ocean may become marine debris, and can then pose a threat to marine organisms, humans, coastal communities, and industries that utilize marine waters. Cruise ships typically manage solid waste by a combination of source reduction, waste minimization, and recycling. However, as much as 75 percent of solid waste is incinerated on board, and the ash typically is discharged at sea, although some is landed ashore for disposal or recycling. Marine mammals, fish, sea turtles, and birds can be injured or killed from entanglement with plastics and other solid waste that may be released or disposed off of cruise ships. On average, each cruise ship passenger generates at least two pounds of non-hazardous solid waste per day.[82] With large cruise ships carrying several thousand passengers, the amount of waste generated in a day can be massive. For a large cruise ship, about 8 tons of solid waste are generated during a one-week cruise.[83] It has been estimated that 24% of the solid waste generated by vessels worldwide (by weight) comes from cruise ships.[84]: 38–39 : Table 2–3 Most cruise ship garbage is treated on board (incinerated, pulped, or ground up) for discharge overboard. When garbage must be off-loaded (for example, because glass and aluminium cannot be incinerated), cruise ships can put a strain on port reception facilities, which are rarely adequate to the task of serving a large passenger vessel.[84]: 126

### Plastic Pollution

Plastic pollution is a major environmental issue, with over 75% of all marine debris currently consisting of plastic.[85] Approximately 20% of global plastic pollution originates from oceanic sources, with shipping identified as a key contributor.[86]

#### Causes and Sources of Plastic Pollution

Plastic pollution in the shipping industry can be categorized into direct discharge pollution and indirect pollution.[86][87]

##### Direct Discharge Pollution

This includes cargo losses and illegal dumping of plastic waste into the ocean.

Cargo Losses

Containers are often lost due to extreme weather, operational errors, and inconsistent securing standards. Such incidents introduce large quantities of debris into the marine environment.[88]

Illegal Dumping

Some vessels violate international regulations by discharging plastic waste directly into the sea.

##### Indirect Pollution

Improper waste management during routine operations leads to the disposal of food packaging and other plastic items into the marine environment.

#### Environmental and Ecological Impacts of Plastic Pollution

Plastic pollution in the oceans can be classified by size: macroplastic (>20 mm), mesoplastic (5–20 mm), microplastic (<5 mm), and nanoplastic (<1000 nm).[85] These pollutants have significant environmental and ecological impacts.

##### Impacts of Large Plastic Debris

Large plastics, such as lost cargo, pose a serious threat to marine life, causing entanglement and ingestion risks that affect mobility, respiration, and feeding behaviors in marine species.[85][89]

##### Microplastic and Nanoplastic Pollution

Larger plastic debris breaks down into smaller particles, transforming into microplastics that disperse throughout the marine environment. Microplastics are also present in cruise ship watewater from laundry and cosmetic products.[90] These microplastics absorb toxic substances, acting as carriers for persistent organic pollutants.[85][91] By 2014, over 5 trillion plastic particles were floating on the ocean's surface, weighing nearly 270,000 tons.[89] These particles, when ingested by marine organisms, can bioaccumulate, impacting marine ecosystems and potentially affecting human health.[87][91]

#### Mitigation Efforts and Limitations

Efforts to address plastic pollution from shipping involve a multi-level governance framework, engaging international organizations, national governments, businesses, and civil society. However, existing mitigation measures face significant challenges.

##### International Governance Framework

Key policies and agreements include the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). Specifically, Annex V (Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships) regulates ship-generated waste management, explicitly prohibiting the direct discharge of plastic waste into the sea.[88] The United Nations Agenda 21 also underscores the importance of controlling shipping pollution.[92]

##### Efforts by National Governments

Many countries have implemented marine litter monitoring programs, providing critical data on floating debris, seafloor litter, and litter in marine organisms. These programs support evidence-based policy decisions.[93]

##### Regional Governance Initiatives

Regional efforts include the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), a key framework for preventing shipping-related plastic pollution. It employs Port State Control (PSC) to enforce environmental regulations and reduce plastic discharges.[94] The EU's Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) mandates reduction of vessel-based litter and supports various marine governance initiatives.[95] In the Arctic, the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) specifically addresses microplastic pollution.[93]

##### Technological and Policy Advancements

Despite MARPOL's requirement for ports to offer waste reception facilities, many facilities need enhancement to improve plastic waste recycling processes.[85] MSFD also faces limitations in monitoring small and medium-sized plastic pollution, and efforts to improve data collection and impact studies on marine biota are needed.[93] Additionally, improving the design of plastic products, such as developing biodegradable materials, could significantly reduce environmental harm.[85]

## Bilge water

Some shipping companies, including large cruise shipping lines, have sometimes violated regulations by illegally bypassing the onboard oily water separator and discharging untreated oily wastewater. In the US these violations by means of a so-called "magic pipe" have been prosecuted and resulted in large fines, but in other countries enforcement has been mixed.[96][97]

## International regulation

| Parts of this earth (those related to section) need to be updated. The reason given is: https://www.climatechangenews.com/2025/04/11/governments-agree-green-shipping-targets-and-fees-for-missing-them/. Please update this earth to reflect recent events or newly available information. (April 2025)

|

Some of the major international efforts in the form of treaties are the Marine Pollution Treaty, Honolulu, which deals with regulating marine pollution from ships, and the UN Convention on Law of the Sea, which deals with marine species and pollution.[98] Maritime governance from the 1950s up to the 1980s has been characterized by intergovernmental decision-making centralized around the IMO. However, this picture has been changing since the 1980s when regional initiatives in the EU and its member states began to play a larger role, partly due to an increasing dissatisfaction with the lacking regulation and enforcement efforts of the IMO.[99][100] This has led to a new synergy developing between the EU and the IMO and other regional actors, broadly characterized as a polycentric mode of governance.[99][101][102][103][104] The polycentric synergy of the EU and IMO has largely been driven by the active and leading role taken by the EU in both implementing and influencing IMO conventions.[101] Four regional initiatives in this context are notable: "the use of special areas in IMO Conventions, the adoption of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Port State Control, the development of the European Union shipping policy domain and the emergence of market-based initiatives by ports and cargo-owners".[99]

While plenty of local and international regulations have been introduced throughout maritime history, much of the current regulations are considered inadequate. "In general, the treaties tend to emphasize the technical features of safety and pollution control measures without going to the root causes of sub-standard shipping, the absence of incentives for compliance and the lack of enforceability of measures."[105] Where polycentric governance relies on positive relationships between major actors and conventions, one of the largest barriers to an effective environmental regulation of shipping arises from negative relationships between major actors and conventions, where ambiguous or overlapping jurisdictions result in a range of different issues such as a lack of effective enforcement and monitoring, inconsistent and unclear standards, and inadequate supervision resulting in blind spots in the high seas.[104][106]

Effective regulation of international shipping thus requires more international coordination. If states regulate emissions unilaterally, this leads to an overall increase in net emissions, whereas coordinated and uniform regulation between states reduces net emissions.[107][108] However, varying patterns of governance are still seen across different ports with the same uniform regulation underscoring the need for policy to also take local and sectoral factors into account,[109] perhaps through tailor-made adaptation measures.[110] The effectiveness of uniform regulation also depends on the use of MRV&E systems, which denote "technologies, policies and administrative processes that monitor, report, verify and enforce compliance with the regulations''. The current enforcement of regulations is lacking, and efforts need to be made to both "strengthen supervision and law enforcement and establish a global monitoring system".[111][106] The most common problems encountered with international shipping arise from paperwork errors and customs brokers not having the proper information about the items.[112] Cruise ships, for example, are exempt from regulation under the US discharge permit system (NPDES, under the Clean Water Act) that requires compliance with technology-based standards.[61] In the Caribbean, many ports lack proper waste disposal facilities, and many ships dump their waste at sea[113] Due to complexities of shipping trade and the difficulties involved in regulating this business, a comprehensive and generally acceptable regulatory framework on corporate responsibility for reducing GHG emissions is unlikely to be achieved soon. As in the case of negotiations around taxation of shipping fuels, international agreement around uniform regulation has not been reached, resulting instead in a deadlock.[114] Overlaps of decision-making authority between central institutions can pose similar barriers, if central norm conflicts between them are large enough – as in the case of competing principles guiding the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the IMO.[115] The UNFCCC is guided by the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) which holds that since developed countries proportionately have contributed the most in terms of GHG emissions, they also take the largest responsibility for addressing the reduction of these emissions. The IMO in contrast is guided by principles of "non-discrimination and equal treatment and No More Favourable Treatment (NMFT) to all ships irrespective of their flag". This has led to a conflict between central interests, since developed states support the NMFT principle, while developing states support the CBDR principle. The effect of this conflict is that we are left with no clear principle around which to regulate resulting in impeding the "legislation efficiency and consensus".[116]

A 2016 journal article recommends that under current circumstances, it is necessary for states, the shipping industry and global organizations to explore and discuss market-based mechanisms (MBMs) for vessel-sourced GHG emissions reduction.[4] MBMs are part of a broader category of mechanisms working through economic incentives "that provide motivation for the adoption of less environmentally damaging practices", the second most common being "infrastructure investments and informative policies".[117] The most prominent and promising use of economic incentives are market-based measures (MBMs). The two main types of MBMs used are emission trading schemes and fuel levies. Both work through putting a price on GHG emissions providing economic incentives for taxed actors to improve their energy efficiency.[104] However, these improvements are also accompanied by a short-term decline in industry profit.[118] Some argue that the current use of MBMs in the EU Emission Trading Scheme could serve as a window of opportunity to reduce GHG emissions in the shipping sector without placing an unnecessarily high burden on the shipping sector. The challenges standing in the way of this – the "allocation of emissions, carbon leakage, permit allocation, treatment of the great variety in ship type, size and usage, and transaction cost" – are however hard to overcome without global market-based economies.[119] Others incentive-based schemes for achieving decarbonization include pricing schemes or the incentivization of "front-runner ships that implement decarbonization technologies beyond regulations".[120][121] However, evaluation of current the incentive schemes reveals that the schemes are onerous and only taken up by shipping enterprises or ports to a limited degree. Further, these incentive schemes are not specifically focused on a reduction in GHG emissions and thus do not support decarbonization.[121]

Further, these approaches are not without their critics. Lars Stemmler is critical towards the attitude that both environmental and social consequences of climate change can be mitigated through "ever more efficiencies in shipping".[122] Jason Monios similarly argues that the shipping sector generally operate by a business-as-usual logic based on assumptions of uninterrupted growth where actors must only address "incremental challenges that can be adapted to in a piecemeal fashion". However, the consequences of climate change might instead take place on a disruptive and uncontrollable level, "bringing starvation, destruction, migration disease and war" necessitating much more radical action.[123] While Monios argues that the shipping industry has started to use the rhetoric of a logic of sustainability, the actions of shipping actors are still largely determined by the dominant business-as-usual logic, which block attempts at regulation from the IMO and leads to a loss of trust in and legitimacy of the system.[124] Lastly, When MBMs become the primary means of addressing climate change at sea, Monios argues, this business-as-usual logic is strengthened, since they crowd out non-market norms and render invisible governance alternatives such as direct regulation and supply-side approaches.[125]

## Issues by region

### Asia

In 2025, about 80 percent of goods are transported overseas.[126] East Asia, in particular, supports the global economy by providing 42 percent of all global exports.[127] The global demand for concentrated shipping activity in Asian ports has resulted in many environmental concerns. The sheer population density concentrated in Asia's coast also presents concern to address environmental issues in these areas, such as air pollution, water pollution, and noise pollution.[126][128]

In 2021, 430 million residents lived near major Chinese port cities, including Shanghai, Shenzhen, Tianjin, and Guangzhou.[126] Greater population densities in coastal areas mean pollution in these areas deserves special attention for protecting global health as carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides are emitted into the atmosphere.[126][127] Ocean acidification and eutrophication are also issues of concern for environmental stability and aquatic life.[129]

The global community recognizes that the negative environmental effects of maritime shipping activity must be tackled with international cooperation. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has set an ambitious goal for its member countries to be carbon neutral by 2050.[130]

### European Union

* Cruise ship pollution in Europe
* EU Reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions from the shipping sector
* EU Sustainable Shipping Forum (ESSF)
* EC-IMO Energy Efficiency Project. The 4-year project aims to establish Maritime Technology Cooperation Centres in 5 regions: Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America and the Pacific. Through technical assistance and capacity-building, the centres will promote the uptake of low carbon technologies and operations in maritime transport in the less developed countries in the respective region. This will also support the implementation of the internationally agreed energy efficiency rules and standards (EEDI and SEEMP).
* MRV Monitoring, reporting and verification of CO2 emissions from large ships using EU ports

### United Kingdom

* Merchant Shipping Act 1995
* Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Act 2006

### United States

It is expected that, (from 2004) "...shipping traffic to and from the United States is projected to double by 2020."[29] However, many shipping companies and port operators in North America (Canada and the United States) have adopted the Green Marine Environmental Program to limit operational impacts on the environment.[131]

* Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships
* American Bureau of Shipping
* Cruise ship pollution in the United States
* National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan
* Oil Pollution Act of 1990
* Regulation of ship pollution in the United States

## See also

* Bottom paint
* Classification society (technical standards NGO)
* Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter
* Environmental impact of transport
* Environmental threats to the Great Barrier Reef
* GREEN Cell Shipping
* Hydrogen-powered ship
* International Association of Classification Societies
* List of environmental issues
* Marine debris
* Marine fuel management
* Maritime environmental crime
* Mobility transition
* North Pacific Gyre
* Oil spill
* Particle (ecology)
* Shipping route
* Tributyltin
* Wave power ship
* Wind-powered vehicle
* Windmill ship
* Zero emission vehicle

## References

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Walker, Tony R.; Adebambo, Olubukola; Del Aguila Feijoo, Monica C.; Elhaimer, Elias; Hossain, Tahazzud; Edwards, Stuart Johnston; Morrison, Courtney E.; Romo, Jessica et al. (2019). "Environmental Effects of Marine Transportation". World Seas: An Environmental Evaluation. pp. 505–530. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-805052-1.00030-9. ISBN 978-0-12-805052-1.
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 "Emissions of maritime transport: a European reference system". The Science of the Total Environment 408 (2): 318–23. December 2009. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.07.037. PMID 19840885. Bibcode: 2009ScTEn.408..318S.
3. ↑ Kaminski, Isabella (22 June 2023). "Climate impact of shipping under growing scrutiny ahead of key meeting". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/22/climate-impact-shipping-under-growing-scrutiny-imo-meeting-seascape.
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Rahim, Mia Mahmudur; Islam, Md. Tarikul; Kuruppu, Sanjaya (2016). "Regulating global shipping corporations' accountability for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the seas". Marine Policy 69: 159–170. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2016.04.018. Bibcode: 2016MarPo..69..159R.
5. ↑ High Seas, High Stakes, Final Report. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Univ. of Manchester, UK. 2014.
6. ↑ "Fuel charges in international aviation and shipping: How high; how; and why?". World Bank. 2013-04-17. http://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/fuel-charges-in-international-aviation-and-shipping-how-high-how-and-why.
7. ↑ "Fuel taxation". https://www.transportenvironment.org/what-we-do/eu-transport-policy/fuel-taxation.
8. ↑ Keen, Michael; Parry, Ian; Strand, Jon (2014-09-09). "The (non-) taxation of international aviation and maritime fuels: Anomalies and possibilities". London: Centre for Economic Policy Research. https://voxeu.org/article/non-taxation-international-aviation-and-maritime-fuels-anomalies-and-possibilities.
9. ↑ Urbina, Ian (September 25, 2019). "Dumping into the Ocean | #TheOutlawOcean.". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbAC0LaIXUc&feature=emb_logo.
10. ↑ "Noise could sound the death knell of ocean fish". The Hindu (London). 15 August 2010. http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/article572548.ece.
11. ↑ Human Noise Pollution in Ocean Can Lead Fish Away from Good Habitats and Off to Their Death, University of Bristol, 13 August 2010, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100803212015.htm, retrieved 2011-03-06
12. ↑ Simpson, Stephen D.; Meekan, Mark G.; Larsen, Nicholas J.; McCauley, Robert D.; Jeffs, Andrew (2010). "Behavioral plasticity in larval reef fish: Orientation is influenced by recent acoustic experiences". Behavioral Ecology 21 (5): 1098–1105. doi:10.1093/beheco/arq117.
13. ↑ Noise Pollution and Ship-Strikes, UN Environment Programme-Convention on Migratory Species, http://www.cms.int/press/pressconferences/Microsoft Word - Media_advisory_ Noise_pollution_whale_ship_strikes.pdf, retrieved 2011-03-06
14. ↑ "Discovery Channel's Sonic Sea Journeys Deep Into the Ocean Uncovering the Devastating Impact Man-Made Noise Has on Marine Life and What Can Be Done to Stop the Damage to These Creatures Who Are a Crucial Part of the Circle of Life – Discovery, Inc.". https://corporate.discovery.com/discovery-newsroom/discovery-channels-sonic-sea-journeys-deep-into-the-ocean-uncovering-the-devastating-impact-man-made-noise-has-on-marine-life-and-what-can-be-done-to-stop-the-damage-to-these-creatures-who-are-a-cru/.
15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Vanderlaan, Angelia S. M.; Taggart, Christopher T. (2007). "Vessel Collisions with Whales: The Probability of Lethal Injury Based on Vessel Speed". Marine Mammal Science 23 (1): 144–56. doi:10.1111/j.1748-7692.2006.00098.x. Bibcode: 2007MMamS..23..144V.
16. ↑ Womersley, Freya C. (2022). "Global collision-risk hotspots of marine traffic and the world's largest fish, the whale shark". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 119 (20). doi:10.1073/pnas.2117440119. PMID 35533277. Bibcode: 2022PNAS..11917440W.
17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 "North Atlantic right whales in danger". Science 358 (6364): 730–31. November 2017. doi:10.1126/science.aar2402. PMID 29123056. Bibcode: 2017Sci...358..730T.
18. ↑ Ward-Geiger, Leslie I.; Silber, Gregory K.; Baumstark, René D.; Pulfer, Tanya L. (2005). "Characterization of Ship Traffic in Right Whale Critical Habitat". Coastal Management 33 (3): 263–78. doi:10.1080/08920750590951965. Bibcode: 2005CoasM..33..263W.
19. ↑ "Eubalaena glacialis". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2010. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2012.RLTS.T41712A17084065.en.
20. ↑ "Shipping threat to endangered whale". BBC News (BBC). 28 August 2001. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1513434.stm.
21. ↑ "Endangered Fish and Wildlife; Final Rule To Implement Speed Restrictions to Reduce the Threat of Ship Collisions With North Atlantic Right Whales". Federal Register. 10 October 2008. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2008/10/10/E8-24177/endangered-fish-and-wildlife-final-rule-to-implement-speed-restrictions-to-reduce-the-threat-of-ship.
22. ↑ Gopikrishnan, G. S.; Kuttippurath, Jayanarayanan (2020-11-30). "A decade of satellite observations reveal significant increase in atmospheric formaldehyde from shipping in Indian Ocean". Atmospheric Environment 246. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.118095. ISSN 1352-2310. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135223102030827X.
23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington, DC. "Control of Emissions From New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters Per Cylinder." Final rule. Federal Register, 68 FR 9751, 2003-02-28.
24. ↑ "New sulfur regulations from 2020". http://marine-electronics.eu/sulfur-regulations-in-shipping-industry-from-2020.
25. ↑ Saul, Jonathan (2019-12-13). "Factbox: IMO 2020 - a major shake-up for oil and shipping". Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imo-shipping-factbox-idUSKBN1YH1PU.
26. ↑ Fletcher, Philippa (2019-12-12). "Shipping industry sails into unknown with new pollution rules". Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-shipping-imo-insurance-insight-idUSKBN1YG0HM.
27. ↑ Vidal, John (2009-04-09). "Health risks of shipping pollution have been 'underestimated'". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-pollution.
28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 "EU faces ship clean-up call" (in en-GB). 2003-06-25. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3019686.stm.
29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 "Ship Pollution". https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-08-30-ship-pollution_x.htm.
30. ↑ Schmidt, C., & Olicker, J. (20 April 2004). World in the Balance: China Revs Up [Transcript]. PBS: NOVA. Retrieved 26 November 2006, from https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3109_worldbal.html
31. ↑ Sargun, Sethi (March 22, 2021). "A Guide To Scrubber Systems On Ships". Marine Insight. https://www.marineinsight.com/tech/scrubber-system-on-ship/.
32. ↑ boxcar-admin (2021-08-19). "The Deadliest Catch: Scrubber washwater discharge in ASEAN fishing grounds" (in en-US). https://theicct.org/the-deadliest-catch-scrubber-washwater-discharge-in-asean-fishing-grounds/.
33. ↑ Liu, Jiahui; Duru, Okan (2020). "Bayesian probabilistic forecasting for ship emissions". Atmospheric Environment 231. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117540. Bibcode: 2020AtmEn.23117540L.
34. ↑ Schrooten, Liesbeth; De Vlieger, Ina; Int Panis, Luc; Styns, Karel; Torfs, Rudi (2008). "Inventory and forecasting of maritime emissions in the Belgian sea territory, an activity-based emission model". Atmospheric Environment 42 (4): 667–676. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.09.071. Bibcode: 2008AtmEn..42..667S.
35. ↑ "Fourth Greenhouse Gas Study 2020". https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/Environment/Pages/Fourth-IMO-Greenhouse-Gas-Study-2020.aspx.
36. ↑ "Infrastructure Podcast; Decarbonized Shipping". World Bank. 2022-03-16. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/podcast/2022/03/16/decarbonized-shipping-reducing-the-dependence-on-fossil-fuels.
37. ↑ Kersing, Arjen; Stone, Matt (2022-01-25). "Charting global shipping's path to zero carbon". McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/travel-logistics-and-infrastructure/our-insights/charting-global-shippings-path-to-zero-carbon.
38. ↑ Raucci, Carlo (2019-06-06). "Three pathways to shipping's decarbonization". Global Maritime Forum. https://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/news/three-pathways-to-shippings-decarbonization.
39. ↑ "Bold global action needed to decarbonize shipping and ensure a just transition: UNCTAD report | UNCTAD" (in en). 2023-09-27. https://unctad.org/news/bold-global-action-needed-decarbonize-shipping-and-ensure-just-transition-unctad-report.
40. ↑ "Cruise industry data shows continued progress toward sustainability goals". Cruise Lines International Association. 9/7/2024. https://cruising.org/news/cruise-industry-data-shows-continued-progress-toward-sustainability-goals.
41. ↑ "Fourth IMO GHG Study 2020". International Maritime Organization. 2021. p. 392. https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Environment/Documents/Fourth IMO GHG Study 2020 - Full report and annexes.pdf.
42. ↑ "LNG: The Threat to the Arctic from Liquified Natural Gas as a Shipping Fuel". https://cleanarctic.org/campaigns/the-arctic-climate-crisis/lng-the-threat-to-the-arctic-from-liquified-natural-gas-as-a-shipping-fuel/.
43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 Ulrich, Kendra; Singh, Devyani; Robertson, Angeline (October 2024). "Banking on a Climate Shipwreck, Exposing the roles of Global Bank in the Expansion of Maritime Fossil Fuels". https://stand.earth/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/FINAL_Oct-23v5_Shipwreck-2024.pdf.
44. ↑ Comer, Bryan. "Methane slip: LNG’s Achilles heel". https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ICCT_Comer_COP27_methane_slip_mp4-1.pdf.
45. ↑ 45.00 45.01 45.02 45.03 45.04 45.05 45.06 45.07 45.08 45.09 45.10 45.11 45.12 45.13 45.14 45.15 45.16 45.17 45.18 45.19 45.20 45.21 Walker, Tony R. (2019). "Environmental Effects of Marine Transportation". in Sheppard, Charles. World Seas: An Environmental Evaluation. Volume III: Ecological Issues and Environmental Impacts (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Elseviere. pp. 505–530.
46. ↑ 46.0 46.1 46.2 46.3 SafeSeas (n.d.). "Shipping risks". https://www.safeseas.net/themes/shipping-risks/.
47. ↑ 47.0 47.1 47.2 47.3 Bueger, Christian; Stockbruegger, Jan (2021). "Op-Ed: Green Shipping Must Go Beyond Decarbonization". https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/op-ed-green-shipping-must-go-beyond-decarbonization.
48. ↑ 48.00 48.01 48.02 48.03 48.04 48.05 48.06 48.07 48.08 48.09 48.10 48.11 48.12 48.13 48.14 48.15 48.16 48.17 48.18 48.19 48.20 48.21 48.22 48.23 48.24 48.25 48.26 48.27 48.28 48.29 48.30 48.31 48.32 48.33 48.34 48.35 48.36 48.37 48.38 48.39 48.40 48.41 48.42 48.43 48.44 Zhang, Weipan; Li, Chenxuan; Chen, Jihong; Wan, Zheng; Shu, Yaqing; Song, Lan; Xu, Lang; Di, Zhongjie (2021). "Governance of global vessel-source marine oil spills: Characteristics and refreshed strategies". Ocean and Coastal Management 213 (213): 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105874. Bibcode: 2021OCM...21305874Z.
49. ↑ 49.00 49.01 49.02 49.03 49.04 49.05 49.06 49.07 49.08 49.09 49.10 49.11 49.12 49.13 49.14 49.15 49.16 49.17 49.18 49.19 49.20 49.21 49.22 49.23 49.24 Polinov, Semion; Bookman, Revital; Levin, Noam (2021). "Spatial and temporal assessment of oil spills in the Mediterranean Sea". Marine Pollution Bulletin 167 (167): 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112338. PMID 33940431. Bibcode: 2021MarPB.16712338P.
50. ↑ 50.00 50.01 50.02 50.03 50.04 50.05 50.06 50.07 50.08 50.09 50.10 50.11 50.12 50.13 50.14 50.15 50.16 50.17 50.18 50.19 50.20 50.21 50.22 50.23 50.24 50.25 50.26 50.27 Soto-Onate, David; Caballero, Gonzalo (2017). "Oil spills, governance and institutional performance: The 1992 regime of liability and compensation for oil pollution damage". Journal of Cleaner Production 166 (166): 299–311. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.021. Bibcode: 2017JCPro.166..299S.
51. ↑ 51.00 51.01 51.02 51.03 51.04 51.05 51.06 51.07 51.08 51.09 51.10 51.11 51.12 51.13 51.14 Chen, Jihong; Di, Zhongjie; Shi, Jia; Shu, Yaqing; Wan, Zheng; Song, Lan; Zhang, Weipan (2020). "Marine oil spill pollution causes and governance: A case study of Sanchi tanker collision and explosion". Journal of Cleaner Production 273 (273): 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122978. Bibcode: 2020JCPro.27322978C.
52. ↑ 52.00 52.01 52.02 52.03 52.04 52.05 52.06 52.07 52.08 52.09 Galieriková, Andrea; Materna, Matús (2020). "World Seaborne Trade with Oil: One of the Main Cause for Oil Spills?". Transportation Research Procedia 44 (44): 297–304. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2020.02.039.
53. ↑ 53.00 53.01 53.02 53.03 53.04 53.05 53.06 53.07 53.08 53.09 53.10 53.11 53.12 53.13 53.14 53.15 53.16 53.17 53.18 53.19 53.20 53.21 53.22 53.23 53.24 53.25 53.26 53.27 53.28 53.29 53.30 53.31 53.32 53.33 53.34 53.35 53.36 53.37 53.38 53.39 53.40 53.41 53.42 53.43 Hassler, Björn (2016). "Oil Spills from Shipping: A Case Study of Governance of Accidental Hazards and Intentional Pollution in the Baltic Sea". in Gilek, Michael. Environmental Governance of the Baltic Sea. Cham: Springer. pp. 125–146.
54. ↑ 54.0 54.1 54.2 54.3 54.4 54.5 54.6 54.7 Yip, Tsz Leung; Talley, Wayne K.; Jin, Di (2011). "The effectiveness of double hulls in reducing vessel-accident oil spillage". Marine Pollution Bulletin 62 (11): 2427–2432. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.08.026. PMID 21924747. Bibcode: 2011MarPB..62.2427Y.
55. ↑ 55.0 55.1 55.2 55.3 55.4 55.5 55.6 55.7 Lindgren, Frederik J.; Wilewska-Bien, Magda; Granhag, Lena; Andersson, Karin; Eriksson, Martin K. (2016). "Discharges to the Sea". in Andersson, Karin. Shipping and the Environment. Improving Environmental Performance in Marine Transportation. Berlin: Springer. pp. 125–168.
56. ↑ 56.0 56.1 56.2 56.3 ITOPF (n.d.). "Oil Tanker Spill Statistics 2023". https://www.itopf.org/knowledge-resources/data-statistics/statistics/.
57. ↑ 57.0 57.1 57.2 57.3 57.4 Huijer, Keisha (2004). Trends in Oil Spills from Tanker Ships 1995-2004. London: ITOPF.
58. ↑ 58.0 58.1 58.2 Ferraro, G.; Meyer-Roux, S.; Muellenhoff, O.; Pavliha, M.; Svetak, J.; Tarchi, D.; Topouzelis, K. (2009). "Long term monitoring of oil spills in European seas". International Journal of Remote Sensing 30 (3): 627–645. doi:10.1080/01431160802339464. Bibcode: 2009IJRS...30..627F.
59. ↑ NOAA (n.d.). "What are oil spills and where do they come from?". https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial-coastal/oil-spills/os01.html.
60. ↑ 60.00 60.01 60.02 60.03 60.04 60.05 60.06 60.07 60.08 60.09 60.10 60.11 60.12 60.13 Little, David I.; Sheppard, Stephen R.J.; Hulme, David (2021). "A perspective on oil spills: What we should have learned about global warming". Ocean and Coastal Management 202 (202): 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105509. Bibcode: 2021OCM...20205509L.
61. ↑ 61.0 61.1 61.2 61.3 Panetta, L. E. (Chair) (2003). "America's living oceans: charting a course for sea change." Electronic Version, CD. Pew Oceans Commission.
62. ↑ Stockbruegger, Jan; Bueger, Christian (2024). "From mitigation to adaptation: Problematizing climate change in the maritime transport industry". WIREs Climate Change 15 (5): 1–15. doi:10.1002/wcc.894. Bibcode: 2024WIRCC..15E.894S.
63. ↑ 63.0 63.1 63.2 63.3 63.4 Bueger, Christian; Edmunds, Timothy; Stockbruegger, Jan (2024). Securing the Seas. A Comprehensive Assessment of Global Maritime Security. Geneva: UNIDIR.
64. ↑ Saul, Jonathan (2023). "Insight: Oil spills and near misses: more ghost tankers ship sanctioned fuel". https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/oil-spills-near-misses-more-ghost-tankers-ship-sanctioned-fuel-2023-03-23/.
65. ↑ 65.0 65.1 Stockbruegger, Jan; Rafaly, Vonintsoa (2023). "Southeast Asian States Need to Tackle the Dangerous Shadow Tanker Activities in Their Waters. The region has become a major hub for the "dark fleet" of tankers that carry sanctioned oil around the world.". https://thediplomat.com/2023/09/southeast-asian-states-need-to-tackle-the-dangerous-shadow-tanker-activities-in-their-waters/.
66. ↑ IMO (n.d.). "Oil Spill Response". https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Oil-Spill-Response.aspx.
67. ↑ 67.0 67.1 67.2 Bueger, Christian; Edmunds, Timothy (2020). "Mauritius oil spill reveals weakness of maritime security architecture in the Western Indian Ocean". https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/mauritius-oil-spill-reveals-weakness-of-maritime-security-architecture-in-the-western-indian-ocean.
68. ↑ 68.0 68.1 Bueger, Christian (2020). "Mauritius oil spill: Was the government unprepared?". https://www.safeseas.net/mauritius-oil-spill-was-the-government-unprepared/.
69. ↑ Warner, Robin M. (2015). "Stemming the black tide: cooperation on oil pollution preparedness and response in the South China Sea and East Asian Seas". Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 18 (2): 184–197. doi:10.1080/13880292.2015.1044807. https://ro.uow.edu.au/lhapapers/2010.
70. ↑ 70.0 70.1 70.2 70.3 70.4 70.5 IMO (n.d.). "Oil Spill Organizations and Resource Providers". https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Oil Spill Organizations and Resource Providers.aspx.
71. ↑ EcoPorts (n.d.). "EcoPorts". https://www.ecoports.com/.
72. ↑ Binney, Brian F. (1990). "Protecting the Environment with Salvage Law: Risks, Rewards, and the 1989 Salvage Convention". Washington Law Review 65 (3): 639–656.
73. ↑ 73.0 73.1 73.2 Singhota, Gurpreet S. (1995). "IMO's Role in Promoting Oil Spill Preparedness". Science & Technology Bulletin 2 (4): 207–212. doi:10.1016/S1353-2561(96)00007-2. Bibcode: 1995SSTB....2..207S.
74. ↑ 74.0 74.1 Cho, Dong-Oh (2010). "Limitation of 1992CLC/FC and enactment of the Special Law on M/V Hebei Spirit incident in Korea". Marine Policy 34 (3): 447–452. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2009.09.011. Bibcode: 2010MarPo..34..447C.
75. ↑ Ryngaert, Cedric; Ringbom, Henrik (2016). "Introduction: Port State Jurisdiction: Challenges and Potential". The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 31 (3): 379–394. doi:10.1163/15718085-12341405.
76. ↑ ITOPF (n.d.). "Contingency Planning & Response Planning". https://www.itopf.org/knowledge-resources/documents-guides/contingency-response-planning/.
77. ↑ ITOPF (n.d.). "Contingency Planning". https://www.itopf.org/knowledge-resources/documents-guides/contingency-response-planning/contingency-planning/.
78. ↑ 78.0 78.1 78.2 Shi, Xin; Wang, Yang; Luo, Meifeng; Zhang, Changjiang (2019). "Assessing the feasibility of marine oil spill contingency plans from an information perspective". Safety Science 112 (112): 38–47. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2018.09.014.
79. ↑ EPA Draft Discharge Assessment Report, pp. 3-5 – 3-6.[incomplete short citation]
80. ↑ 80.0 80.1 The Ocean Conservancy, "Cruise Control, A Report on How Cruise Ships Affect the Marine Environment," May 2002. - PDF [1]
81. ↑ "Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships" (in EN). https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/environment/pages/sewage-default.aspx.
82. ↑ The Center for Environmental Leadership in Business, "A Shifting Tide, Environmental Challenges and Cruise Industry Responses," p. 14.
83. ↑ Bluewater Network, "Cruising for Trouble: Stemming the Tide of Cruise Ship Pollution," March 2000, p. 5. A report prepared for an industry group estimated that a 3,000-person cruise ship generates 1.1 million US gallons (4,200 m3) of graywater during a seven-day cruise. Don K. Kim, "Cruise Ship Waste Dispersion Analysis Report on the Analysis of Graywater Discharge," presented to the International Council of Cruise Lines, 14 September 2000.
84. ↑ 84.0 84.1 National Research Council (1995). Clean Ships, Clean Ports, Clean Oceans; Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at Sea. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/4769. ISBN 978-0-309-17677-4. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/4769/clean-ships-clean-ports-clean-oceans-controlling-garbage-and-plastic.
85. ↑ 85.0 85.1 85.2 85.3 85.4 85.5 Napper, Imogen Ellen; Thompson, Richard C. (2020). "Plastic Debris in the Marine Environment: History and Future Challenges" (in en). Global Challenges 4 (6). doi:10.1002/gch2.201900081. ISSN 2056-6646. PMID 32685195. Bibcode: 2020GloCh...400081N.
86. ↑ 86.0 86.1 Čulin, Jelena; Bielić, Toni (March 2016). "Plastic Pollution from Ships" (in en). Journal of Maritime & Transportation Science 51 (1): 57–66. doi:10.18048/2016.51.04. ISSN 1848-9052.
87. ↑ 87.0 87.1 Leslie, H A; Brandsma, S H; van Velzen, M J M; Vethaak, A D (April 2017). "Microplastics en route: Field measurements in the Dutch river delta and Amsterdam canals, wastewater treatment plants, North Sea sediments and biota". Environment International 101: 133–142. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2017.01.018. ISSN 0160-4120. PMID 28143645. Bibcode: 2017EnInt.101..133L. https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/microplastics-en-route-field-measurements-in-the-dutch-river-delt.
88. ↑ 88.0 88.1 Wan, Shuyan; Yang, Xiaohan; Chen, Xinya; Qu, Zhaonian; An, Chunjiang; Zhang, Baiyu; Lee, Kenneth; Bi, Huifang (2022-11-20). "Emerging marine pollution from container ship accidents: Risk characteristics, response strategies, and regulation advancements". Journal of Cleaner Production 376. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134266. ISSN 0959-6526. Bibcode: 2022JCPro.37634266W. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652622038380.
89. ↑ 89.0 89.1 Eriksen, Marcus; Lebreton, Laurent C. M.; Carson, Henry S.; Thiel, Martin; Moore, Charles J.; Borerro, Jose C.; Galgani, Francois; Ryan, Peter G. et al. (2014-12-10). "Plastic Pollution in the World's Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea" (in en). PLOS ONE 9 (12). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111913. ISSN 1932-6203. PMID 25494041. Bibcode: 2014PLoSO...9k1913E.
90. ↑ Folbert, Maartje E. F.; Corbin, Christopher; Löhr, Ansje J. (2022-05-26). "Sources and Leakages of Microplastics in Cruise Ship Wastewater" (in English). Frontiers in Marine Science 9. doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.900047. ISSN 2296-7745. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2022.900047/full.
91. ↑ 91.0 91.1 Beaumont, Nicola J.; Aanesen, Margrethe; Austen, Melanie C.; Börger, Tobias; Clark, James R.; Cole, Matthew; Hooper, Tara; Lindeque, Penelope K. et al. (2019-05-01). "Global ecological, social and economic impacts of marine plastic". Marine Pollution Bulletin 142: 189–195. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.022. ISSN 0025-326X. PMID 31232294. Bibcode: 2019MarPB.142..189B. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X19302061.
92. ↑ Vince, Joanna; Hardesty, Britta D. (2018-06-19). "Governance Solutions to the Tragedy of the Commons That Marine Plastics Have Become". Frontiers in Marine Science 5: 214. doi:10.3389/fmars.2018.00214. ISSN 2296-7745. Bibcode: 2018FrMaS...5..214V.
93. ↑ 93.0 93.1 93.2 Galgani, Francois; Lusher, Amy L.; Strand, Jakob; Haarr, Marthe Larsen; Vinci, Matteo; Molina Jack, Eugenia; Kagi, Ralf; Aliani, Stefano et al. (September 2024). "Revisiting the strategy for marine litter monitoring within the european marine strategy framework directive (MSFD)" (in en). Ocean & Coastal Management 255. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107254. Bibcode: 2024OCM...25507254G. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0964569124002394.
94. ↑ "Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control". 2021-01-01. https://parismou.org/sites/default/files/Paris MoU including 43rd amendment final.pdf.
95. ↑ "ARCTIC MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (AMAP): Work Plan 2015–2017". ARCTIC MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME. March 2015. https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/50422cbb-a511-4e5e-9779-03c8013a4ad9/content.
96. ↑ "The $40m 'magic pipe': Princess Cruises given record fine for dumping oil at sea". The Guardian. 2016-12-02. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/02/the-40m-magic-pipe-princess-cruises-given-record-fine-for-dumping-oil-at-sea.
97. ↑ Kantharia, Raunek (2019-10-24). "Magic Pipe: The Mystery of the Illegal Activity Still Continues on Ships". Marine Insight. Bangalore, India. http://www.marineinsight.com/misc/maritime-law/magic-pipe-the-mystery-of-the-illegal-activity-still-continues-on-ships/.
98. ↑ Steger, M. B. (2003). Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press Inc. New York.
99. ↑ 99.0 99.1 99.2 van Leeuwen, Judith (November 2015). "The regionalization of maritime governance: Towards a polycentric governance system for sustainable shipping in the European Union" (in en). Ocean & Coastal Management 117: 23–31. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.013. Bibcode: 2015OCM...117...23V. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0964569115001386.
100. ↑ Ringbom, Henrik (December 2018). "Regulation of ship-source pollution in the Baltic Sea" (in en). Marine Policy 98: 246–254. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2018.09.004. Bibcode: 2018MarPo..98..246R. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0308597X18306742.
101. ↑ 101.0 101.1 van Leeuwen, Judith; Kern, Kristine (February 2013). "The External Dimension of European Union Marine Governance: Institutional Interplay between the EU and the International Maritime Organization" (in en). Global Environmental Politics 13 (1): 69–87. doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00154. ISSN 1526-3800. Bibcode: 2013GlEnP..13...69V. https://direct.mit.edu/glep/article/13/1/69-87/14603.
102. ↑ Prehn, Michael (September 2021). "Climate strategy in the balance who decides?" (in en). Marine Policy 131. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104621. Bibcode: 2021MarPo.13104621P. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0308597X21002323.
103. ↑ Gritsenko, Daria (October 2017). "Regulating GHG Emissions from shipping: Local, global, or polycentric approach?" (in en). Marine Policy 84: 130–133. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2017.07.010. Bibcode: 2017MarPo..84..130G. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0308597X17301215.
104. ↑ 104.0 104.1 104.2 Bloor, Michael; Baker, Susan; Sampson, Helen; Dahlgren, Katrin (2015-07-24). "Enforcement Issues in the Governance of Ships' Carbon Emissions" (in en). Laws 4 (3): 335–351. doi:10.3390/laws4030335. ISSN 2075-471X.
105. ↑ Khee-Jin Tan, A. (2006). Vessel-source marine pollution: the law and politics of international regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
106. ↑ 106.0 106.1 Zhang, Shuanghong; Chen, Jihong; Wan, Zheng; Yu, Mingzhu; Shu, Yaqing; Tan, Zhijia; Liu, Jiaguo (November 2021). "Challenges and countermeasures for international ship waste management: IMO, China, United States, and EU" (in en). Ocean & Coastal Management 213. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105836. Bibcode: 2021OCM...21305836Z. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0964569121003197.
107. ↑ Sheng, Dian; Li, Zhi-Chun; Fu, Xiaowen; Gillen, David (May 2017). "Modeling the effects of unilateral and uniform emission regulations under shipping company and port competition" (in en). Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 101: 99–114. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2017.03.004. Bibcode: 2017TRPE..101...99S. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1366554516306470.
108. ↑ Dong, Junjie; Zeng, Jia; Yang, Yanbin; Wang, Hua (2022-11-22). "A review of law and policy on decarbonization of shipping". Frontiers in Marine Science 9. doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.1076352. ISSN 2296-7745. Bibcode: 2022FrMaS...976352D.
109. ↑ Gritsenko, Daria; Yliskylä-Peuralahti, Johanna (December 2013). "Governing shipping externalities: Baltic ports in the process of SOx emission reduction" (in en). Maritime Studies 12 (1): 10. doi:10.1186/2212-9790-12-10. ISSN 2212-9790. Bibcode: 2013MarSt..12...10G.
110. ↑ Ng, Adolf K.Y.; Zhang, Huiying; Afenyo, Mawuli; Becker, Austin; Cahoon, Stephen; Chen, Shu-ling; Esteban, Miguel; Ferrari, Claudio et al. (2018-05-04). "Port Decision Maker Perceptions on the Effectiveness of Climate Adaptation Actions" (in en). Coastal Management 46 (3): 148–175. doi:10.1080/08920753.2018.1451731. ISSN 0892-0753. Bibcode: 2018CoasM..46..148N. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08920753.2018.1451731.
111. ↑ Brewer, Thomas L. (2021-10-02). "Regulating international maritime shipping's air polluting emissions monitoring, reporting, verifying and enforcing regulatory compliance" (in en). Journal of International Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping 5 (4): 196–207. doi:10.1080/25725084.2021.2006464. ISSN 2572-5084. Bibcode: 2021JIMSE...5..196B.
112. ↑ "4 Challenges in International Shipping". Blue Bell, PA: CLX Logistics. 11 September 2015. http://www.clxlogistics.com/top-4-challenges-you-need-to-master-for-international-shipping/.
113. ↑ United Nations Environment Programme in collaboration with GEF, the University of Kalmar, the Municipality of Kalmar, Sweden, and the Governments of Sweden, Finland and Norway. (2006). Challenges to international waters: regional assessments in a global perspective . Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme. Retrieved 5 January 2010.
114. ↑ Heine, Dirk; Gäde, Susanne (April 2018). "Unilaterally removing implicit subsidies for maritime fuels: A mechanism to unilaterally tax maritime emissions while satisfying extraterritoriality, tax competition and political constraints" (in en). International Economics and Economic Policy 15 (2): 523–545. doi:10.1007/s10368-017-0410-6. ISSN 1612-4804.
115. ↑ Hackmann, Bernd (March 2012). "Analysis of the governance architecture to regulate GHG emissions from international shipping" (in en). International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 12 (1): 85–103. doi:10.1007/s10784-011-9155-9. ISSN 1567-9764. Bibcode: 2012IEAPL..12...85H. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-011-9155-9.
116. ↑ Chen, Yuli (January 2021). "Reconciling common but differentiated responsibilities principle and no more favourable treatment principle in regulating greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping" (in en). Marine Policy 123. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104317. Bibcode: 2021MarPo.12304317C.
117. ↑ Christodoulou, Anastasia; Gonzalez-Aregall, Marta; Linde, Tobias; Vierth, Inge; Cullinane, Kevin (2019-03-18). "Targeting the reduction of shipping emissions to air: A global review and taxonomy of policies, incentives and measures" (in en). Maritime Business Review 4 (1): 16–30. doi:10.1108/MABR-08-2018-0030. ISSN 2397-3757.
118. ↑ Kosmas, Vasileios; Acciaro, Michele (December 2017). "Bunker levy schemes for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction in international shipping" (in en). Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 57: 195–206. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2017.09.010. Bibcode: 2017TRPD...57..195K. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1361920917305114.
119. ↑ Miola, A.; Marra, M.; Ciuffo, B. (September 2011). "Designing a climate change policy for the international maritime transport sector: Market-based measures and technological options for global and regional policy actions" (in en). Energy Policy 39 (9): 5490–5498. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.013. Bibcode: 2011EnPol..39.5490M. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0301421511003855.
120. ↑ Lam, Jasmine Siu Lee; Notteboom, Theo (2014-03-04). "The Greening of Ports: A Comparison of Port Management Tools Used by Leading Ports in Asia and Europe" (in en). Transport Reviews 34 (2): 169–189. doi:10.1080/01441647.2014.891162. ISSN 0144-1647. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01441647.2014.891162.
121. ↑ 121.0 121.1 Alamoush, Anas S.; Ölçer, Aykut I.; Ballini, Fabio (March 2022). "Ports' role in shipping decarbonisation: A common port incentive scheme for shipping greenhouse gas emissions reduction" (in en). Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain 3. doi:10.1016/j.clscn.2021.100021. Bibcode: 2022CLSC....300021A.
122. ↑ Stemmler, Lars (June 2020). "Shipping and a "Great Transformation"—some remarks for a new sustainability paradigm" (in en). Sustainability Management Forum | NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum 28 (1–2): 29–37. doi:10.1007/s00550-020-00499-w. ISSN 2522-5987. Bibcode: 2020SMFor..28...29S.
123. ↑ Monios, Jason; Wilmsmeier, Gordon (2020-10-02). "Deep adaptation to climate change in the maritime transport sector – a new paradigm for maritime economics?" (in en). Maritime Policy & Management 47 (7): 853–872. doi:10.1080/03088839.2020.1752947. ISSN 0308-8839.
124. ↑ Monios, Jason; Ng, Adolf K.Y. (June 2021). "Competing institutional logics and institutional erosion in environmental governance of maritime transport" (in en). Journal of Transport Geography 94. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103114. Bibcode: 2021JTGeo..9403114M.
125. ↑ Monios, Jason (2022-09-21). "The Moral Limits of Market-Based Mechanisms: An Application to the International Maritime Sector" (in en). Journal of Business Ethics 187 (2): 283–299. doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05256-1. ISSN 0167-4544. PMID 36158524.
126. ↑ 126.0 126.1 126.2 126.3 Sun, Ling; Zhang, Jingyi; Ducruet, César; Itoh, Hidekazu; Liu, Xiangqi (2025-02-01). "The impact of shipping activities on air quality and residents' health in China's port cities". Journal of Transport Geography 123. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.104099. ISSN 0966-6923. Bibcode: 2025JTGeo.12304099S.
127. ↑ 127.0 127.1 Park, Jaehyeong; Mun, Jeonghyeok; Kim, Dongjin; Lee, Hwa Woon; Kim, Cheol-Hee; Lee, Hyo-Jung; Jo, Hyun-Young; Koo, Ja-Yong et al. (2024-03-01). "Assessing the impact of shipping emissions on ozone concentrations in East Asia: Insights from KORUS-AQ and SIJAQ 2021 campaign periods". Atmospheric Environment 320. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2024.120339. ISSN 1352-2310. Bibcode: 2024AtmEn.32020339P. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1352231024000141.
128. ↑ Chin, Anthony T. H.; Low, Joyce M. W. (2010-12-01). "Port performance in Asia: Does production efficiency imply environmental efficiency?". Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 15 (8): 483–488. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2010.06.003. ISSN 1361-9209. Bibcode: 2010TRPD...15..483C. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S136192091000088X.
129. ↑ Li, Xiaoshu; Zhao, Yuzhe; Cariou, Pierre; Sun, Zhenyu (2024-03-01). "The impact of port congestion on shipping emissions in Chinese ports". Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 128. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2024.104091. ISSN 1361-9209. Bibcode: 2024TRPD..12804091L. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1361920924000488.
130. ↑ Oloruntobi, Olakunle; Chuah, Lai Fatt; Mokhtar, Kasypi; Gohari, Adel; Rady, Ahmed; Abo-Eleneen, Rasha E.; Akhtar, Muhammad Saeed; Mubashir, Muhammad (2024-01-01). "Decarbonising ASEAN coastal shipping: Addressing climate change and coastal ecosystem issues through sustainable carbon neutrality strategies". Environmental Research 240 (Pt 2). doi:10.1016/j.envres.2023.117353. ISSN 0013-9351. PMID 37821061. Bibcode: 2024ER....24017353O. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0013935123021576.
131. ↑ "Green Marine: An environmental program to establish sustainability in marine transportation". Marine Pollution Bulletin 105 (1): 199–207. April 2016. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.02.029. PMID 26899158. Bibcode: 2016MarPB.105..199W.

## Further reading

* Ewan McGaughey, 'Liability for climate damage and shipping' in S Baughan, B Soyer and A Tettenborn (eds), Disruptive Technologies, Climate Change and Shipping (2022) ch 13 and on SSRN
* Copeland, Claudia (6 February 2008). ﻿Cruise Ship Pollution: Background, Laws and Regulations, and Key Issues﻿ (Report). Washington, D.C.: US Congressional Research Service. RL32450. http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/07Dec/RL32450.pdf.
* Becker, Austin; Ng, Adolf K.Y.; McEvoy, Darryn; Mullett, Jane (8 February 2018). "Implications of climate change for shipping: Ports and supply chains". WIREs Climate Change (Wiley) 9 (2). doi:10.1002/wcc.508. ISSN 1757-7780. Bibcode: 2018WIRCC...9E.508B. https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/maf_facpubs/20.
* "The First Wave A blueprint for commercial-scale zero-emission shipping pilots". Energy Transitions Commission. 11 November 2020. https://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/content/2020/11/The-First-Wave-–-A-blueprint-for-commercial-scale-zero-emission-shipping-pilots.pdf.
* "Charting a Course for Decarbonizing Maritime Transport". 2021-04-23. https://live.worldbank.org/Decarbonizing-Maritime-Transport.

## External links

* Maritime International Secretariat Services[Usurped!] \- Shipping Industry Guidance on Environmental Compliance
* GloBallast partnership (IMO)
* Cruise Ship Pollution Overview \- Oceana
* Ecological facts on ballast water
* The Global MTCC Network

* v
* t
* e

Human impact on the environment

General|

* Environmental issues
* list of issues
* Human impact
* Impact assessment
* Planetary boundaries

Causes|

* Agriculture
* irrigation
* meat production
* cocoa production
* palm oil
* Energy industry
* biofuels
* biodiesel
* coal
* nuclear power
* oil shale
* petroleum
* reservoirs
* Genetic pollution
* Industrialisation
* Land use
* Manufacturing
* cleaning agents
* concrete
* plastics
* nanotechnology
* paint
* paper
* pesticides
* pharmaceuticals and personal care
* Marine life
* fishing
* fishing down the food web
* marine pollution
* overfishing
* Mining
* Overdrafting
* Overexploitation
* Overgrazing
* Overpopulation
* Particulates
* Pollution
* Quarrying
* Reservoirs
* Tourism
* Transport
* aviation
* roads
* shipping
* Urbanization
* urban sprawl
* War

Effects|

* Biodiversity threats
* biodiversity loss
* decline in amphibian populations
* decline in insect populations
* Climate change
* global warming
* runaway climate change
* Coral reefs
* Deforestation
* Defaunation
* Desertification
* Ecocide
* Erosion
* Environmental degradation
* Freshwater cycle
* Habitat destruction
* Holocene extinction
* Nitrogen cycle
* Land degradation
* Land consumption
* Land surface effects on climate
* Loss of green belts
* Phosphorus cycle
* Ocean acidification
* Ozone depletion
* Resource depletion
* Water degradation
* Water scarcity

Mitigation|

* Birth control
* Cleaner production
* Climate change mitigation
* Climate engineering
* Community resilience
* Decoupling
* Ecological engineering
* Environmental engineering
* Environmental mitigation
* Industrial ecology
* Mitigation banking
* Organic farming
* Reforestation
* urban
* Restoration ecology
* Sustainable consumption
* Waste minimization

* Commons
* Category
* by country
* assessment
* mitigation

* v
* t
* e

Marine pollution

* Algal bloom
* Anoxic event
* Anoxic waters
* Aquatic toxicology
* Cultural eutrophication
* Cyanotoxin
* Dead zone
* Environmental impact of shipping
* Eutrophication
* Fish diseases and parasites
* Fish kill
* Friendly Floatees
* Hypoxia
* Invasive species
* Marine debris
* Marine garbage patches:
* Great Pacific
* Indian Ocean
* North Atlantic
* South Pacific
* Mercury in fish
* Microbead
* Nonpoint source pollution
* Nutrient pollution
* Ocean acidification
* Ocean deoxygenation
* Oil spill
* Particle
* Plastic bags
* Plastic particle water pollution
* Point source pollution
* Shutdown of thermohaline circulation
* Silver nanoparticles
* Stormwater
* Surface runoff
* Upwelling
* Urban runoff
* Water pollution

* v
* t
* e

Pollution

Air pollution|

* Acid rain
* Air quality index
* Atmospheric dispersion modeling
* Chlorofluorocarbon
* Indoor air quality
* Global dimming
* Global distillation
* Global warming
* Ozone depletion
* Atmospheric particulate matter
* Smog

Water pollution|

* Environmental impact of pharmaceuticals and personal care products
* Environmental impact of shipping
* Environmental monitoring
* Eutrophication
* Freshwater environmental quality parameters
* Groundwater pollution
* Hypoxia
* Marine debris
* Marine pollution
* Nutrient pollution
* Ocean acidification
* Oil spill
* Septic tank
* Surface runoff
* Thermal pollution
* Turbidity
* Urban runoff
* Wastewater
* Water quality
* Water stagnation
* Waterborne diseases

Soil contamination|

* Bioremediation
* Electrical resistance heating
* Herbicide
* Open defecation
* Pesticide
* Phytoremediation
* Soil Guideline Values (SGVs)

Radioactive contamination|

* Actinides in the environment
* Bioremediation of radioactive waste
* Environmental radioactivity
* Fission product
* Nuclear fallout
* Plutonium in the environment
* Radiation poisoning
* Radium in the environment
* Uranium in the environment

Other types of pollution|

* Land degradation
* Light pollution
* Pollution from nanomaterials
* Noise pollution
* Radio spectrum pollution
* Urban heat island
* Visual pollution

Pollution response|

* Cleaner production
* Industrial ecology
* Pollutant release and transfer register
* Polluter pays principle
* Pollution control
* Pollution prevention
* Waste minimization
* Zero waste

Inter-government treaties|

* Basel Convention
* CLRTAP
* Kyoto Protocol
* MARPOL Convention
* Montreal Protocol
* OSPAR
* Rotterdam Convention
* Stockholm Convention

Major organizations|

* Basel Action Network
* Central Pollution Control Board (India)
* DEFRA
* Environment Agency (England)
* Scottish Environment Protection Agency
* U.S. EPA
* European Environment Agency
* Greenpeace

de:Umweltschutz in der Seeschifffahrt

0.00

(0 votes)

Original source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental impact of shipping. Read more

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Earth:Environmental_impact_of_shipping&oldid=4301651"
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template