Intercargo welcomes the legislative proposals aimed at making those who operate them commercially pay the costs of CO2 emissions from ships

This amendment provides that the person or organisation responsible for compliance with the EU ETS should be the shipping company, defined as the shipowner or any other organisation or person, such as the manager or charterer naked, who assumed responsibility for the exercise of the ship by the shipowner and who, assuming this responsibility, has agreed to assume all duties and responsibilities imposed by the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (ISM Code). The amendment, in the text proposed by the European Commission, provides that, in line with the 'polluter pays' principle, the company of navigation could, by means of a contractual agreement, consider the entity directly responsible for the decisions that affect the CO2 emissions of the ship responsible for the costs of compliance under the Directive. This entity - specifies the text proposed by the Commission - it would normally be the entity responsible for the choice of fuel, course and speed of the ship

In the proposal, which has Peter Liese as rapporteur, it is noted that, however, the shipping company is not always responsible the purchase of fuel or the adoption of operational decisions which affect the ship's CO2 emissions and which responsibilities can be assumed by an entity other than the shipping company according to an agreement contractual. In this case - it is specified - in order to guarantee the full compliance with the polluter pays principle, and encourage the adoption of efficiency measures and more fuels clean, it is appropriate to include a binding clause in those agreements for the purpose of transferring costs so that the entity who is ultimately responsible for the decisions that affect the CO2 emissions of the ship and is held responsible covering the compliance costs paid by the shipping company within the meaning of the Directive. That entity would normally be the entity responsible for the choice, and the purchase of the fuel used by the vessel, or the operation of the ship, as regards, for example, the choice of cargo transported, or the course and speed of the ship.

For Intercargo, "this recognition of the fact that often the shipping company is not the entity commercial that controls the activity of the ship, and therefore not is responsible for the resulting emissions of gases greenhouse, it is long overdue». "Even if we keep our reservations on the Emissions Trading System of the EU as a whole - said the President of the association, Dimitrios Fafalios - we are pleased to see that the EU is taking steps in the right direction, as the authorities regulation have finally understood some of the realities of our sector. Business models within the sector of solid bulk - explained Fafalios - are varied and Different. A significant share of the operations of the bulk carrier is managed by charterers who, not only assume responsibility for the purchase of the fuel, but they also make operational decisions that directly affect CO2 emissions from the ship, such as the speed of the navigation'.

So far the favor expressed by Intercargo about the last developments of proposals to update the EU ETS. Fafalios, however, also clarified why the association expresses caution in welcoming them: "at the same time - specified - if the proposal recognizes the need for establish a contractual obligation between the shipowner and the operator commercial about the transfer of costs, it must be clear - highlighted the president of Intercargo - that this is easier said than done.