Commercial shipping gets a fairly ease ride from climate change policies, despite being a massive emitter of carbon dioxide, though the industry does face calls for tightening rules on marine fuel pollution. Yet even here the shipping sector may be able to postpone anti-pollution moves, thanks to the influence of lobby groups on its world governing body. Indeed, Mediapart can reveal that a senior employee of oil giant Total, which produces marine fuels, is currently representing the French government in key discussions on the issue.
The story goes back to 2008 when the United Nations body charged with maritime issues, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), set a limit of 0.5% on the sulphur content of shipping fuel oils, to be implemented in 2020. The current limit on sulphur content is 3.5%. However, the shipping and oil industries, fearing higher costs, obtained a concession: before bringing in the new limit, a review would be carried out to clarify the availability of low-sulphur fuels. That review is due to be completed before 2018.
The verdict of this review will be crucial. If it concludes that the global supply of low-sulphur fuel oil is insufficient, the IMO will postpone implementing the 0.5% sulphur limit until 2025. The review's authors will be chosen by a high-level IMO committee on marine fuels, on which 13 national governments have seats, and the committee will also direct their work.
Enlargement : Illustration 1
This is the context in which France has chosen as its representative on the committee a man called Franck Chevallier, who is special advisor for environmental regulations on refinery products in the Strategy Division at Total SA, the giant French oil multinational.
So how is it that a chemist at an industrial company that has a direct stake in both the outcome of the review and the results of the committee’s deliberations finds himself occupying France’s seat on this very same committee? The IMO said that the decision of whom to nominate rests with each government. “Your question about the reasons for the choice of such and such a person should be directly addressed to France,” added an official.
Mediapart then telephoned the French ambassador to the IMO, Élisabeth Barsacq, who said she did not have the time to talk and hung up. A few hours later she sent an email saying Mediapart should contact the press attaché at France's foreign affairs ministry, who in turn directed calls to the environment ministry. No one denied the appointment. Government officials commented that the committee was “a working group with no decision-making power” made up of “experts from the private sector when the technical nature of the subject demands this, designated ad hoc by member states.”
Mediapart also telephoned Franck Chevallier himself, who referred calls to France's maritime affairs unit the Direction des Affaires Maritimes “for whom I am working as a technical expert”. Chevallier was also nominated in May to the Conseil National de l’Air, which advises the environment ministry on air pollution, as a representative of MEDEF, the French employers’ federation.
A spokesman for Total, meanwhile, said: “A member of our staff was nominated by the IMO as an expert representing France, in the group responsible for evaluating technically different proposals from providers who could carry out the study evaluating the availability of fuels with low sulphur content in 2020.
“Each expert in this group of 20 members has a mission to transmit a technical and scientific evaluation of the offerings according to criteria and an evaluation grid defined by the IMO. The expert appointed for France has also received guidelines and precise instructions on the position to adopt,” he said. The spokesman concluded: “The final political decision on the application date for the regulation will be taken by another IMO committee which brings together the governments concerned (more than 100 delegations) in which experts or consultants will not have a voice: only officials from these governments will contribute.”
Lobbying at the UN
In fact, several industrial lobbies participate openly and officially on the IMO’s high-level committeemon marine fuel, where they are registered as non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This is normal practice at the IMO, which opens its deliberations to economic concerns to allow them to defend their views and interests. In that context, however, they speak in their own names.
The appointment of Franck Chevallier is much more controversial. He will speak in France's name while simultaneously being an employee with a subordinate relationship to Total, a company that refines and sells heavy fuel oils for shipping. If the IMO introduces its new environmental regulations, Total could face a bill of tens of millions of euros for converting its refineries to produce low-sulphur fuels. It would also lose one of its main outlets for heavy fuel oils, which are a by-product of the refining process. In these circumstances, what true independence can this expert have, and what is the value of his assessments?
France is not the only country to be represented by an industrial expert on this committee. Brazil has designated Marco Antonio Costa Tritto, a director of Brazilian multinational oil firm Petrobras who formerly ran its bunkering - ship refuelling - operation in Singapore. In an interview last October with Seatrade Maritime News, Tritto said that Petrobras was reluctant to invest in producing low-sulphur fuel oils and that in his view there would not be enough global demand for low-sulphur fuel to meet the demands of the IMO's deadline. So in other words, as far as he is concerned, the outcome of the review is a foregone conclusion. By contrast the United States is represented on the committee by an official from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Michael Samulski.
This conflict of interest within a United Nations body whose decisions have a major influence on the maritime transport industry reveals how open the UN is to industrial lobbies. This is particularly shocking in the case of marine fuels because they represent a major health risk, causing serious respiratory problems, in particular affecting children with asthma. According to some reports, sulphur emissions from commercial shipping cause some 50,000 premature deaths a year in Europe, and also contribute to acid rain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The French version of this article can be found here.
English version by Sue Landau
(Editing by Michael Streeter)