|
September 2007
I must say that I am increasingly bemused by the ecologists’ concern over the
“carbon footprint” attributed to Shipping. The witch hunt continues – inevitably
enthusiastically supported by our Eurocrats in Brussels – despite the statistic
that Shipping is estimated to be responsible for only 2% of total global
emissions while transporting more than 90% of the world’s trade.
I am not I emphasise implying that the industry should simply ignore the
hysteria and I admire the immediate response by such as Intertanko, Intercargo
and my old admired friend Lars Carlsson (late of Concordia “oil must travel
first class” and now Chairman of Shipping Emissions Abatement and Trading).
These and others are demonstrating that they are taking the situation seriously
and by various means are doing something about reducing Shipping’s already
minimal impact on global emissions. Thus Shipping is seen to be on the side of
the angels before yet another ill informed criticism gains momentum against the
industry. It may also delay or even prevent yet more unnecessary “regulation”.
My feelings on all this are encapsulated in my experience of nearly 60 years in
Shipping during which time Shipping has been randomly accused of all sorts of
malfeasances quite out of perspective to reality. Just think of them: oil
pollution, strandings, fires, untreated sewage pollution, exploitation of crews,
sending ships for scrapping/recycling which contain hazardous, toxic substances
etc etc etc. Of course each of these has occurred
and indeed may occasionally occur again, but do they accurately picture the
allegedly evil, uncaring face of the industry? They do not and I have always
been proud of the unrivalled efficiency and general probity of the vast majority
of shipowners, managers and their crews.
The problem lies in the fact that the public, ably informed by the media, seems
interested only in maritime “disasters” real or imagined. Thus the image of
Shipping needs to be improved by a vigorous PR effort.
Shipping in all its forms should stop being defensive. On the contrary it has
everything to be proud of in its contribution to our way of life. One single
week, let alone month, without Shipping would result in a grinding halt in
economic activity and even precipitate starvation.
This introduction has I appreciate the tone of a sermon. My justification for it
is that I am thoroughly sickened by mindless criticism of an industry which has
an unmatched record in terms of safety, efficiency, cheapness and environmental
friendliness.
IMIF with its eclectic membership is well placed to take a lead in projecting
maritime’s image.
Jim Davis
|