Ferries, the EU and bad carbon
Discussion
Brittany Ferries newsletter said:
To achieve its ambition of zero net emissions by 2050, the European Union is extending its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to Europe's seas.
Brittany Ferries, like all shipping companies operating in EU ports, will be subject to this system, which means that a new surcharge to recover the cost of the ETS will be introduced for every crossing made on our routes from 1 January 2024.
UK-Spain £19 per car, plus £1 per passenger each trip.Brittany Ferries, like all shipping companies operating in EU ports, will be subject to this system, which means that a new surcharge to recover the cost of the ETS will be introduced for every crossing made on our routes from 1 January 2024.
UK-France £6 per car, plus £1 per passenger each trip.
BF EUMissions page said:
Where do the funds from the ETS surcharge go?
Funds are paid directly from us to the EU, which uses the funds for EU climate change projects and is also fed into the national budgets of member states. The money will be used to support investments in renewable sandals, low-carbon cheese and wine, bank account balance improvements and monetary transition from your pocket to ours.
Or something.Funds are paid directly from us to the EU, which uses the funds for EU climate change projects and is also fed into the national budgets of member states. The money will be used to support investments in renewable sandals, low-carbon cheese and wine, bank account balance improvements and monetary transition from your pocket to ours.
All getting a bit silly now...
andy43 said:
All getting a bit silly now...
True.But shipping is lagging a long way behind pretty much everyone else in 'going green'.
If someone could work out a way of charging a carbon tax on sea-freight, that would already have been done...and frankly that would make more sense than a lot of these other levies, fees, taxes and general Dick-Turpin-like behaviour that we're seeing in the UK and EU.
havoc said:
True.
But shipping is lagging a long way behind pretty much everyone else in 'going green'.
If someone could work out a way of charging a carbon tax on sea-freight, that would already have been done...and frankly that would make more sense than a lot of these other levies, fees, taxes and general Dick-Turpin-like behaviour that we're seeing in the UK and EU.
No, what you mean is shipping in this particular bit of the planet has only just twigged they can take the piss just as much as your average council.But shipping is lagging a long way behind pretty much everyone else in 'going green'.
If someone could work out a way of charging a carbon tax on sea-freight, that would already have been done...and frankly that would make more sense than a lot of these other levies, fees, taxes and general Dick-Turpin-like behaviour that we're seeing in the UK and EU.
The chinese dog sh t being shipped in daily to then go to landfill is probably charged zilch.
andy43 said:
The chinese dog sh t being shipped in daily to then go to landfill is probably charged zilch.
That is my point altogether. No-one is charging emissions-related fees to cargo ships, because if one port of entry does then as much cargo as possible will go to other ports and then be road-freighted to the final destination.It needs all ports in an entire bloc to do the same to make any difference. And then if a port just outside the bloc doesn't do the same, that port will suddenly become really popular.
And yes, I am advocating for this to happen, because:-
- Shipping emissions are dirty AF. They make an SUV rolling coal seem like Greta Thunberg's personal transport. So any lever to start improving sea-freight emissions is a very good thing.
- It might actually make people think twice about importing cheap Chinese tat, as the tat won't be quite so cheap anymore. Which would have a second beneficial impact from reducing the # of journeys.
- It'll improve our balance-of-payments vs China, which will be a nice supplementary economic benefit.
andy43 said:
BF EUMissions page said:
Where do the funds from the ETS surcharge go?
Funds are paid directly from us to the EU, which uses the funds for EU climate change projects and is also fed into the national budgets of member states. The money will be used to support investments in renewable sandals, low-carbon cheese and wine, bank account balance improvements and monetary transition from your pocket to ours.
Or something.Funds are paid directly from us to the EU, which uses the funds for EU climate change projects and is also fed into the national budgets of member states. The money will be used to support investments in renewable sandals, low-carbon cheese and wine, bank account balance improvements and monetary transition from your pocket to ours.
All getting a bit silly now...
One such project I'm aligned with:
There's a lot of really good stuff that's happening that never gets to see the light of day because that would weaken the popular narrative around the validity of the EU and Environmental Improvement.
StevieBee said:
To quell your cynicism, I have and am currently working on several projects funded - in large part - by the ETS. These range from Environmental Capacity Building, Sector Reform projects in accession countries focusing upon areas of environmental improvement, green city projects and more.
One such project I'm aligned with:
There's a lot of really good stuff that's happening that never gets to see the light of day because that would weaken the popular narrative around the validity of the EU and Environmental Improvement.
And there was me thinking the EU would waste my 21 quid per trip on something completely unrelated. One such project I'm aligned with:
There's a lot of really good stuff that's happening that never gets to see the light of day because that would weaken the popular narrative around the validity of the EU and Environmental Improvement.
Air quality monitoring stations for Cyprus though, advanced ones at that. I’m sure the new sewage system will relegate decades of argument, military action and occasional bad smells to the history books.
Consider my cynicism quelled.
andy43 said:
And there was me thinking the EU would waste my 21 quid per trip on something completely unrelated.
Air quality monitoring stations for Cyprus though, advanced ones at that. I’m sure the new sewage system will relegate decades of argument, military action and occasional bad smells to the history books.
Consider my cynicism quelled.
I fear your 21 quid may be found wanting on that particular point so I'll hand you back 20% of your cynicism Air quality monitoring stations for Cyprus though, advanced ones at that. I’m sure the new sewage system will relegate decades of argument, military action and occasional bad smells to the history books.
Consider my cynicism quelled.
havoc said:
andy43 said:
The chinese dog sh t being shipped in daily to then go to landfill is probably charged zilch.
That is my point altogether. No-one is charging emissions-related fees to cargo ships, because if one port of entry does then as much cargo as possible will go to other ports and then be road-freighted to the final destination.It needs all ports in an entire bloc to do the same to make any difference. And then if a port just outside the bloc doesn't do the same, that port will suddenly become really popular.
And yes, I am advocating for this to happen, because:-
- Shipping emissions are dirty AF. They make an SUV rolling coal seem like Greta Thunberg's personal transport. So any lever to start improving sea-freight emissions is a very good thing.
- It might actually make people think twice about importing cheap Chinese tat, as the tat won't be quite so cheap anymore. Which would have a second beneficial impact from reducing the # of journeys.
- It'll improve our balance-of-payments vs China, which will be a nice supplementary economic benefit.
havoc said:
andy43 said:
The chinese dog sh t being shipped in daily to then go to landfill is probably charged zilch.
That is my point altogether. No-one is charging emissions-related fees to cargo ships, because if one port of entry does then as much cargo as possible will go to other ports and then be road-freighted to the final destination.It needs all ports in an entire bloc to do the same to make any difference. And then if a port just outside the bloc doesn't do the same, that port will suddenly become really popular.
And yes, I am advocating for this to happen, because:-
- Shipping emissions are dirty AF. They make an SUV rolling coal seem like Greta Thunberg's personal transport. So any lever to start improving sea-freight emissions is a very good thing.
- It might actually make people think twice about importing cheap Chinese tat, as the tat won't be quite so cheap anymore. Which would have a second beneficial impact from reducing the # of journeys.
- It'll improve our balance-of-payments vs China, which will be a nice supplementary economic benefit.
Many many legal and regulatory challenges to address before we'll see one, at least it's a start.
Edited by TGCOTF-dewey on Wednesday 13th December 12:26
TGCOTF-dewey said:
havoc said:
andy43 said:
The chinese dog sh t being shipped in daily to then go to landfill is probably charged zilch.
That is my point altogether. No-one is charging emissions-related fees to cargo ships, because if one port of entry does then as much cargo as possible will go to other ports and then be road-freighted to the final destination.It needs all ports in an entire bloc to do the same to make any difference. And then if a port just outside the bloc doesn't do the same, that port will suddenly become really popular.
And yes, I am advocating for this to happen, because:-
- Shipping emissions are dirty AF. They make an SUV rolling coal seem like Greta Thunberg's personal transport. So any lever to start improving sea-freight emissions is a very good thing.
- It might actually make people think twice about importing cheap Chinese tat, as the tat won't be quite so cheap anymore. Which would have a second beneficial impact from reducing the # of journeys.
- It'll improve our balance-of-payments vs China, which will be a nice supplementary economic benefit.
Many many legal and regulatory challenges to address before we'll see one, at least it's a start.
Edited by TGCOTF-dewey on Wednesday 13th December 12:26
But the comparison isn't really valid. Looking at the emission per item shipped, the level is tiny because the ships can today carry so much more stuff.
IIRC, there was global agreement on legislation introduced in 2020 that's aimed at reducing Sulphur content in emissions and other improvements to the fuel used (normally the lowest grade there is). And the Thorium HTGR reactor looks interesting.
So if a few quid on your crossing adds a bit of speed to things, that's no bad thing.
TGCOTF-dewey said:
I'm surprised there hasn't been a greater return to sail/wing enhanced propulsion for less time critical freight.
Bring back the tea clipper.
It's in the works - saw this a few months back - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66543643Bring back the tea clipper.
StevieBee said:
The stats 'look' truly alarming. I think it's something like the seven largest container ships produce more emissions each year than all of the cars and lorries in the world.
But the comparison isn't really valid. Looking at the emission per item shipped, the level is tiny because the ships can today carry so much more stuff.
On a per-use basis, you're right.But the comparison isn't really valid. Looking at the emission per item shipped, the level is tiny because the ships can today carry so much more stuff.
On a "what are the biggest ongoing threats to climate stability that we MUST address", cargo ships are pretty much* top of the tree but have been ignored ever since global warming was first touted. Almost like they're in the "too difficult to deal with" pile and all these government actions about climate change are mere window dressing...
* Chinese power generation emissions may trump them.
andy43 said:
Terminator X said:
Highest UK taxes in living memory + cost of living crisis + all of us paying through the nose in green taxes. Good times.
TX.
But the warm fuzzy feeling you get enroute to Santander knowing you’ve helped fund Turkish drainage system upgrades as above? Priceless.TX.
NaePasaran said:
Yep because a UK cost of living crisis, a UK energy crisis, a UK housing crisis with the UKs highest taxes in living memory is absolutely nothing to do with the UK and completely the fault of Brussels.
I presume that's dripping with sarcasm?(Hard to tell without smilies)
Gassing Station | Holidays & Travel | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff