European Union calls for ban on Heavy Fuel Oil

The Malta Environment and Planning Authority on Monday chose heavy fuel oil over gas-oil as the main fuel for the Delimara power station extension. But even as MEPA board members voted on the issue, the European Commission and Parliament were actively seeking to ban the same fossil fuel from international shipping, on the grounds that is causes serious air and sea pollution.

Although the proposed ban initiative is intended to protect the increasingly vulnerable Arctic circle - exposed to greater risk on account of fears of global warming - the wording of the ban suggests that it is not just arctic fauna that may be jeopardised by HFO.

Originally adopted on January 20, 'A sustainable EU policy for the High North' is scathing in its description of health and environmental hazards posed by HFO. Environmental NGO Bellona describes the fuel favoured by MEPA as "the biggest environmental problem caused by shipping".

"The sticky bunker oil has a worse environmental impact than any other oil when it is released as a result of grounding or leakage," Bellona said in submissions to the International Maritime Organisation earlier this year. "It is viscous and does not dissolve in water As a result, its impact on beaches and seabirds is much more detrimental than that of lighter compounds such as marine diesel. In addition, the use of heavy fuel oil brings on worse air pollution, including soot emissions."

The European Commission policy, approved last January, goes as far as to suggest that "the EU should threaten to refuse in its harbours vessels with heavy fuel oil on board, or which would cause high soot emissions."

While considered the most pollutant of the available fuels even in ordinary environments, HFO is considered particularly harmful in areas already exposed to climate change risks.

Heavy fuel oil produces soot (black carbon) in its particle form - namely nitrogen oxide, sulphur oxide and carbon dioxide.

"Soot settles on ice and snow and slowly blackens the large white surfaces," the Bellona report observes. "This absorbs more energy from sunlight and accelerates the melting of snow and ice, increasing the dark sea surface, which in turn further increases absorption of sun energy and the melting of snow and ice. Soot emissions therefore contribute to climate change in the high north and to the global climate change by affecting the ocean currents that largely determine the climate we have today."

Significantly, the same report recommends diesel and natural gas as ideal ways to cut down on harmful emissions. "Large cuts in emissions of soot and sulphur oxides are possible if ships opt for cleaner fuels - mainly diesel and natural gas. Natural gas will also reduce NOx emissions by 80% and CO₂ emissions by about 20% compared to conventional fuels."

Having adopted a call for a ban on HFO as part of its official environmental policy, the European Commission is now expected to lobby with the International Maritime Organisation to effectively institute a ban on HFO in European shipping.

It is unclear how this policy, if adopted by the IMO, would affect the situation in Delinara: whereby hazardous produced by the HFO-powered station will be stored in containers at the Freeport, before being exported by sea.