The Polar Code

The idea of a strict mandatory code for shipping in polar regions, agreed and en- acted at IMO level, should have general appeal to the shipping industry as well as to the various governments and NGOs that have a strong interest in protecting the environment. Failure to generate and enact such a code in a timely manner at IMO level is likely to result in individual states enforcing their own regulations for shipping operating in their waters. They will undoubtedly vary from one state to another, making compliance unnecessarily complicated. A strong, uniform code en- forced throughout the polar regions will in the end reduce confusion and help to bring about safe and sound maritime operations for all with due regard for these sensitive environmental zones.

The points that the Polar Code should ad- dress include the following:

◈ Ice strengthening of vessels to minimize disasters, including hull integrity, water tightness and general vessel fitness for sailing in polar conditions;

◈ Additional safety equipment required to cope with the harsh environment and reduced rescue infrastructure;

◈ Special local navigational considerations applicable to polar regions. Sufficient, accurate hydro-geographic information is required as a basic component to successful and safe sailing in these waters.

◈ Crewing of vessels and training of crews to prepare them for polar conditions;

◈ The mandatory use of distillate fuel and the banning of the use of heavy fuel oil;

◈ Stringent provision for the prevention of spillage or leakage of oil and other noxious liquids;

◈ Avoidance of discharge of sewage and greywater;

◈ Stringent regulations regarding the discharge of garbage;

◈ Measures to reduce the emission of black carbon, NOx, SOx and other air emissions, over and above those in force or being considered in non-polar regions. Reduction of fuel consumption and the type of fuel burned are key points;

◈ Reduction of underwater noise;

◈ Immediate enforcement of the Ballast Water Management Convention, which has not yet entered into force;

◈ A ban on the use of toxic antifouling systems that leach biocides or emit other highly toxic substances into the water;

◈ A cleaning regime ensuring that ships sailing in polar waters are cleaned of bio- fouling before voyaging into these areas in order to prevent the invasion of non-indigenous species. The code will have different regulations for different classes of ship (depending on the degree of ice they have to deal with). The basic classes have not yet been agreed.

Holistic approach – safety and environment together

It can be seen that the safety and environmental measures that the Polar Code must address need to be considered all together. Otherwise safety measures and environmental measures may not work in harmony or, worse, may conflict and cancel each other out. For example, a measure taken to reduce fuel consumption may result in more underwater noise unless both factors are considered together. Or an antifouling system claiming to reduce fuel consumption may result in the discharge of a great deal of highly toxic material into polar waters. The ideal hull coating system for polar regions would be one that was not toxic, that would stand up to the harsh polar conditions  and not be scraped off by contact with ice, and that also lent itself to easy removal of biofouling before any vessel ventured into polar waters. A holistic approach would take all these points into consideration.

The Polar Code will set something of a precedent for IMO regulatory instruments in that it will cover a number of disciplines and areas of interest under one code. This is particularly important in polar regions, where safety and environmental concerns must be considered in harmony. It may also set a pattern for similar IMO initiatives in the future.

Quick solutions are needed

As outlined above, the various factors that make the Polar Code desirable and necessary have already come into being, yet the code is not complete. Failure to enact and ratify a strong Polar Code in a timely manner will most likely result in a fragmentary, state-by-state regulatory framework, which will prove much more burdensome to the shipping industry than a single international code covering all the major points in a uniform manner.

The drivers for increased traffic in these regions are not being postponed to cooperate with the slow progress of the Polar Code. This is why the arbitrary postponement of the code at DE 56, the intention to develop the safety measures in the code separately from the environmental measures and the lack of urgency with which the code was treated at DE 56 were particularly frustrating and disappointing to those who can clearly see the need for a strong, harmonious Polar Code ratified before the shipping traffic in the polar regions builds up significantly.

Following a unilateral decision by the DE chairperson that no decision about the environmental aspects of the code would be taken until the 57th session in early 2013 (DE 57), it appears there will be no holistic approach as requested by many of the DE 56 delegates and no official further consideration of the environmental aspects until February 2013.

In addition to the Polar Code, other measures will be needed to protect these environments, including marine spatial planning in order to look at the larger ecosystem picture. The Polar Code will cover the shipping aspect but there are other factors such as how shipping affects oil and gas, how it affects fisheries, cumulative effects and the overall environmental picture. These points will need to be considered and environmental impact assessments undertaken.

The delays in the completion of the Polar Code need be set aside, the urgency due to the situation recognised and the whole process moved forward rapidly with due regard to the need for a holistic approach.