A new UN regulation banning heavy fuel oil (HFO) in Arctic waters has come into effect, but environmental campaigners are raising concerns about loopholes that could weaken its impact. From today, ships transiting Arctic waters are prohibited from using or carrying HFO, a measure aimed at safeguarding the delicate Arctic environment and its wildlife. However, the ban’s effectiveness is being questioned due to geographic limitations, exemptions, and waivers.
Half of the Arctic coastline is under Russian jurisdiction, and the country, with its vast fleet of over 800 ships, has no plans to implement the regulation. The Clean Arctic Alliance, a non-profit organization, highlights that HFO, a viscous and polluting fuel, accounts for a significant portion of global marine fuel usage. While banned in Antarctica and the waters around Svalbard since 2022, HFO still constitutes around 75% of the marine fuel transported in the Arctic.
The environmental concerns surrounding HFO stem from its emissions and the challenges associated with cleaning up spills. Burning HFO produces exhaust laden with black carbon particles, which decrease the reflectivity of Arctic snow, glaciers, and sea ice, leading to increased heat absorption. This contributes to the accelerating feedback loop of climate change, as more shipping routes open up in the Arctic due to its changing environment. The Clean Arctic Alliance notes a significant increase in black carbon emissions from shipping between 2015 and 2019, with the IMO ban only projected to reduce these emissions by a modest 5%.
The WWF emphasizes the high levels of sulfur in HFO, requiring it to be “scrubbed” according to international law. However, this loophole technology, which uses seawater to scrub exhaust fumes, transfers pollutants from the air to the ocean. Over 97% of the polluting waste from ships in Canadian waters is attributed to scrubbers.
HFO’s thick, tar-like consistency poses a significant risk in case of spills. Its density relative to water can vary, causing it to float, sink, or suspend in the water. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration classifies HFO as a persistent oil, with only a small portion evaporating after a spill. Spills often form thick slicks on the water’s surface, fragmenting into tarballs that can be transported over vast distances by winds and currents.
In the frigid Arctic waters, the cold temperature exacerbates the situation, slowing down the breakdown of HFO and making cleanup virtually impossible. The existing challenges in the Arctic, such as ice, extreme cold, and limited access to equipment, further complicate any spill response efforts. Such spills pose a serious threat to Arctic wildlife, including walrus, seals, and beluga whales, and cause long-term contamination of sediments.
The International Council on Clean Transportation estimates that approximately 74% of ships currently using HFO can continue doing so under the new regulations. Ships with “protected fuel tanks” are exempt from the ban, despite the fact that these tanks may only reduce the risk of spills but still contribute to black carbon and polluted wastewater from scrubbing. Although Norway’s Svalbard Environmental Protection Act prohibits HFO, with recent enforcement resulting in a significant fine for an Irish shipping company, countries bordering the Arctic retain the authority to issue exemptions or waivers in their territorial waters for their own ships.
Canada has indicated its intention to issue waivers for domestic ships transporting food and fuel to Arctic communities. Finland has suggested it will enforce the regulations, while the US and Denmark have yet to comment on their plans. The continued use of HFO in the Arctic, despite the new regulations, raises concerns about the effectiveness of the ban and the potential long-term consequences for the fragile environment.
