Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
SUMMARY
Strategic direction, if 6
applicable:
Output: 6.1
Introduction
2 As noted in document MEPC 71/14/4, the threat of an accidental oil spill in Arctic
waters remains the most significant threat from ships to the Arctic marine environment. While
spill response activities can be carried out in the Arctic, several factors such as ice conditions,
I:\MEPC\72\MEPC 72-11-4.docx
MEPC 72/11/4
Page 2
weather and seasonal darkness can impede the efficacy of such operations. Consequently,
the Committee invited Member States, the maritime shipping industry and other interested
parties to "…use their collective expertise to develop a pragmatic solution that effectively
addresses environmental concerns, considers impacts on Arctic communities and economies,
and facilitates transition for industry" (MEPC 71/14/4, paragraph 11). The co-sponsors agree
that taking steps to mitigate the risk of oils spills and harm to the Arctic environment is the
overall goal of this work.
3 With this in mind, the co-sponsors have read with interest document MEPC 72/11/1
(Finland et al.), which calls for a ban on heavy fuel oil (HFO) use and carriage as fuel by ships
in Arctic waters. The objectives in the document are consistent with the desire of Canada and
the Marshall Island to protect the Arctic from the impacts of HFO by shipping.
Considerations
4 The co-sponsors are of the view that when developing measures to achieve
environmental objectives, potential impacts of the measures on Arctic communities and
economies should be taken into account. The co-sponsors note similar work has been
undertaken by the Arctic Council.
6 Taking into account the above, the co-sponsors propose that the scope of work for
the PPR Sub-Committee on this output should include an assessment of impacts and take into
consideration the elements outlined in document MEPC 71/14/4, paragraph 12.
___________
I:\MEPC\72\MEPC 72-11-4.docx