One cargo ship emits as much harmful gases as 50 million cars

Shipping contributes significantly more to air pollution than cars

One cargo ship pollutes as much air as 50 million cars. This means that just 15 ships of this size emit as much pollution as the entire global car fleet of around 750 million cars today. 

In total, the world may have around 90,000 cargo ships in operation today alone. Of course, not all of them emit huge amounts of pollutants, but even on average, such ships emit 500 times more pollutants than all road vehicles put together.

This means that shipping accounts for 18-30% of global nitrogen oxides (NOx) pollution and 9% of global sulfur oxides (SOx) pollution.

Experts estimate that a single large ship can produce as much as 5 000 tonnes of sulphur oxide (SOx) pollution per year. This means that shipping contributes between 3.5% and 4% of all climate change emissions, and as much as 85% of this pollution is concentrated in the northern hemisphere, where we live^[1].

However, this is not routinely discussed in the public sphere. Why? Since the 1960s, developed countries have been increasingly regulating car emissions. This has led to a reduction of more than 98% in emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons over three decades.

Why is there no discussion about applying similar rules to shipping? It is becoming clear that, unlike citizens' cars, it is much more difficult to impose various restrictions on ships, so there is no attempt to do so, and jurisdiction is the fundamental reason why cargo ships are not regulated.

Even though states can take over and require ships to comply with the laws of the country only when they enter one or other coastal area, outside the coastal areas, shipping is regulated by the International Maritime Organisation of the United Nations (UN).

Countries are obliged to accept and comply with its rules, but only a few years ago, the organization demanded that 90% of sulfur be removed from ships' fuel by 2020, even though the fight against car pollution is much faster and more effective.

It's not just old cars that cause pollution, but they are the ones that are getting the most attention

Car pollution and how to tackle it is one of the hottest topics when it comes to the environment, we don't hear much about shipping, but what about air pollution? After all, we often hear politicians or celebrities being criticized for arriving at environmental events in private, polluting planes or for traveling the same distance as we do to the nearest shopping center^[2].

Indeed, aviation is a major problem when it comes to pollution. And it is not only the planes themselves that pollute but also the airports. One recent study found that the most polluting airport in the world is Dubai. In one year, it emitted 20.1 million tonnes of CO2, which is roughly the equivalent of the greenhouse gas emissions of five coal-fired power stations. London Heathrow Airport had the second highest climate impact, emitting 19.1 million tonnes of CO2 per year. 

Planes taking off and landing at as many as six airports in London are responsible for the same amount of harmful nitrogen oxides and particulate matter that 3.23 million cars emit every year.

The study also found that the world's 20 largest airports together emit as much carbon dioxide as 58 coal-fired power stations. Critics of air travel have argued that airport pollution avoidance measures are inadequate and that the current situation poses a risk to human health, but we do not hear calls from the authorities to move away from old aircraft or to avoid using certain types of fuel.

Environmental hysteria: the idea of 15-minute cities and the happiness of having nothing

The World Health Organization (WHO) says that air pollution is a global threat to human health. Ninety percent of the world's population currently lives in areas where pollution exceeds safe limits. It causes 7 million premature deaths each year from heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and acute respiratory infections.

The WHO is guided by evidence that limiting polluting vehicles' access to urban centers through clean air and low-pollution zones can benefit health. Studies have shown that such zones have reduced the prevalence of all health problems associated with air pollution^[3].

This leads to radical ideas such as the "15-minute city," which has been widely discussed in the public sphere for years. It is essentially an urban planning idea that aims to bring basic services within a quarter of an hour's walk or bike ride of where people live in cities.

While some experts argue that there is nothing wrong with ensuring that people can walk or cycle to the shops or school, the danger is that someone may decide how often you go to the shop, post office, etc.

A few years ago, Oxfordshire County Council in the UK approved the creation of traffic filters enforced by cameras at six key locations. This meant that private cars would not be allowed in without a permit, which they could use for up to 100 days a year, but all other vehicles would be exempt.

This quickly sowed panic on social networks, with talk of the government and the world's powerful seeking to restrict and control people's movements, all under the guise of a narrative of environmental problems and threats.

But this is not the only tantalizing idea. "You will have nothing, and you will be happy" is a phrase often used by critics of the World Economic Forum (WEF), who accuse the WEF of wanting to restrict private property. Indeed, a 2016 essay for the WEF by Danish politician Ida Auken said:

"Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city, or maybe I should say our city. I have nothing. I don't own a car, a house, appliances, or clothes. This may seem strange to you, but it makes a lot of sense to those of us who live in this city.

Although such cities do not exist today, people are indeed encouraged to own as little as possible: we are encouraged not to own a polluting car, not to buy a lot of clothes or furnishings, and society is taught to borrow, rent, share everything from a mobile device to a bicycle. This could one day lead to a society without property.

However, for the time being, this is only a debate for the future, and some of the control mechanisms are already taking place now, even in Lithuania. For example, this spring, environmental inspectors, not policemen, will start checking car pollution. 

The practical application of this innovation has raised many questions. After all, environmental enforcers suddenly have the right to stop and inspect vehicles at any time of the day or night without police assistance. This raises questions about security: how can you identify an environmental officer without falling into the trap of potential attackers?

Drivers are also worried that if they do not stop and thus disobey the environmental officer's instructions, they could face a fine of up to €1,200, or even if they comply with the officer's instructions but find that their car exceeds the air pollution standards, the environmental officers could not only impose a fine but also immediately withdraw the roadworthiness test. However, the complaints and concerns of the citizens have not moved the authorities too much. The issue of the common good and the fight against pollution is still on the table.