How shipping in the EU is driving the rapid loss of Arctic sea ice
Produced by the incomplete combustion of fuels in ship engines, black carbon is contributing to the rapid loss of Arctic sea ice.
Previous reports have only focused on vessels flying EU flags, overlooking the impact of ships travelling to and from EU ports.
'Our findings show that ships connected to EU trade, regardless of their flag, are major drivers of black carbon pollution in the Arctic,' says Liudmila Osipova, senior researcher at the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), and lead author of its new study.
'Recognising these emissions in future policies could help the EU better align its climate goals with its real footprint in the Arctic.'
As Arctic shipping activity increases, so too are the associated black carbon (BC) emissions.
Between 2015 and 2021, BC emissions in the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)'s definition of the Arctic nearly doubled, according to the study.
In the more broadly defined Geographic Arctic, shipping emitted 1.5 kilotonnes (kt) of BC and 12 kt of CO₂ in 2021. About a quarter of these emissions occurred within the IMO definition of the Arctic, indicating a strong growth in BC emissions in the polar area, from 193 tonnes in 2015 to 413 tonnes six years later.
This growth trend is concerning, since one tonne of black carbon has a global warming effect equivalent to 900 tonnes of CO₂, as it absorbs more heat in the atmosphere.
BC's impact is particularly pronounced in the Arctic. When the sooty particles settle on snow or ice, they reduce the albedo of these surfaces, meaning they reflect less light and so melt faster.
This compounds the climate challenges in a region which is already heating up three to four times faster than the global average.
Despite its potent climate and health impacts - it is linked to lung cancer, respiratory illness, and cardiopulmonary disease - BC remains one of the most unregulated short-lived climate and air pollutants.
Brussels typically only accounts for the emissions from its EU-flagged ships in the Arctic. To give a truer picture of the pollution over which the bloc has control, ICCT has also totted up BC and CO₂ from EU-regulated ships, which answer to the EU Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system as they voyage between EU ports.
These vessels are the bigger polluters, it found. BC and CO₂ emissions from EU-regulated ships of at least 5,000 gross tonnage were nearly double those from EU-flagged ships in the IMO Arctic in 2021.
That year, nearly three-quarters of the ships operating in the Geographic Arctic and half of those in the IMO Arctic were navigating to or from EU ports.
To address a significant gap in its maritime regulation, the researchers say that EU policymakers could include BC among the pollutants measured and reported within the bloc's MRV system.
Beyond improved emissions tracking, there are various ways to reduce BC emissions, such as incentivising ships to use distillate instead of residual fuel, and encouraging the installation of diesel particulate filters on board.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
How could the bird flu strain raising alarm in the US enter Europe?
A strain of bird flu that has jumped from animals to people in the United States could find its way to Europe, EU scientists have warned in a new report. EU-US trade of 'raw milk' products and wild bird movement appear to be the biggest risks, according to the analysis from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Avian influenza has been spreading at higher levels worldwide over the past five years, including in wild birds and poultry farms in Europe. The virus has occasionally jumped from birds into mammals, including foxes, mink, and cats. European officials are also concerned about an H5N1 bird flu outbreak among US dairy cows that spilled to people last year, infecting 70 and killing one. There is no evidence of person-to-person transmission, and the US strain has not been detected in the EU. But health experts fear that left unchecked, the virus could evolve to the point where it spreads more easily between people, raising the risk of a broader outbreak. 'Avian influenza viruses pose an increasing threat, with the potential to adapt to humans and trigger future pandemics,' Andrea Gervelmeyer, a scientific officer with EFSA's animal health team, told Euronews Health. That, Gervelmeyer added, is a 'major concern for global health'. For the new report, EFSA analysed all the possible ways the US bird flu strain could make its way into the EU. One risk is that as wild birds migrate in the coming months, they could bring H5N1 with them. The virus might be detected first in key European stopovers such as Iceland, the United Kingdom, Ireland, western parts of Scandinavia, and major wetlands on the coasts of Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands. EFSA scientists also scrutinised trade between the EU and US. Imports of 'raw' milk, cheese, or other dairy products pose a 'potential risk for virus introduction into the EU,' they said. Raw milk products may be properly labelled or pasteurised, a process that kills bacteria and viruses such as avian influenza. That means dairy exports from parts of the US hit hard by the outbreak could be riskier. Since 2023, the EU has imported 889 tonnes of milk and cream and 10 tonnes of fresh cheese from the US that 'may not have undergone sufficient thermal treatment' to kill the virus, EFSA said. The EU also imports about 20,000 tonnes of beef from the US every year. But strict trade rules and limited presence of the virus in meat mean that while it is theoretically possible the bird flu strain could enter Europe that way, it's not likely, EFSA said. Scientists also do not believe that US exports of chicken, poultry, or bull semen – of which the EU has imported nearly 85,000 kilograms since 2023 – are likely to cause bird flu outbreaks in Europe. However, there is still some 'uncertainty' around data from the US, the agency said, and it will keep monitoring bird flu threats and issue recommendations to keep the US strain from entering the EU. For now, Gervelmeyer said the risk assessment should help to boost 'preparedness measures to protect public health in Europe'.
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
Is honey beekeeping doing more harm than good for other pollinators?
One third of pollinator species, such as bees, butterflies, bats, and hummingbirds, are in decline in many parts of the world. In Europe, one out of ten bee and butterfly species is threatened with extinction. Without pollination (which is crucial for plant reproduction), many plant species would decline and eventually disappear, putting food security at risk. Almonds, apples, coffee, and strawberries are some of the foods that depend on the essential pollination work carried out by bees. Honeybees are often called 'managed pollinators' because they can be domesticated by humans. However, most pollinators are wild, or 'non-managed', including more than 20,000 different species of bees, species of flies, butterflies, moths, wasps, beetles, thrips, birds, bats, and other vertebrates. But as wild bee and butterfly populations shrink, the number of honeybee hives in the European Union has been steadily growing, making the EU the world's second-largest honey producer after China. Animal pollination contributes an estimated €5 billion to the EU's agricultural output per year. Why are wild pollinators in decline? Land use change, intensive agriculture, pesticides, pollution, invasive species, infectious diseases, and climate change are the main threats to pollinators, according to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. However, a 2023 study in Canada linked urban beekeeping to reduced pollen availability and fewer wild bee species. 'When there is an abundance of honeybees in the neighbourhood, wild pollinators have some serious competition', said Mario Vallejo-Marin, professor in Ecological Botany at Uppsala University. That happens 'because wild bees are quite picky, they do not go to any flower, they go to the flowers they are adapted to, and different species will visit different flowers', explained Ignasi Bartomeus, researcher at the Doñana Biological Station. Are honey beekeepers saving the wrong bees? 'Honeybees clearly face a lot of threats, such as pesticides and pathogens', Bartomeus told Euronews. However, 'the number of honeybee hives in Europe is generally stable, and in Spain, for example, it is increasing,' he added. That is why, for many ecologists, honey beekeeping is not bee conservation. Instead, it can be counterproductive. Astudy published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution in 2024 found that losing wild pollinators is more harmful to plant reproduction than losing honeybees. Ainhoa Magrach, Ikerbasque research professor at the Basque Centre for Climate Change, added: "85% of wild plant species and 70% of the crops we consume (including the most nutritious ones) depend on pollinator to set fruit. If we lose these pollinators, we will also lose much of the plant diversity in the world, which in turn are the base of many terrestrial food webs". 'I have even seen some campaigns trying to increase the number of commercial honeybee hives to rescue pollinators. That would be equivalent to saying we need more chicken farms to save bird biodiversity', Bartomeus told Euronews. The negative impact of honey beekeeping is still scientifically debatable and depends on the specific environmental context and floral variety in each region. Raquel Teixeira de Sousa, former honeybee researcher at the Oxford Bee Lab, says beekeeping still is very important: "it is fundamental to keep the livelihoods of small rural communities'. So, how can we save wild pollinators? Watch the video to find out.
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
EU pharma chief calls for European Nasdaq to boost biotech innovation
Stefan Oelrich, president of Bayer's pharmaceutical division and newly appointed head of the EU's pharmaceutical lobby EFPIA, pointed out the urgent need for capital market reform to support biotech development in Europe. 'We need the equivalent of a Nasdaq in Europe where we can raise capital for biotech. Because biotech is not just about government finance,' Oelrich said during a press conference last week. Launched in 1971, the Nasdaq (originally the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations) was the world's first electronic stock market. Known for its fully electronic trading model, the exchange has historically been attractive to fast-growing sectors, including life science, listing some of the world's largest tech companies, including Apple, Microsoft, and Google. Oelrich argued that Europe must urgently develop a similar equity-driven financing ecosystem. 'Today, there is very limited venture capital available, which is largely due to the way we manage equities. We invest our equities not in venture, but elsewhere,' he said. According to him, the lack of early-stage capital means European biotech innovations often migrate elsewhere — especially to the US, where funding and commercialisation opportunities are more robust. 'The transition from basic research to patented applications tends to follow where the capital is. We must ensure that innovation generated in European universities and research institutions stays in Europe,' he warned. 'Why don't we do it?' His remarks came just ahead of the unveiling of the EU's long-awaited Life Sciences Strategy, which aims to revive Europe's position as a hub for biotech research and development. The strategy acknowledges that the gap in venture capital investment is widening in Europe. It points to the continent's fragmented capital markets and heavy reliance on bank loans, which are often limited in volume and duration, as major structural issues. The strategy also recommends strengthening innovation hubs and integrating them into value chains to better attract private investment. However, it does not place significant emphasis on completing the EU's Capital Markets Union (CMU), a key demand from Oelrich. 'This may sound ambitious, but it's absolutely doable. Interestingly, everyone I talk to recognises the need: So why aren't we acting on it?' Oelrich asked. He also suggested that part of Europe's pension and life insurance capital could be redirected toward venture investment if appropriate political frameworks were put in place. 'Inventions can find a market here as it's not only about a lack of capital in Europe: It's about how we allocate it. We need to do a better job,' he concluded. The broader context The EU's Capital Markets Union remains incomplete, with progress hindered by regulatory divergence, inconsistent enforcement, and political resistance to deeper integration. While the CMU does not directly aim to create new stock exchanges, it does support efforts to expand access to capital, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This improved access could encourage the development of specialised or regional exchanges, though the broader goal remains integration rather than fragmentation. Currently, Europe lacks sector-specific stock exchanges. Major platforms like Euronext, the London Stock Exchange, Deutsche Börse, Nasdaq Nordic, and SIX Swiss Exchange list companies across a wide range of industries. Instead of dedicated exchanges, sector-focused investment is facilitated through indices such as the STOXX Europe 600 family, which tracks sectors like banking, automotive, and leisure. Still, for many in the biotech sector, the absence of a specialised capital-raising platform remains a barrier. Whether the EU will — and can — move to address this remains to be seen.
