Cruise giants sail into a SULPHUROUS storm

In an echo of ‘Dieselgate’, billions of pounds are being poured into fitting ships with controversial ‘scrubbers’. They cut air pollution – but critics say they just poison the sea

SHIPPING firms are preparing to invest billions of pounds into controversial machines that critics say will pump our oceans with polluted water.

US investment bank Goldman Sachs estimates that up to 5,000 vessels will be fitted with so-called scrubbers in the coming years, at a cost of up to $10 million (£7.6 million) per ship.

Scrubbers stop sulphur emissions from being pumped into the air through exhaust pipes – but the vast majority of the devices then divert the waste into the sea.

Opponents say this can be hugely damaging to sea life, with studies showing that scrubbing technology can lead to water acidification, threaten marine ecosystems and harm coral, algae and shellfish.

It is the latest threat to the world’s oceans after plastic pollution triggered growing awareness about the effects of commercial waste.

Goldman Sachs, known as the ‘Vampire Squid’ for its grip on the banking market, has identified them as a way for multinationals to save money on fuel.

This is because scrubbers allow shipping firms to get round strict regulations that from 2020 will restrict the use of cheaper, ‘dirty’ fuels. Companies including Carnival, the FTSE 100-listed owner of P&O and Princess Cruises, have already started installing the technology on their vessels ahead of t he crackdown.

One shipping industry boss last night compared the use of scrubbers with the Volkswagen ‘Dieselgate’ scandal, where t h e Ger man c a rmaker was found to have misled regulators and customers by hiding nitrogen oxide emissions during vehicle tests.

He also suggested firms using scrubbing t echnology – which has been banned in some countries, including Belgium – are cynically putting profits before the environment.

Patrick Rodgers, the boss of Euronav, a large tanker company that is refusing to install scrubbers on its ships, said: ‘I think when the public wakes up to the industrialisation of pollution from the atmosphere to the ocean, the industry will face as big a backlash as VW did during its emissions scandal. Scrubber users have been seduced by the prospect of making super profits from being able to use what they think will be cheaper, dirty fuel.’

He added: ‘Using scrubbers faces a simple test: could you justify to your family that you’re meeting pollution regulations by pumping sulphuric acid and other equally nasty by-products into the oceans?

‘I don’t see how it makes sense to solve one pollution problem by creating another.’ New Internat i onal Maritime Organization ( IMO) regulations, which come into force in 2020, will prohibit ships from using fuel that is made up of more than 0.5 per cent s u l p h u r, down f rom 3. 5 per cent currently. Fuel with such low sulphur levels is up to 50 per cent more expensive, experts say.

However, there is a loophole in the rules. Ships will be allowed to keep using cheaper, grubbier fuels which contain more t han 0.5 per cent of t he chemical if they have scrubbers fitted.

In a report seen by The Mail on Sunday, Goldman Sachs estimates that the cost of installing a scrubber is between $5 million ( £ 3 . 8 mi l l i o n ) and $ 10 million (£ 7.6 million). It was reported in May that the US bank is offering to help companies finance the installation, but Goldman now denies this claim.

Malcolm Latarche, a maritime expert at ShipInsight, calculates that, at those prices, firms which install scrubbers will make their money back within a year. Ned Molloy, an independent oil analyst, said: ‘The attitude in the industry is that this is allowed by the rules, and it’s a more profitable route, so why not?’

But he added that there is a danger t hat regulations could be changed to outlaw scrubbers in the future.

The chairs of two influential UK parliamentary committees have questioned Ministers on the environmental impact of scrubbers.

Conservative MP Neil Parish, head of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, has challenged both Environment Secretary Michael Gove and Transport Secretary Chris Grayling on the technology.

Dr Sarah Wollaston, the Tory MP for Totnes, who chairs the Health and Social Care Committee, has questioned the impact it could have on British seas.

Nusrat Ghani, a Minister in the Department for Transport, said: ‘ The Government has not seen any evidence t hat t he use of scrubbing technology would have any significant effect on marine environment.’

Ghani added that the systems ‘collect and store any sulphur residue and solid particulate matter on board the vessel, to be deposited at a port waste reception facility’. However, this claim is challenged by parts of the industry. Euronav estimates that 95 per cent of scrub- bers that have been fitted to ships so far are ‘open loop’, meaning that they discharge waste water constantly rather than at port waste stations.

A study by German environment agency UBA on scrubbers in 2015 found: ‘ The discharge of wash water [ t hrough a n o pen loop system] to the sea contributes to acidification of seawater, since the air pollutants are converted i nto t he st rong sulphuric and nitric acids.’

It also pointed to a separate study, which found that ‘increased acidity poses a threat to marine ecosystems, harming species such as coral and algae, as well as commercial aquaculture species, such as shellfish’.

Carnival, which has installed open loop scrubbers on to 70 of its ships at a cost of $ 500 million, denied the machines are damaging to the environment.

Mike Kaczmarek, vice president of marine technology at Carnival, t old The Mail on Sunday t hat scrubbers have a ‘negligible environmental impact’, adding: ‘It’s not a bad thing. The oceans are actually a natural reservoir for the earth’s sulphur.’

He accused shipping rivals who have not invested in scrubbers of spreading ‘disinformation’ about their harm to the environment, and claimed that lower sulphur fuel – as well as being more expensive – consumes more energy to make.