Lloyd’s Register – Written evidence (ARC0048) 1. Summary The objectives of this submission of evidence to the Select Committee on the Arctic are: To offer supporting data and insights on transit and destination shipping in the Arctic and, in addition, the characteristics of the UK registered Arctic shipping fleet. To contribute evidence on the technological challenges for future Arctic shipping activities To contribute evidence on the regulatory framework that will govern Arctic shipping To contribute advice, and views, on Arctic shipping to support consideration of the “UK dimension” by the Select Committee Considering each objective in turn: Key points on supporting data and insights on transit and destination shipping in the Arctic: 1. Very small numbers of ships use Arctic transits for voyages between ocean basins (i.e. Pacific and Atlantic basins) as an alternative shipping route to transits through the Panama or Suez canal 2. Shipping in the Russian Arctic is likely to increase, but will be mainly export shipping for dedicated natural resources projects. Transit of commercial ships through the Russian Arctic is likely to occur during the summer season only 3. The UK registered ice-classed fleet is small, with 119 ice classed ships, and just 8 ships potentially suitable for transiting the Russian Northern Sea Route independently in an average summer season Figure 1.1 % of Ice Classed UK Fleet Figure 1.2 Ice Classes assigned to UK flagged ships 1 Key points on the technological challenges for future Arctic shipping activities: 1. Technological challenges remain for efficient Arctic shipping with a significant build and operating cost premium associated with current generation of Arctic capable ships 2. A combination of uncertainty of ice loads, and the development of much larger Arctic ship designs than hitherto, may lead to Arctic ships that are uneconomic in operation with reduced cargo carrying capacity and excessive hull structural steel-weights 3. Dedicated, or specialised, ships designed for year round ice-going navigation, even those enhanced only for seasonal navigation in light ice conditions, are uncompetitive in build and operation costs when compared with open water shipping Key points on the regulatory framework that will govern Arctic shipping: 1. Canada and the Russian Federation have requirements that regulate Arctic shipping including seasonal limitations on ship operations in Arctic sea areas under their jurisdiction, primarily based on the ice strengthening standard (ice class) assigned to the ship. 2. International Maritime Organisation (IMO) finalised mandatory standards (“Polar Code”) for Polar Shipping in 2014. The entry into force date will be 1st January 2017. The Polar Code is intended to supplement SOLAS1 and MARPOL2, and covers additional aspects of ship design and construction for international ships operating in the Polar Regions. 3. The Polar Code will require limitations to be recorded on the Polar Ship Certificate i.e. ice conditions and temperature limits of ship operations. Key points on Arctic shipping to support consideration of the “UK dimension”: 1. There may be direct economic and/or employment benefits to the UK from: a. An increase in Passenger Cruise Voyages in the Arctic b. Imports to the UK of natural resources from the Arctic 2. UK Arctic shipping experience and knowledge will be difficult to sustain if current low volumes of Arctic shipping prevail in future. A similar situation does, however, prevail for most other countries interested in the development of Arctic shipping. 3. Any initiative, as part of a “UK dimension” of Arctic shipping, may need to consider co- operation with other countries with interests in development of Arctic. 1 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 as modified by the 1988 SOLAS Protocol 2 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973/1978 2 2. Contents 1. Summary 2. Contents 3. Introduction 3.1 Objective 3.2 About Lloyd's Register 3.3 Lloyd's Register’s involvement with Arctic shipping 4. Arctic shipping 4.1 Arctic sea ice and “choke points”: transit shipping obstacles 4.2 Arctic shipping demands 4.3 Arctic shipping statistics 4.4 World and UK fleet statistics 5. Arctic Technology 5.1 Technological advancements to support expanded shipping activities 5.2 Technological challenges for future Arctic shipping activities 6. Arctic shipping regulations 6.1 Current international regulations 6.2 Polar Code 7. Arctic Shipping developments and the UK 7.1 Passenger Cruise Voyages 7.2 Export of Natural Resources 7.3 Summary of expected impact development of Arctic Shipping on UK interests 8. Concluding Remarks 9. References Appendix A: Lloyd's Register’s involvement with Arctic shipping Appendix B: Supporting Information – Arctic shipping statistics Appendix C: Supporting Information – Arctic technology Appendix D: Ice Class descriptions Appendix E: Arctic oil, gas and mineral major projects 3 3. Introduction 3.1 Objective The objectives of this submission of evidence are: To offer supporting data and insights on transit and destination shipping in the Arctic and, in addition, the characteristics of the UK registered Arctic shipping fleet To contribute evidence on the technological challenges for future Arctic shipping activities To contribute evidence on the regulatory framework that will govern Arctic shipping To contribute advice, and views, on Arctic shipping to support consideration of the “UK dimension” by the Select Committee 3.2 About Lloyd's Register Lloyd’s Register is a provider of marine classification services, helping ensure that internationally recognised safety and environmental standards are maintained at every stage of a ship's life. 3.3 Lloyd's Register’s involvement with Arctic Shipping Lloyd's Register publishes and maintains rules for design, construction and survey of ships, including specific rules for ships operating in ice (ice class ships) and ships intended to operate as icebreakers. Accumulated practical experience with ships designed, constructed and operated for ice navigation forms the basis of our commentary and evidence to The Select Committee on the Arctic. Further detail about Lloyd's Register’s involvement in Arctic Shipping is included in Appendix A. 4. Arctic Shipping 4.1 Arctic sea ice and “choke” points: transit shipping obstacles This section presents evidence of the environmental considerations (notably ice cover) relevant to Arctic shipping opportunities Recent measurements of the extent of Arctic sea ice, particularly the minimum extent in the summer have been used to suggest that the Arctic may soon become a viable transit route between the Atlantic and Pacific basins, and an alternative to the Panama and Suez canals. Figure 4.1 shows a plot of historical averages, including recent years, of the Arctic sea ice extent. The following points are highlighted: 2012 is the lowest ice extent on record, however 2014 data is closer to the 2000’s average Increase in variability of ice extent year-on-year The variability year-on-year is more significant in the summer time, in the winter there is less variability There is still significant ice coverage during the winter season Data on sea-ice extent is based on satellite observations that begin in 1979 4 Figure 4.1 Arctic Sea ice extents – historical averages and recent measurements3 With respect to the impact of the changing sea ice on shipping, the following observations are offered: The trend of less extent of ice in the summertime would suggest that the summer season is increasing for transit of open water ships (i.e. ships not specially designed to operate in ice). In 2013 the ice free season was approximately 40 days4 along the Russia Arctic transit routes The variability of the summer season will continue to making long-term planning difficult for transits using the Arctic as a commercial shipping route The consistent cover of ice in the winter will remain a hazard and block all but high specification (high ice class) ships transiting outside of the summer season Figure 4.2 shows three plots of sea ice extent for the 2014 season. The figure is intended to highlight the significant presence of ice during the mid-winter period. The middle plot in Figure 4.2 indicates the start of the “formal” summer shipping season on the Northern Sea Route. However significant ice remains on the route, effectively blocking entry and exit to the route for all but specialist ice class shipping. The right hand plot in Figure 4.2 shows the lowest ice extent for 2014 and shows open water for the Northern Sea Route, but with ice still keeping all but the shallow southern North West Passage route closed. Figure 4.2: Left hand plot: Mid-Winter (30 January) Middle plot: Start of Shipping Season (1 July) 3 http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm 4 Based on an analysis of Arctic Sea-Ice Monitor satellite image data 5 Right hand plot: Lowest ice extent for 2014 (26 September) Figure 4.2 illustrates that the ice extent does not retreat uniformly from the shoreline of both the Northern Sea Route and North West Passage. In both sea areas there are also a number of shallow or constrained shipping channels that form “choke points” where, depending on the year, ice may remain longer than usual and prevent a passage. A number of the more prominent “choke points” where ice may seasonally prevent a passage from opening are indicated in Figure 4.3: The eastern end of the Northern Sea route is bounded by Novaya Zemlya, effectively providing two entrances, to the South through the Kara Gate or north of the island. Depending on ice conditions in the Kara Sea either one of these routes may be blocked, thus limiting transit of large vessels. Towards the Western end of the Northern Sea route the New Siberian Islands present a limited draft passage South (through the Sannikov Strait) or North of the Islands, where the draft is deeper.