Regulation of emissions of pollutants such as sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides is a devolved matter and the information provided relates to England only.

A regulatory framework, the Environmental Permitting Regulations (England and Wales) 2016, controls pollution from industry, including power generation. Sites are required to obtain environmental permits and meet limits on emissions of air pollutants, including sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, as set out in the Regulations. All large industrial facilities, including Large Combustion Plant, are regulated by the Environment Agency (EA) and must use best available techniques (BAT) to reduce emissions and report their emissions. The BAT approach ensures standards are enhanced over time by defining the available techniques which are the best for preventing or minimising emissions and impacts on the environment.

As set out in the Clean Maritime Plan published in 2019, we have committed to consulting on options for extending the North Sea Emissions Control Area.

Defra’s national Automatic Urban and Rural Monitoring Network (AURN) currently has 28 sites monitoring sulphur dioxide every 15 minutes in the UK. Over the last 10 years (2008 – 2018) concentrations of sulphur dioxide monitored have remained consistently low. The UK has been compliant with legally binding limit values for sulphur dioxide for the entire period.

The low concentration levels are in part linked to large reductions in UK sulphur dioxide emissions (a 67% reduction between 2008 and 2017).

The Government has not seen any evidence that the use of scrubbing technology would have any significant effect on marine environment.

All scrubbers must comply with mandatory Guidelines, which were developed by the International Maritime Organization, before they are allowed to become operational. The potential effects of the use of scrubber technologies on the marine environment was taken into consideration when developing the Guidelines. To be compliant, 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.

Some scrubbers discharge treated wash water back into the sea – which is also controlled under the IMO Guidelines. There are ongoing studies which are looking at the impact of wash water discharges within European waters, which we are monitoring. At this stage, we are not aware of any significant issues which have been found. However, we will respond appropriately at international level, if these or any other studies, conclude that further controls are needed.

The Government has not seen any evidence that the use of scrubbing technology would have any significant effect on marine environment.

All scrubbers must comply with mandatory Guidelines, which were developed by the International Maritime Organization, before they are allowed to become operational. The potential effects of the use of scrubber technologies on the marine environment was taken into consideration when developing the Guidelines. To be compliant, 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.

Some scrubbers discharge treated wash water back into the sea – which is also controlled under the IMO Guidelines. There are ongoing studies which are looking at the impact of wash water discharges within European waters, which we are monitoring. At this stage, we are not aware of any significant issues which have been found. However, we will respond appropriately at international level, if these or any other studies, conclude that further controls are needed.

The Government has not seen any evidence that the use of scrubbing technology would have any significant effect on marine environment.

All scrubbers must comply with mandatory Guidelines, which were developed by the International Maritime Organization, before they are allowed to become operational. The potential effects of the use of scrubber technologies on the marine environment was taken into consideration when developing the Guidelines. To be compliant, 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.

Some scrubbers discharge treated wash water back into the sea – which is also controlled under the IMO Guidelines. There are ongoing studies which are looking at the impact of wash water discharges within European waters, which we are monitoring. At this stage, we are not aware of any significant issues which have been found. However, we will respond appropriately at international level, if these or any other studies, conclude that further controls are needed.

Further to my answer of 29 January, the data provided refers to the specific fuel sampling and testing regime put into place by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) in order to support compliance activity relating to the use of low sulphur fuel by ships. This sampling activity started on 1 January 2016 in line with a Europe-wide decision.

This sampling is supplementary to the normal Port State Control activity that is performed by MCA Marine Surveyors, the scope of which includes consideration of compliance with air pollution requirements.

In 2015 the MCA carried out 1068 inspections under Port State Control which includes the examination of documentation related to compliance with the North Sea sulphur emissions control area.

Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) Marine Surveyors carry out a full range of Port State Control (PSC) and inspection tasks including assessment of compliance with environmental requirements such as the use of low sulphur fuel forming part of their normal duties.

Surveyor resources are not dedicated to specific tasks and inspections will consider a range of safety and environmental issues so it is not possible to disaggregate staff numbers on this specific issue.

In 2015, there were 74 qualified and accredited MCA Marine Surveyors carrying out PSC inspection activity, including that related to sulphur compliance across the UK.

In 2016, there are 64 qualified and accredited MCA Marine Surveyors who have been supplemented by a further 30 trained sulphur inspectors.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

In July 2014, the Government’s support for shipowners and ports was successful in securing €29.5m of EU assistance under the TEN-T programme. All the projects received the full amount that they bid for. They are:

· €10m - Pilot project to deploy hybrid scrubber technology. (P&O with ports of Dover / Calais / Hull / Rotterdam)

· €2.5m – Deployment of hybrid scrubbers. (DFDS with ports of Immingham / Gothenburg)

· €4.3m – Trial of Liquefied Natural Gas bunkering in Teesport. (Teesport and consortium)

· €12.7m – Retrofitting a ship with LNG engines and developing port infrastructure. (Portsmouth with Brittany Ferries, port of Caen and Zeebrugge).

Ultimately, operators will make commercial decisions. The Government is aware that there are ferry routes which industry considers are vulnerable, but this information is commercially sensitive. We are exploring with the European Commission whether a ferry route which is deemed to be vulnerable as a result of the new sulphur requirements could receive State Aid – and, if so, the parameters on which it could do so. Those discussions are ongoing.

I have had two exchanges of letters with Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans, concerning the future of the Rosyth – Zeebrugge freight service and the options that were being considered. We both recognised that issues around State Aid would significantly restrict domestic support and I confirmed that we had written to the Commission about the provision of State Aid. I assured Mr Brown that the UK would continue to support applications for EU funding to assist eligible projects that helped mitigate the impact of the Directive.

The aim of providing assistance would be to help secure existing routes, which in turn, should help to secure employment. Any domestic funds that we provide to industry will need to provide value for money to the taxpayer and avoid distortions in a competitive market. However, there would be no direct link between these funds and the provision of employment and training for UK seafarers. This is already provided for separately, through the training requirements of the tonnage tax regime and through our Support for Maritime Training (SMarT) funding which we increased by 25% last year to £15m.

Pollutant emissions from ships are regulated by an international treaty in Annex VI to the MARPOL Convention. The sulphur provisions in MARPOL, which were adopted in 2008, are substantially mirrored in the EU Directive 2012/33/EU.

This year, the Government was successful in supporting shipowners and ports who apply for EU assistance under the TEN-T programme to help purchase innovative technologies – including infrastructure for liquefied natural gas (LNG) bunkering. We are now considering other potential measures for providing EU and domestic financial support for industry.

Moreover, we have secured a commitment to enable shipowners to discuss their plans for compliance with the European Commission, in confidence, to help resolve any outstanding difficulties. We are promoting the importance of a targeted, consistent and proportionate enforcement regime for marine sulphur across the EU. We have been instrumental in bringing forward the date for IMO’s fuel availability review, which should provide industry more time to prepare for the 0.5% global sulphur limit, which will apply outside European waters in 2020 or 2025.