Podcasts about International Maritime Organization

Cargo ships are significant sources of global air pollution because of their fuel oil.  Most ships burn heavy fuel oil that is loaded with sulfur, so when it is burned it produces noxious gases and fine particles that can harm human health and the environment.  The International Maritime Organization enacted a mandatory cap of 0.5% […]

Earlier this month, the International Maritime Organization agreed its net zero framework at the 83rd meeting of its Marine Environment Protection Committee. If you're not sure what was agreed or the impact it will have on shipping, make sure you listen to our MEPC post-mortem episode of the podcast, which is available here. A lot of shipping's decarbonisation chips have been placed on e-fuels. This is where an electrolyser is used to split hydrogen from water and combine that so-called green hydrogen with nitrogen to make ammonia, or CO2 to make synthetic methane or methanol. E-fuels are by far the most expensive option, but they're also seen as the best way to decarbonise the industry in the long term, but not by everyone. So are we placing far too much stock in e-fuels? Or can they live up to their salvatory status and deliver shipping to net zero in time? Joining Declan on the podcast this week are: Michael Liebreich, Bloomber New Energy Finance founder Dr Tristan Smith, University College London associate professor in energy and transport

The United Nations plot to impose global taxes on international shipping was approved at a meeting of the International Maritime Organization this month, setting the stage for the first-ever global tax to fuel global government, warns The New American magazine’s Alex Newman in this episode of Behind The Deep State. The Deep State has been ... The post UN Global Tax Advances to Fuel Global Tyranny appeared first on The New American.

The International Maritime Organization recently agreed to a global deal to tackle shipping emissions after over a year of tense and fraught talks, with the US dramatically exiting discussions. The agreement includes mandatory marine fuel standards and a carbon trading mechanism. It will need to be adopted in October, but some countries still vocally oppose the measures. In this episode of Energy Evolution, host Eklavya Gupte speaks with Commodity Insights journalist Max Lin, Edmund Hughes from the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA), and Georgios Kasimatis from DNV Maritime to gain insight into the complexities of these regulations and their implications for the decarbonization of the maritime sector. Energy Evolution has merged with Platts Future Energy, and episodes are now regularly published on Tuesdays. 

The International Maritime Organization recently agreed to a global deal to tackle shipping emissions after over a year of tense and fraught talks, with the US dramatically exiting discussions. The agreement includes mandatory marine fuel standards and a carbon trading mechanism. It will need to be adopted in October, but some countries still vocally oppose the measures. In this episode of Energy Evolution, host Eklavya Gupte speaks with Commodity Insights journalist Max Lin, Edmund Hughes from the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA), and Georgios Kasimatis from DNV Maritime to gain insight into the complexities of these regulations and their implications for the decarbonization of the maritime sector. Energy Evolution has merged with Platts Future Energy, and episodes are now regularly published on Tuesdays. 

Alex Newman is an award-winning international freelance journalist, author, researcher, educator and consultant. He is senior editor for The New American. In addition, he's co-author of Crimes of the Educators, author of Deep State: The Invisible Government Behind the Scenes and author of, Indoctrinating Our Children to Death. He is also founder and CEO of Liberty Sentinel and a national syndicator of radio and TV programs including Behind the Deep State which airs on WVCY television and vcy.tv.From the World Health Organization, to USAID, to the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, it's no secret that President Trump has been pulling funding away from globalist organizations. This means they desperately want access to your money. In order to do that, there's a powerful, yet little known agency called the International Maritime Organization that is in the process of imposing the first global tax on humanity. With this tax they will have direct access to independent funding. This is basically a global shipping fuel tax supposedly designed to thwart carbon emissions and climate change. Keep in mind, if they can tax world shipping, there's nothing that can stop them from moving on to tax agriculture, air travel, energy production, civilian transportation and other things. With that income they can then fund armies, police, social engineering programs, propaganda campaigns and much more.

Alex Newman is an award-winning international freelance journalist, author, researcher, educator and consultant. He is senior editor for The New American. In addition, he's co-author of Crimes of the Educators, author of Deep State: The Invisible Government Behind the Scenes and author of, Indoctrinating Our Children to Death. He is also founder and CEO of Liberty Sentinel and a national syndicator of radio and TV programs including Behind the Deep State which airs on WVCY television and vcy.tv.From the World Health Organization, to USAID, to the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, it's no secret that President Trump has been pulling funding away from globalist organizations. This means they desperately want access to your money. In order to do that, there's a powerful, yet little known agency called the International Maritime Organization that is in the process of imposing the first global tax on humanity. With this tax they will have direct access to independent funding. This is basically a global shipping fuel tax supposedly designed to thwart carbon emissions and climate change. Keep in mind, if they can tax world shipping, there's nothing that can stop them from moving on to tax agriculture, air travel, energy production, civilian transportation and other things. With that income they can then fund armies, police, social engineering programs, propaganda campaigns and much more.

On Friday, some 20 years of decarbonisation work at the International Maritime Organization culminated in a historic agreement, with countries voting 63-16 in favour of an emissions fuel standard with a built-in carbon price. If it Is formally adopted in October, this will be the first binding global carbon price on any industry; a genuinely momentous achievement that will change the future of shipping. What they've come up with is highly complex and is going to take the industry a while to fully digest. But fear not, we have three brave experts willing to help make sense of it and tell us, hopefully, what comes next. Marie Fricaudet is a senior research fellow at the UCL Energy Institute Aoife O'Leary is a lawyer, economist, and the chief executive of Opportunity Green And Rico Luman, a senior sector economist at ING Bank

As the UN's shipping body, the International Maritime Organization, meets to decide on a pivotal levy that will tax ships for using polluting fuels, host Graihagh Jackson and BBC Climate Reporter Esme Stallard discuss whether this will be enough to cut the industry's significant carbon emissions. From the Port of Rotterdam, we find out how the industry is already trying to reduce its carbon footprint. And are alternative shipping fuels really as green as it's claimed. We dive into the issue, along with more of April's climate news. The BBC's Climate Editor Justin Rowlatt speaks to one of COP30's top officials, a new study on carbon-gobbling forests in China and the latest on India's heatwave. Presenters: Graihagh Jackson and Esme Stallard Producer: Beth Timmins Editor: Sophie Eastaugh Sound mixing: Tom Brignell Production Coordinator: Brenda Brown

The global methanol market is seeing emerging demand for low-carbon transportation fuels, with particular focus on marine fuels, driven by a need to decarbonize global shipping without disrupting supply chains. While conventional methanol has a history of being used as a transportation fuel, there are many new technologies designed to produce methanol with lower carbon intensity than conventional, oil-based marine fuels. However, cost of production and supply availability remain barriers to adoption. Global research lead for methanol and derivatives Olivier Maronneaud and chemicals price reporter Andre Mikhail discuss methanol's potential as a low-carbon fuel, the current production landscape, and the need for effective regulation to bridge the cost gap between sustainable fuels and fossil. Links:International Methanol Producers and Consumers Association conference International Maritime Organization 83rd meeting eMethanol FOB Rotterdam $/mt FRGMD00 Marine Fuel 0.5% FOB Spore Cargo $/mt AMFSA00

Even before Donald Trump pronounced the end of gloablisation, the shipping industry was effectively operating in a self-induced state of paralysis. Uncertainty over a looming trade war, the regulatory cost of carbon and just how long the global current disruption can hide a fundamentally unbalanced shipping market had led executives across the industry to conclude that doing nothing for the moment is likely to be the safest bet they could make. That pause is now a hard stop. What occurred last week was not just the US starting a global trade war, or sparking a rout in stock markets. It was the world's hyper power firmly turning its back on the globalisation process it had championed, and from which it handsomely profited in recent decades. What is president Trump going to do next? What can Europe realistically do in response? Are we going to have peace in the Middle East and is the Red Sea opening anytime soon? Does Russia somehow come in from the cold? It's not just clarity from the International Maritime Organization shipowners are searching for now… Joining Richard on the podcast this week are: Chris Wiernicki, chief executive of American Bureau of Shipping Knut Orbeck Nielsen, chief executive of DNV Maritime Eman Abdalla, global operations director at Cargill Ocean Transportation Nick Brown, chief executive, Lloyd's Register Adam Kent, managing director at Maritime Strategies International

The exhaust produced by ocean-going ships can contribute to our warming climate. Most ships burn fossil fuels, so they spew out atmosphere-warming compounds. But some of their contribution to global warming may be a result of lower emissions—not of carbon, but of sulfur.One of the compounds produced by burning fossil fuels is sulfur dioxide. Sunlight can cause it to interact with other compounds. That can yield droplets of acid rain, plus tiny grains of sulfur. Water can condense around those grains, forming clouds. The sulfur can stay in the air for days, so it can contribute to clouds for a long time.The sulfur-based clouds are bright, so they reflect a lot of sunlight into space. That helps keep down the surface temperature.In 2020, the International Maritime Organization passed some new regulations. It required shipping to cut sulfur emissions by 80 percent—reducing acid rain and cutting air pollution around ports.A recent study looked at the possible impact that's had on global warming. Researchers analyzed more than a million satellite images of ocean clouds. They compared those to maps of global temperature increases. And they used computer models to study what it all means.The work found a big drop in ship-created clouds. And the drop correlated with areas of greater warming. The researchers concluded that the loss of clouds could have added about a tenth of a degree Fahrenheit to global temperatures—and could add more in the years ahead.

MONDAY February 17 kicks off the first of a crucial series of climate talks at the International Maritime Organization. There are just two intersessional working group meetings, and one Marine Environment Protection Committee left to approve regulations to bring shipping to net zero by or around 2050. Hundreds of negotiators will be working day and night to agree on some combination of a carbon price tool and a greenhouse gas fuel standard. The rules have to close the price gap between fossil and green fuels, kickstart investment in renewable supply chains, and also help poorer countries and low-lying islands cope with the costs of climate change. This has been talked about this for many years now, but 2025 is different. The IMO's 2023 GHG Strategy requires it to approve its mid-term measures in April and adopt them in October, to then come into force by 2027. So, what can we expect? ISW-GHG is not open to the press, but it's where much of the real political horse-trading takes place. The IMO's 176 member states are split roughly between those in favour of a carbon levy per tonne of CO2 equivalent, combined with a green fuel standard, and those who only want a fuel standard alone. Declan Bush takes you behind the doors of the IMO ahead of an important week for the shipping industry. Joining Declan on this week's episode are: Guy Platten, secretary general, International Chamber of Shipping Jesse Fahnestock, decarbonisation director, Global Maritime Forum

Decarbonisation is one of the most written-about topics in Lloyd's List. Read our daily briefing on any given day and it will more than likely contain at least one story dedicated to the industry's journey towards net zero. And there's good reason for that too. It dominates shipping headlines and touches every corner of our industry and 2025 could be a pivotal year in shipping's long history. Not only are there major changes to the European Union's FuelEU and Emissions Trading System about to come into force, but many believe the world's first international carbon levy could be agreed at the International Maritime Organization during meetings of its Marine Environment Protection Committee later this year. So, how likely is it that shipping gets a firm agreement from the IMO that carries some weight? And, if nothing is agreed, then what does the future of the regulator look like? To talk you through what could be a momentous year in securing shipping's future, here's multimedia editor and former sustainability editor Declan Bush, and Lloyd's List editor-in-chief, Richard Meade.

After enduring social unrest, geopolitical tensions and the Covid-19 pandemic, this Asian financial and shipping hub — long seen by many as in decline — has finally found an opportunity to stage a comeback. The Action Plan on Green Maritime Fuel Bunkering and accompanying incentive scheme unveiled a few weeks ago is seen by the local shipping community as a step by the Hong Kong government in the right direction — but only a step. The ambition is big, because behind it is not just a Hong Kong story, but a China story. Here, promoting renewables and ensuring energy security are closely intertwined, and its massive scale and cost advantage in this sector has led people to believe that the country will become the world's largest supplier of low-emission fuels, such as green methanol and ammonia. Hong Kong, a former British colony and the most outward-looking and free trading part of Chinese territory, despite Beijing's tightening grip over the past decade, should become one of the most important exporters, or a trading hub for these fuels to reach the world, some argue. In the words of Hong Kong Chamber of Shipping chairman Hing Chao, the vision is to “provide a Chinese solution to global maritime decarbonisation¨ through Hong Kong. Can this vision succeed? What more does Hong Kong need to do? For example, does it need to implement its own carbon pricing mechanism with neighbouring Chinese ports, say those in the Hong Kong-Macao-Guangdong Greater Bay Area, or GBA, before the International Maritime Organization's mid-term measures roll out? More importantly, can China fulfil its ambition to become the “world's factory” for green fuels? What challenges need to be overcome? Also, will geopolitics, which is accelerating the reconfiguration of global trade and supply chains, and arguably also affecting the pace of global decarbonisation, hinder the realisation of this ambition? Joining Cichen on this week's episode are: Hing Chao, chairman of the Hong Kong Chamber of Shipping and Wah Kwong Maritime Transport Roberto Giannetta, chairman of the Hong Kong Liner Shipping Association Sanjay Kuttan, chief strategy officer of the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation

This episode of the Lloyd's List Podcast was brought to you by Veson. Visit veson.com/decision-advantage for more information. Ten years or so ago, when the University of Plymouth ran their first cybersecurity symposium, the number attendees barely made double figures. This week, held in the main hall of the International Maritime Organization on London's Albert Embankment, the same event attracted more than 300, from shipping companies in almost every sector. Clearly, the topic has gained attention and traction, partly down to the repeated warnings of horror stories the industry continues to receive, right the way up to hackers being able to remotely control very large crude carriers. There have been several high-profile cyber incidents in shipping since the devastating NotPetya attack which cost Maersk more than $250m in 2017. The Port of Seattle, the Port of Lisbon and class society DNV can all count themselves of cyber attacks in the last two years. But the apocalyptic vision that has been painted for the industry time and time again hasn't materialised yet. So, how worried should we really be about cybersecurity in shipping? Joining Joshua on the podcast this week are: Kevin Jones, professor of computer science and director of the Maritime Cyber Threats Research Group, University of Plymouth Daniel Ng, chief executive of Cyberowl Svante Einarsson, head of cybersecurity maritime for EMEA and APAC, DNV Knut Ørbeck-Nilssen, maritime chief executive, DNV

Ron Baiman discusses his expansive paper summarising all known SRM and other direct climate cooling techniques https://academic.oup.com/oocc/article/4/1/kgae014/7731760 Plus his letter to the International Maritime Organization https://academic.oup.com/oocc/article/4/1/kgae008/7706251

The global climate circus heads to Baku, Azerbaijan this weekend for the start of the annual COP confab. That's the Conference of the Parties, meaning signatories to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change — or COP 29. Shipping will be there, but don't expect much in the way of headline conclusions this year. If there is going to be any progress from this meeting, it's going to focus on the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance. So why are we talking about COP this week? The reality is that COPs have never really been about shipping, but what happens inside COP has a direct bearing on what happens next in terms of shipping's long term regulatory future. This year specifically COP is taking place just six months before the International Maritime Organization sits down agree the economic and technical measures to hit the industry's 2050 net zero targets. What happens in COP has at least some bearing on what happens in the IMO and perhaps more importantly, shipping's ability to make connections across the energy departments out in Azerbaijan over the next two weeks are going to be crucial to the process that follows whatever comes out of the IMO. Shipping may not be a huge part of COP, but COP matters hugely to shipping. Joining Richard on the podcast this week are: Dr Tristan Smith, University College London Katharine Palmer, Shipping Lead, UNFCC Climate Champions

Once a year, an industry alliance of first-movers and green investors gather in a room for shipping's answer to Davos, the annual Global Maritime Forum. And it's always an interesting conversation. These are shipping's optimists. The progressive cohort of industry leaders who have collectively invested billions of dollars in decarbonisation projects and spawned voluntary projects advancing everything from transparent green finance and insurance to diversity programmes and climate-aligned chartering. But it's not easy being an optimist in shipping right now. There are the obvious geopolitical headwinds blowing in of course, but there is also a growing sense that the industry in wait and see mode. Shipping's green first-movers are increasingly unlikely to move further without a sufficiently robust regulatory framework from the International Maritime Organization next year. Scratch below the surface of the conversations about progress and innovation, and it's apparent that we're not yet at a stage where, even without the regulation, the industry is yet aligned on who ends up footing the bill for what is going to be a very expensive transition to green fuels and even basic efficiency investments. And yet, despite all that, when the GMF gathered in Tokyo earlier this month there was a palpable sense of optimism in the room and genuine evidence that progress is not just possible, it is now inevitable. So, has the shipping industry really moved from laggard to leader in the race to decarbonise? Joining Richard on this week's episode are: Eman Abdalla, global operations director ocean transportation division, Cargill Laure Baratgin, head of commercial operations, Rio Tinto Matthieu de Tugny, head of marine and offshore, Bureau Veritas Nick Brown, chief executive, Lloyd's Register Arsenio Dominguez, secretary-general, IMO Johanna Christensen, chief executive, Global Maritime Forum

Navigating the Future of Maritime Sustainability In this special episode, we are honoured to welcome Arsenio Domínguez, the Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Recorded during the 82nd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) session in London, this conversation offers a rare glimpse into the mind of a visionary leader who is spearheading global efforts to protect our oceans. Arsenio shares his thoughts on the maritime industry's critical challenges, from driving change to advancing innovative sustainability solutions.  This episode is a must-list for anyone interested in maritime policy, sustainability, and the future of ocean health. Whether you work in the maritime industry, are a policy enthusiast, or are passionate about protecting our planet, this conversation will inspire and inform you.

In questa puntata vi raccontiamo del disastro dell'Alexander Kielland, uno dei peggiori incidenti su piattaforme petrolifere della storia recente. Enti benefici che si occupano di questi temi: Assonautica https://www.assonautica.it/ International Maritime Health Association: https://www.imha.net/ International Maritime Organization: https://www.imo.org/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode of the Lloyd's List Podcast was brought to you by Veson. Visit https://veson.com/decision-advantage/ for more information. There is a very detailed series of policy discussions happening right now inside the walls of the International Maritime Organization. The question of whether the IMO can stick to its timetable and agree the basic architecture of shipping's energy transition via a fuel standard and some kind of levy is of course important. It's important in terms of demand signals to fuels producers, regulatory certainty for an industry in limbo, but it's also going to determine whether we continue to have global regulation for shipping. If what the IMO agrees is not ambitious enough, shipping still faces the likely proliferation of national and regional bloc legislations to come. But what gets agreed inside the Marine Environment Protection Committee, is not the final step of shipping's decarbonisation journey. It's not even the starter. There's a long list of practical and political factors for shipping to consider beyond an IMO discussion, and the industry needs to be preparing itself for a gruelling series of changes over several years. The bigger picture is that shipping is still not yet fully on the radar of the wider energy transition discussions like the Global African Hydrogen Summit that took place in Namibia last month. There are still a lot of dots to be joined between government, ports, fuel suppliers and shipping as one of many industries in the queue for green fuels. The industry is entering a phase that requires different approaches to its understanding of fuels supply and procurement and the coming regulation. The cliché “it's a marathon not a sprint” is overused. But shipping is facing a decarbonisation ultra-marathon, and it needs to start training now.

What is the role of LNG as a transition fuel and how does fit with the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) ambitions and regulations?Ahead of the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee Meeting (MEPC 82) on 30 Sept – 4 Oct the Seatrade Maritime Podcast caught up with Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez.Seatrade Maritime News Correspondent Nick Savvides talked to the Secretary-General about the role of LNG as a transition fuel, as well as theme of next year's World Maritime Day on 26 September 2025.The conversation covers:The role of LNG in shipping's energy transitionDecarbonisation targets and technological developmentsAddressing industry concerns and regulatory guidanceThe theme for World Maritime Day 2025Environmental impact and ocean protectionListen to the full episode now

In this episode of The Boardroom 180 Podcast, host Munir Haque invites the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Canada's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, to share insights on diplomatic relations and governance. The conversation covers the importance of anticipating global trends and how challenging it has become with the increasing pace of change and interconnectedness. They also discuss Goodale's extensive political career, spanning over four decades, and his current role in strengthening Canada-UK relations. Not only does Mr. Goodale highlight the complexities and responsibilities of diplomacy, but he also discusses his experiences as High Commissioner in London, describing the city's vibrant cultural and political landscape. He reflects on the rapid and efficient political transitions in the UK, contrasting them with those in Canada and the US, and praises the UK's ability to switch governments swiftly and without turmoil. There is professionalism in the British public service in preparing for potential leadership changes that could serve as a model for other democracies, including Canada, which is effective but moves at a slower pace during transitions.Munir and Mr. Goodale explore the role of diplomats in fostering international relationships. The significance of maintaining strong ties with the new UK government following the recent election was stressed by Mr. Goodale, along with the importance of building relationships and ensuring Canadian interests are effectively represented. The episode provides a comprehensive look at the intricacies of diplomacy, the value of strong governance, and the critical role of international relationships in shaping global affairs.About Ralph GoodaleRaised on a family farm near Wilcox, Saskatchewan, Ralph Goodale received a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Regina in 1971, and a Bachelor of Laws from the University of Saskatchewan in 1972. He has practical experience in business, agriculture, law, and broadcasting, as well as federal and provincial politics.He was first elected to the Parliament of Canada in 1974 at the age of 24, representing Assiniboia in Saskatchewan. In the 1980s, he served as leader of the provincial Liberal Party, and was elected to the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly in 1986.Mr. Goodale returned to the House of Commons in 1993 as the Member of Parliament for Wascana, and was subsequently re-elected in 1997, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2015. He served in the federal Cabinet as Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, Minister of Natural Resources, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Minister of Finance, and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.In March of 2020, Mr. Goodale became Special Advisor to the Government of Canada with respect to Iran's deadly attack against Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752 which claimed many innocent Canadian lives. In December of 2023, Mr. Goodale was named Canada's official representative to the Ismaili Imamat.  He continues in both of these roles.--Contact Munir Haque | ActionEdge Executive Development: Website: AEEDNow.comLinkedin: Action Edge Executive Development Inc.Contact Ralph Goodale: Website: International.gc.caParliament of CanadaTwitter / XPodcast Production:Recording:  PushySix StudiosProduction Assistance: Astronomic Audio--Transcript Ralph Goodale: [00:00:03] If you really want to score, skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where the puck is, because you'll always be after the fact. But you have to make those judgments about where the world is going, and making those judgments is harder now because it's all going faster and faster and faster and there are interconnecting circles and everything is more complicated.Munir Haque: [00:00:29] Hello everyone, and welcome to another episode of The Boardroom 180 Podcast. I'm your host, Munir Haque, an executive coach and senior board strategist. I have partnered with Action Edge Executive Development to lead their governance and political acumen division. In each episode, we meet with governance leaders and step into their boardrooms, where decisions shape the world around us. Munir Haque: [00:00:48] Welcome to another episode of The Boardroom 180 Podcast. Our guest today is the Honourable Mr. Ralph Goodale, High Commissioner for Canada in the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland and the Permanent Representative on the International Maritime Organization. He's been in this position since 2021, since retiring from Canadian politics. He was first elected to the Parliament of Canada in 1974 at the age of 24, representing Assiniboia and Saskatchewan. This was only two years after receiving his law degree. In the 1980s, he served as a leader of the provincial Liberal Party, and was elected to the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly in 1986. Mr. Goodale returned to the House of Commons in 1993 and was Member of Parliament for Wascana, and was subsequently reelected in 1997, 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2015. He has served many federal cabinet positions, including Minister of Agriculture and Agri foods, Minister of Natural Resources, Leader of Government in the House of Commons, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Minister of Finance and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, just to name a few. According to CBC, he is the only MP to serve under both Trudeau prime ministers. So, Mr. Goodale, I was truly honored to have you join our podcast today. Ralph is joining us from London, UK. So it's morning here in Calgary and it's late afternoon there in London? I think it's about seven or eight hour time difference. So welcome.Ralph Goodale: [00:02:23] Very nice to be on your program and very good to see you again, Munir. It's been a few years since we've had a visit. But glad to be on your podcast.Munir Haque: [00:02:32] Good. The UK is looking good on you.Ralph Goodale: [00:02:35] Well, this is a terrific assignment. One that I'm very grateful to have. London is a wonderful venue. There's art and culture and history and something fascinating or completely outrageous on virtually every street corner. The whole world passes through London as international affairs, politics, diplomacy, economic matters. This is an international intersection. We have excellent relationships with the UK government, whether it's the former conservative government or now the new labor government. The relationship between Canada and the UK is strong and deep and we work together on a whole vast variety of matters and we get a lot of things done together. And this last three years and four months that I have been in London in this role has been an incredibly busy period. When I arrived, they were grappling with Brexit and struggling to get out from under COVID, and then that evacuation from Afghanistan came along, and then there was the AUKUS situation. T...

AI-driven autonomous ships raise legal questions, and shipowners need to understand autonomous systems' limitations and potential risks. Reed Smith partners Susan Riitala and Thor Maalouf discuss new kinds of liability for owners of autonomous ships, questions that may occur during transfer of assets, and new opportunities for investors. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting edge issues on technology, data and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Susan: Welcome to Tech Law Talks and our new series on AI. Over the coming months, we'll explore the key challenges and opportunities within the rapidly evolving AI landscape. And today we will focus on AI in shipping. My name is Susan Riitala. I'm a partner in the asset finance team of the transportation group here in the London office of Reed Smith.  Thor: Hello, I'm Thor Maalouf. I'm also a partner in the transportation group at Reed Smith, focusing on disputes.  Susan: So when we think about how AI might be relevant to shipping, One immediate thing that springs to mind is the development of marine autonomous vessels. So, Thor, please can you explain to everyone exactly what autonomous vessels are?  Thor: Sure. So, according to the International Maritime Organization, the IMO, a maritime autonomous surface ship or MASS is defined as a ship which, to a varying degree, can operate independently of human interaction. Now, that can include using technology to carry out various ship-related functions like navigation, propulsion, steering, and control of machinery, which can include using AI. In terms of real-world developments, at this year's meeting of the IMO's working group on autonomous vessels, which happened last month in June, scientists from the Korean Research Institute outlined their work on the development and testing of intelligent navigation systems for autonomous vessels using AI. That system was called NEEMO. It's undergone simulated and virtual testing, as well as inland water model tests, and it's now being installed on a ship with a view to being tested at sea this summer. Participants in that conference also saw simulated demonstrations from other Korean companies like the familiar Samsung Heavy Industries and Hyundai of systems that they're trialing for autonomous ships, which include autonomous navigation systems using a combination of AI, satellite technology and cameras. And crewless coastal cargo ships are already operating in Norway, and a crewless passenger ferry is already being used in Japan. Now, fundamentally, autonomous devices learn from their surroundings, and they complete tasks without continuous human input. So, this can include simplifying automated tasks on a vessel, or a vessel that can conduct its entire voyage without any human interaction. Now, the IMO has worked on categorizing a spectrum of autonomy using different degrees and levels of automation. So the lowest level still involves some human navigation and operation, and the highest level does not. So for example, the IMO has a degree Degree 1 of autonomy, a ship with just some automated processes and decision support, where there are seafarers on board to operate and control shipboard systems and functions. But there are some operations which can be automated at times and be unsupervised. Now, as that moves up through the degrees, we get to, for example, Degree 3, where you have a remotely controlled ship without seafarers on board the ship. The ship will be controlled and operated from a remote location. All the way up to degree four, the highest level of automation, where you have a fully autonomous ship, where the operating systems of the ship are able to make their own decisions and determine their own actions without human interaction. action.  Susan: Okay, so it seems like from what you said, there are potentially a number of legal challenges that could arise from the increased use of autonomy in shipping. So for example, how might the concept of seaworthiness apply to autonomous vessels, especially ones where you have no crew on board?  Thor: Yeah, that's an interesting question. So the requirement for seaworthiness is generally met when a vessel's properly constructed, prepared, manned and equipped for the voyage that's intended. Now, in the case of autonomous vessels, they're not going to be able to. The kind of query turns to how a shipowner can actually warrant that a vessel is properly manned for the intended voyage where some systems are automated. What standard of autonomous or AI-assisted watchkeeping setup could be sufficient to qualify as having excised due diligence? A consideration is of course whether responsibility for seaworthiness could actually be shifted from the shipowner to the manufacturer of the automated functions or or the programmer of the software of the automated functions on board the vessel as you're aware the concept of seaworthiness is one of many warranties that's regularly incorporated in contracts for the use of ships and for carriage of cargo. And a ship owner can be liable for the damage that results if there's an incident before which the ship owner has failed to exercise due diligence to make the ship seaworthy. And this, in English law, is judged by the standard of what level of diligence would be reasonable for a reasonably prudent ship owner. That's true even if there has been a subsequent nautical fault on board. But how much oversight and knowledge of workings of an autonomous or AI-driven system could a prudent ship owner actually have? I mean, are they expected to be a software or AI expert? Under the existing English law on unseaworthiness, a shipowner or a carrier might not be responsible for faults made by an independent contractor before the ship came into their possession or before it came into their orbit. So potentially faults made during the shipbuilding process. So to what extent could any faults in an AI or autonomous system be treated in that way? Perhaps a ship owner or carrier could claim a defect in an autonomous system came about before the vessel came into their orbit and therefore they're potentially not responsible for subsequent unseaworthiness or incidents that result. There's also typically an exception to a ship owner's liability for navigational faults on board the vessel if that vessel has passed a seaworthiness test. But if certain crew and management functions have been replaced by autonomous AI systems on board, how could we assess whether there's or not there has actually been a navigational fault for which the owners might escape liability or pre-existing issue of unseaworthiness, so a pre-existing hardware or software glitch? This opens up a whole new line of inquiry as to at what might have happened behind the software code or the protocols of the autonomous system on board and the legal issues of responsibility of the ship owner and the subsequent applicable liability for any incidents which might have been caused by unseaworthiness are going to involve a significant legal inquiry and in new areas where it comes to autonomous vessels.  Susan: Sounds very interesting. And I guess that makes me think of, I guess, a wider issue that crewing is only part of, which would be standards and regulations relating to autonomous vessels. And obviously, as a finance lawyer, that would be something my clients will be particularly interested in, in terms of what standards are there in place so far for autonomous vessels and what regulation can we expect in the future?  Thor: Sure. Well, the answer is at the moment, there's not very much. So as I've mentioned already, the IMO has established a working group on autonomous vessels. And the aim of that IMO working group is to adopt a non-mandatory goal-based code for autonomous vessels, the MASS code, which will aim to be in place by 2025. But like I said, that will be non-mandatory, and that will then form the basis for what's intended to be a mandatory MASS Code, which is expected to come into force on the 1st of January 2028. Now, the MASS Code working group last met in May of this year. And it reports on a number of recommendations for inclusion in the initial voluntary MASS Code. Interestingly, one of those recommendations was for all autonomous vessels, so even the fully autonomous degree four vessels, to have a human being, a person in charge designated as the master even if that person is remote at all times so that may rule out a fully autonomous non-supervised vessel from being compliant with the code. So mandatory standards still very much under develop in development and not currently in force until 2028 at the moment that doesn't mean to say there won't be national regulations or flag regulations covering those vessels before then.  Susan: Right. And then I guess another area there would be insurance. I mean, what happens if something happens to a vessel? I mean, I'm looking at it from a financial perspective, of course, but obviously for ship owners as well, insurance will be the key source of recovery. So what kinds of insurance products would already be available for autonomous vessels?  Thor: Well, good to know that some of the insurers are already offering products covering autonomous vessels. So just having Googled what's available the other day, I bumped into Ship Owners Club, which holds entries for between 50 and 80 autonomous vessels under their All Risks P&I cover. And it seems that Guard is also providing hull and machinery and P&I cover for autonomous vessels. And I can see that their industry is definitely taking steps to get to grips with cover for autonomous vessels. So hull and P&I cover is definitely out there. So we've covered some of the legal challenges and insurance and what autonomous vessels are. I wonder, Susan, what other more specific challenges people interested in financing autonomous vessels might face?  Susan: Sure. Yeah. So, I mean, I guess I'll preface that by saying that I'm an asset finance lawyer. So instinctively, when I think about financing autonomous vessels, I'm thinking about the assets itself. So either financing the construction or the acquisitions of of the vessel. But in terms of autonomous vessels in particular, there are boundless investment opportunities beyond just the vessel itself, you know, on the financing, some of the research and development, some of the corporate finance of the companies designing and building those vessels, and the technology used to operate them. So there's, I imagine, a vast opportunity here for an investor who's keen to get involved. From a commercial perspective, autonomous vessels are pretty new. They're pretty untested. Obviously, you've talked a lot about the fact that a lot of the regulation isn't really completely there yet. There's a lot of development still to come. So it takes quite a brave investor to put funding into it. And so far, at least, the return on investment is a bit uncertain. It's not like investing in a tanker or a bulk carrier where you've got a known market. Everyone knows what the problems are. Everyone knows what the risks are, how to mitigate them. So in a lot of ways, this is all still very, very new, both for the owners and for the finances. But investors are very interested in sustainability solutions. They're interested in what the next big thing is. So I imagine that the autonomous ships are quite likely to appeal with potentially better safety records, being more sustainable. That in turn would then make the asset better value for the investors and less likely to result in insurance claims or reputational damage resulting from incidents and that sort of thing. From a legal perspective, it doesn't immediately seem that there would be a huge difference in taking a mortgage over an autonomous ship versus a manned one. But then it becomes a bit more complicated if we start to think about enforcing that mortgage. So in the traditional way to enforce a mortgage, the mortgagee will arrest the vessel in a suitable port. Depending on where the vessel is, the lender may need to instruct the borrower or the manager to sail the vessel to a suitable port. And if the borrower fails to do this, the lender can become a mortgagee in possession, take over the ship, sail it into a friendly port and apply for traditional sale. But how are you going to do that if you can't just go on board and say to the master, hey, I've arrested this ship, I'm going to take over now. And thinking about, for example, the degree three vessels where you'd have a remote operator redirecting the ship, what happens? Presumably the mortgagee would have to go to them and say we'd like you to redirect this vessel what if they refuse can the lender take over can they override the autonomous system or the remote operation would they have to. Would there be cybersecurity issues, issues with password and access and things like that? I mean, these are all kind of big questions at the moment that no one's tried to do this yet. So it isn't really clear how all of this would fit in with the existing law on the rights of a mortgagee in possession, which is a very well-tested legal concept, but it does assume physical control of the ship, which is not as obvious in an autonomous scenario as it would otherwise be. And a conducted issue to that would be, what I already mentioned, is kind of the absence of a clear market, and this would be relevant in the context of a judicial sale. So at least at the outset, valuing autonomous vessels could be a bit difficult. And until there's a clearly defined secondhand market, it might be difficult to lend us to determine whether it's even worth enforcing in terms of the potential return they would get, because it's difficult to analyze how much you might be able to get for the vessel. Not aware of any cases where someone has tried to do this. So the existing law will definitely need to develop and it's going to be very interesting times as we navigate these changes in the market in relation to autonomous vessels.  Thor: Yeah, I can see that autonomy definitely throws up a whole bunch of issues for financing.  Susan: Definitely. I mean, at the moment, we don't entirely know all the answers, but we're definitely looking forward to finding out.  Thor: Right.  Susan: Thank you so much for joining us for our AI podcast today.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's emerging technologies practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

In China, shipyards that were distressed assets just years ago are now highly sought after. And if you happened to buy into some back then, congratulations; you likely stand to make a windfall profit. Shanghai-headquartered DCL Investments made one such shrewd play more than two years ago. It invested in restructuring bankrupt Yangzhou Guoyu Shipbuilding at bargain prices, becoming the yard's controlling shareholder in July 2024. Now this facility, with over 300 acres of land, 2 km of Yangtze river frontage, and four slipways able to produce up to 18 merchant ships annually, is generating positive cashflow by leasing to other shipbuilders. It could also bring DCL Investments a hefty return if snapped up by the next buyer. Behind this story is the unfolding of the latest shipbuilding cycle: orderbooks swell, ship prices surge, yards' profits rebound, and capacity expands. But spectres of the past haunt: will rampant overordering end in yet another devastating crash? Those who lived through the order bubble prior to the 2008 financial crisis can't help but worry about history repeating itself. Sanguine voices, however, counter history won't simply repeat. This cycle still has room to run, optimists say, fuelled by fleet renewal demand amid massive levels of aging tonnage and tightening emissions rules absent in the frenzied 2000s. Meanwhile, the industry outlook is intertwined with various uncertainties. Can vessel earnings justify the rising ship prices? Can shipyards resolve labour shortages? Is the International Maritime Organization able to accomplish its green ambitions? And, will excess capacity expansion re-emerge in China, the world's largest shipbuilding nation and, disrupt markets? Discussing shipbuilding prospects on the podcast this week: Wang Linyu, managing director of DCL Investments John Cotzias, founder of Xclusiv Dimitris Roumeliotis, research analyst of Xclusiv Rob Willmington, markets editor of Lloyd's List

In his first year on the job, International Maritime Organization secretary general Arsenio Dominguez has confronted two major sustainability challenges facing shipping: decarbonisation and the violence in the Red Sea, which threatens an oil spill and endangers mariners. He spoke to TradeWinds editor-in-chief Julian Bray at the Shipowners' Forum Germany.

The maritime industry transports over 80% of goods worldwide and is essential to the deployment of climate technologies.  At present, the industry contributes approximately 2 to 3% of global emissions, but this figure is projected to grow without major changes to the industry and its ancillary services. However, decarbonizing the maritime industry is unusually challenging.  As the president of Marine and executive vice president at Wärtsilä, Roger Holm's team helps power one out of every three ships worldwide. In light of new EU regulations and the International Maritime Organization's goal of net neutral carbon emissions by 2050, Wärtsilä is now focused on solving the decarbonization riddle for clients that operate ships that can last for decades and need to be able to adapt to a wide range of infrastructure and fuels in ports. In this episode, Roger Holm chats with Hilary Langer and shares why Wärtsilä approaches maritime decarbonization at the systems level, why clients are increasingly focused on sustainability, and where he sees the greatest potential for carbon and cost savings. Links:Wärtsilä Marine SolutionsEuropean Commission - Reducing emissions from the shipping sectorWorld Resources Institute - Decarbonizing International ShippingNYTimes Gift Link – Shipping Contributes Heavily to Climate Change. Are Green Ships the Solution?Bloomberg - How the Shipping Industry Aims to Reach Net Zero by 2050Episode recorded August 14, 2024 Email your feedback to Chad, Gil, and Hilary at climatepositive@hasi.com or tweet them to @ClimatePosiPod.

Strict but fair. That's the description of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority from retiring chief executive Mick Kinley. Some of the world's biggest shipping companies have been named and shamed by the regulator in recent years and their vessels banned from entering ports over sub-standard conditions or not paying crew. Speaking with characteristic Australian candour and colour, Kinley reflects on the progress made by the regulator he has led for the past 10 years and offers some advice to the International Maritime Organization where he has been a key figure for some time. As Kinley sails off over the horizon after 30 years with AMSA, Lloyd's List sits down with him to talk about his role, changes in the Australian maritime industry over the past three decades and some of the global achievements the authority has had as it seeks to protect seafarers and maintain standards in shipping.

Send us a Text Message.Ever wondered what it's truly like to juggle life-changing events like a trip to Disney World, pregnancy complications, and welcoming a newborn, all while keeping up with advancements in AI and podcasting technology? No? We don't either. This episode we open up about our break from podcasting, touching on the highs and lows of our recent experiences—including high blood pressure and hospitalizations—and how we've been adapting to our new day to day with a tiny baby. Alongside these heartfelt updates, we explore the spine-chilling mysteries of ghost ships, starting with the enigma of the Mary Celeste to the curious 18-month journey of the MV Alta. Why do ships like these end up abandoned, and what secrets do they harbor? We delve into startling statistics from the International Maritime Organization and dissect theories ranging from mutiny and piracy to more sinister possibilities. Whether it's a prepared meal left behind or navigational equipment gone missing, each detail adds to the intrigue of these abandoned vessels.Join us for as we unravel Ghost Ships on our return to podcasting from our long hiatus!  Find us on the socials: IG, FB, TikTok, Threads and Youtube as The Ghoulcast PodEmail: theghoulcastpod@gmail.comText us! Link on each episode! Do you have a spooky story, true crime case, or 5 degrees of Ted Bundy you'd like to share with us? Shoot us an email with the Title: Guest Ghoul to share and when we have enough we'll read them on an episode. Just let us know if you'd like your names omitted or changed (preferably you change them for us and format them nicely so I don't mess it up!).

While aviation may be converging on one main pathway to decarbonization — sustainable aviation fuel — maritime shipping may require a more diverse set of solutions: a portfolio of fuels, energy efficiency, and on-board carbon capture and storage. But each technology has operational and capital challenges. So what will it take to scale them up? In this episode, Shayle talks to Dr. Lynn Loo, CEO of the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation. Ocean-going shipping consumes about 300 million tons of fuel per year, accounting for 3% of global emissions. But with significant regulatory pressure from bodies like the International Maritime Organization, shipping companies are exploring a range of options. Shayle and Lynn cover topics like: Conventional fuels, like heavy fuel oil and marine gas oil The inadvertent climate impact of cutting sulfur emissions The pros and cons of lower-carbon fuels, like LNG, biofuels, methanol, and ammonia The challenges for infrastructure and operations, especially involving the low volumetric energy density of new fuels  On-board carbon capture and storage How energy efficiency reduces the impact of low volumetric energy density Recommended resources International Maritime Organization: Fourth Greenhouse Gas Study 2020 Catalyst: Heavy duty decarbonization Catalyst: Putting a halt to geoengineering — by accident Catalyst is brought to you by Anza Renewables, a data, technology, and services platform for solar and storage buyers. Anza's real-time market intel equips buyers with the essential data they need to get the best deals. Download Anza's free Q2 Module Pricing Insights Report at go.anzarenewables.com/latitude  Catalyst is brought to you by Kraken, the advanced operating system for energy. Kraken is helping utilities offer excellent customer service and develop innovative products and tariffs through the connection and optimization of smart home energy assets. Already licensed by major players across the globe, including Origin Energy, E.ON, and EDF, learn how Kraken can help you create a smarter, greener grid at kraken.tech. Catalyst is brought to you by Antenna Group, the global leader in integrated marketing, public relations, creative, and public affairs for energy and climate brands. If you're a startup, investor, or enterprise that's trying to make a name for yourself, Antenna Group's team of industry insiders is ready to help tell your story and accelerate your growth engine. Learn more at antennagroup.com.

Sacramento has done it before — regulating the environmental footprint of ships at sea rather than waiting for action by the International Maritime Organization. And now officials in the California capital are considering doing it again — this time for greenhouse gas emissions. We talk to University of California Berkeley's David Wooley, Pacific Environment's Teresa Bui and Chamber of Shipping of America's Kathy Metcalf.

Episode 17 of the “Aerospace Ambition Podcast” featuring Dr Dan Rutherford from The International Council on Clean Transportation is out!Talking Points• Why is 2035 a good timescale to set sustainable aviation goals?• How should we trade of carbon-intensity goals versus absolute emissions goals?• Should we prioritize quantify or quality of SAFs during the scale-up?• Why are OEMs' delivery projections concerning with regard to sustainable aviation?• How good do weather models have to be for contrail management to be adopted at scale?• Are papers stressing uncertainty in the mitigation of non-CO2 effects of aviation helpful?• When is contrail warming going to be integrated into the Travel Impact Model?• What is the Science Based Targets initiative?• Is it fair to compare supersonic flight with advanced air mobility sustainabilitywise?GuestDr Dan Rutherford is the ICCT's first Senior Director of Research for Marine and Aviation, where he focuses on developing policies to reduce emissions from planes and ships with national and international regulators. An expert in fuel efficiency and emission reduction in international transport, he has contributed to environmental policies at the UN's International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and International Maritime Organization for over ten years. Dan holds a B.A. in Chemistry from the University of Minnesota Morris and a Master of Science and Ph.D. in Environmental Engineering and Science from Stanford University.Resources• ICCT Technology Pathway: https://theicct.org/publication/global-aviation-vision-2050-align-aviation-paris-jun22/• Travel Impact Model: https://travelimpactmodel.org/• ICCT & MIT Study on Supersonic Flight: https://theicct.org/publication/aviation-global-supersonic-safs-feb22/Linkedin Profiles• Dan: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dan-rutherford-b179652/• Marius: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariuswedemeyer/AAMBITION Newsletterhttps://mailchi.mp/55033eb444bd/aambition-n

The low orderbook, demand growth and longer ton-miles created by supply-chain disruptions bode well for the health of the dry-bulk industry. In this Talking Transports podcast, Seanergy Maritime Holdings Chairman and CEO Stamatis Tsantanis joins Lee Klaskow, Bloomberg Intelligence senior transportation & logistics analyst, to discuss the opportunities and challenges facing the global dry-bulk shipping market. A prolonged crisis in the Red Sea could drive Capesize rates and profit higher for owners in the coming months. One of the biggest challenges will be the industry's ability to meet the International Maritime Organization's goals for zero emissions by 2050 through a transition toward greener fuels, he says. Tsantanis also talks about the impact of Russia's war on Ukraine and China's demand for raw materials.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The new International Maritime Organization secretary general Arsenio Dominguez joins the Lloyd's List Podcast this week to discuss the challenges ahead, his leadership style and just how much influence the 'SG' really has in setting the industry's agenda. Happy new year to all Lloyd's List Podcast listeners

In 2023, the International Maritime Organization adopted a new strategy for shipping's greenhouse gas emissions, targeting net zero emissions by around 2050. In the year ahead, it will carry out important work to turn its ambition into action. We interviewed UCL Energy Institute's Tristan Smith, and hear from IMO secretary general-elect Arsenio Dominguez and Union of Greek Shipowners president Melina Travlos.

Solar geoengineering is a hot (er, cool?) topic these days. One method involves injecting a form of sulfur into the atmosphere to reflect solar radiation and help reduce global temperatures. But it could also cause unpredictable changes to ozone, rainfall, and ecosystems. So when a rogue startup began sending balloons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere last year, it sparked outrage. But here's the thing: We've been geoengineering our atmosphere for decades, just not intentionally. Scientists have long known that sulfur dioxide emissions from maritime shipping have a cooling effect on the atmosphere. They brighten clouds and reflect more solar radiation. We've also known that sulfur dioxide is a toxic air pollutant that causes tens of thousands of premature deaths per year.  So in 2020 when the International Maritime Organization, which regulates shipping, required ships to drastically cut their sulfur dioxide emissions, it reduced air pollution. But it also accidentally warmed the surface of the oceans. So how big of a deal is this? In this episode, Shayle talks to Dr. Dan Visioni, climate scientist and assistant professor at Cornell University's Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. They cover topics like: The mechanism behind marine cloud brightening and how it differs from stratospheric sulfate injection Why the warming effect was so strong in the North Atlantic in particular What we still don't understand about the impact on global mean temperatures and regional weather, likeheat waves and hurricanes   What this accidental experiment tells us about how to conduct a deliberate geoengineering experiment Recommended Resources: Analysis: How low-sulphur shipping rules are affecting global warming Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics: Climate and air quality trade-offs in altering ship fuel sulfur content Catalyst is a co-production of Post Script Media and Canary Media. Are you looking to understand how artificial intelligence will shape the business of energy? Come network with utilities, top energy firms, startups, and AI experts at Transition-AI: New York on October 19. Our listeners get a 10% discount with the code pspods10. Catalyst is supported by Antenna Group. For 25 years, Antenna has partnered with leading clean-economy innovators to build their brands and accelerate business growth. If you're a startup, investor, enterprise, or innovation ecosystem that's creating positive change, Antenna is ready to power your impact. Visit antennagroup.com to learn more. Catalyst is supported by RE+. RE+ is more than just the largest clean energy event, it's a catalyst for industry innovation designed to supercharge business growth in the clean energy economy. Learn more: re-plus.com. 

Heat this summer has not been normal for most of the world. Globally, July 2023 was the hottest month on record, mainly because the oceans are at record-high temperatures. This week the team talked with climate scientist Zeke Hausfather about the short term and long term reasons why. They also discuss how we get the ocean data, whether that be from satellites, remote controlled ocean floats, and in some cases — seals. Yes, seals. We want to hear from you! Have a question for the meteorologists? Call 609-272-7099 and leave a message. You might hear your question and get an answer on a future episode! You can also email questions or comments to podcasts@lee.net. About the Across the Sky podcast The weekly weather podcast is hosted on a rotation by the Lee Weather team: Matt Holiner of Lee Enterprises' Midwest group in Chicago, Kirsten Lang of the Tulsa World in Oklahoma, Joe Martucci of the Press of Atlantic City, N.J., and Sean Sublette of the Richmond Times-Dispatch in Virginia. Episode transcript Note: The following transcript was created by Adobe Premiere and may contain misspellings and other inaccuracies as it was generated automatically: Hello everyone. I'm meteorologist Sean Sublette and welcome to Across the Sky our national Lee Enterprises weather podcast. Lee Enterprises has print and digital news operations in more than 70 locations across the country, including at my home base in Richmond, Virginia. I'm joined by my meteorologist colleague Matt Holiner in Chicago. My pals Kirsten Lang and Joe Martucci out of the office today. Our guest this week is Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist. Very deep into the data, has a wealth of information about how much warming is taking place globally. And we really wanted to pick his brain about what's going on in the oceans this year in particular. There has been so much buzz, Matt, about how hot the oceans are right now. So we wanted to kind of get into some of the reasons for that. Yeah, that's the headline I think grabbed people's attention. Of course, you know, as soon as there was those 100 degree temperature readings off the coast of Florida, then immediately all the headlines were Hot Tub water and everybody knows what a hot tub feels like. It's like, yeah, I don't think the ocean should just be naturally that hot if it's, you know, not being artificially heated. But I mean, it is just getting warmer. But I also think that sometimes, you know, and that's the challenge, you know, where there's, you know, still doubt, unfortunately, that comes up with climate change because then certain things get exaggerated because there is something because they're also following that. Lots of headlines about the thermal hailing circulation shutting down. And what I liked in our discussion coming up with Zeke was he really dived into that and explained how likely it is and what's really going to happen, because immediately all the means of the day after tomorrow came and it's like, oh, the ocean current shuts down. It's going to be a global ice age, you know? Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's talk about what's really going to happen, how likely the circulation shutting down really is. That was just one of the things that we discuss about with them. But it's always good to come back to the experts that really know what's going on rather than just people just throwing stuff out there on social media because there's a there's still a lot of bad stuff on social media. Yeah. And he talked about, you know, if you've never heard of the thermo heal hailing circular ocean, sometimes it's called the MOOC. It has a lot of different nicknames, but he talks about what that is why it's important. He also addressed that 101 degree water temperature, some some things that are going on with that. And we just talked about where we're climate changes now and how much more warming we should expect. So lots to get to with our conversation with Dr. Zeke Zeke Hausfather, let's go right to it. Dr. Zeke Hausfather father is the climate research lead for STRIVE and a research scientist with Berkeley. Earth is a climate scientist and IPCC author whose research focuses on observational temperature records, climate models, carbon renew, removal and mitigation technologies. Zeke also serves as science science contributor to Carbon Brief and was previously the director of climate and energy at the Breakthrough Institute, the lead data scientist at SS, the Chief Scientist at Sea 3ai and Co-Founder and Chief Scientist of Efficiency 2.0. And on top of all that, in his spare time, whatever spare time he has, he runs a very excellent substack with Andrew Dessler over at Texas A&M called the Climate Brink. So we are just pleased as punch as Mama used to say, to have Zeke Harris father with us on Across the sky. Thanks so much for joining us. Noah is excited to be here. All right. So let's jump right into the whole oceans thing. This has been on top of everybody's climate weather minds for several weeks now about how warm the oceans have been this year with regard to the longer term record. So before we get into the specifics about why they're so warm this year, talk a little bit about, I guess, the metadata, the data sets that we are using and why we are so confident about making such a statement about the oceans being as warm as they are right now. Sure. So we've collected ocean data for a long time. It was, in fact back in the 1840, as there is an international convention to standardize the collection of temperature data from ships, in part to better understand shipping routes, weather conditions to make ship journeys more predictable. In fact, the reason we start global temperature records like those we produce at Berkeley Earth or NOAA's or the UK Met Office record in 1850 is because that's when we start getting enough ocean data to at least, you know, with reasonable errors, estimate global temperatures. So in the early days we used to measure ocean temperatures by throwing wooden buckets over the sides of ships, pulling them up, sticking a thermometer in and writing it down in the captain's logbook. Funny story that actually had some biases because as you're pulling a bucket up the side of a ship, it evaporates. Some of the water evaporates off the top and that cools the remaining water in the bucket. And so you actually get slightly cooler temperatures with buckets around World War Two. We switched primarily to ship engine room and take ballast where the water goes through the whole of the ship to cool the engine. You know, these are steamships or, you know, more modern diesel ships. And it turns out engine rooms are a little warmer. So you have some biases there and translating from buckets to ship endurance. And then starting around 1980, we really transitioned in large part to automated systems that, you know, there's thousands of them. They float around the ocean, they send data up to satellites. And in more recent years since the nineties, we have satellite radio monitors that can measure the ocean skin temperature directly. And it turns out that all these different sets of instruments largely agree with each other. You know, you have to correct the biases when you switch from one to the other, of course. But if you do that, you get a pretty good consistent, high quality record of ocean temperatures since at least 1850. And certainly, you know, we have incredibly good records, you know, for the last few decades when we have satellites and buoys and ships and these awesome robots called Argo floats that float around the ocean and dive down to 2000 meters and sample all the ocean heat content and other variables on their way up. So we're really in the golden age of climate data, particularly when it comes to the ocean today. Real quick, before we talk a little bit more about this year, just for my own thing, in my own mind, I know the Argo floats have become very popular recently. Off the top of your head, an approximation, the you know, to a first order of magnitude about how many of these Argo floats are kind of out there right now. The latest number I heard and it's a couple of years old at this point, but it's about 3500 Argo floats and they're pretty well distributed around the ocean. There's a few areas they don't get, so they're not great at going under sea ice. In fact, scientists have figured out a pretty cool hack for that. And they actually put thermometers on the top of SEAL's heads like wild animals. And they dive under the sea ice to get temperatures there. The Argo plates can't go easily. Wait, wait, wait. They put a thermometer on top of the head of a seal. Yep. A couple hundred seals have thermometers on their heads and they're taking measurements. They're very small there. I'm guessing this is a very tiny electro radio transmitter is not something like that. Yeah, it's a liquid and glass thermometer sticking on there, Ed? No, no. There's a like a little transmitter on the SEALs head that's, you know, pretty small and unobtrusive, but takes measurements when the seals under the ice and then sends it off to a satellite when they get back to the surface and they track the seals and, you know, take it off their head after, you know, a year or so and then, you know, rotate new seals into the the seal temperature monitoring core. So that's one area that scientists had to fill in the gaps a little bit. The other is the deep ocean. So our current Argo network mostly goes down to about 2000 meters or, you know, 6000 feet or so below that. We haven't had as many measuring systems historically. But there's a new deep Argo program that's trying to fill in some of those gaps. That's amazing. Matt, you want to jump in with anything? Yeah, I'm still wrapping my mind around seals taking temperature readings for us. That is, if you Google it, there's some very, very adorable pictures of seals with little instruments on their heads. I'm sure. I'm sure. You know, my my question is, you know, as far as the coverage goes and I mean, we're talking about, you know, it seems like in many locations, you know, sea surface temperatures on the rise. I mean, a combination of El Nino and but also in the Atlantic, seeing the sea surface temperatures on the rise. But I'm trying to kind of get into more of the details about instead of just saying sea surface temperatures are on rise everywhere, are there certain locations where we're really seeing a particular rise more so than other parts of the planet? Yeah. So historically, you know, over long term changes, you know, some parts of the ocean warming slightly slower than others, like southern oceans. Ocean is always a bit wonky because it has, you know, a lot of overturning circulation and a lot of deep mixing. There's a weird cold patch off the southeast of Greenland that may be related to a slowdown in the thermal handling circulation, though there's a lot of debate around that. But historically, the oceans have generally warmed at similar rates. This year, though, we've seen this really crazy warmth in the North Atlantic that is far beyond, you know, the level of warming we're seeing in other ocean basins. And so that's that's been really remarkable. And a lot of people have, you know, focused on that as a, you know, very unusual thing and tried to look at different potential explanations for it. And I kind of want to follow up with that thermo hayling circulation, because immediately when you talk about that, I think of the movie the Day After Tomorrow and how the ocean currents shut down and then suddenly there is this mass blizzard. We went into an ice age. So can you talk about the likelihood of this ocean currents shutting down and what would actually happen if it did happen? And is it going to be at the scale of the day after tomorrow? Sure. So let's start with the likelihood and then we can talk about the day after tomorrow. So scientists have historically thought the likelihood of a shutdown this century is quite low. You know, most of our climate models show it slowing down, in part as you have a lot of freshwater runoff from Greenland. So to back up a little bit the way the thermal handling circulation fundamentally works is that as water is traveling north in wind driven currents in the Atlantic, more and more of the water at the surface evaporates, which means that what's left over gets more and more salty because the salt stays when the water evaporates. And as it gets salty enough, it gets denser. And once it gets dense enough, it starts to sink. And so that drives one of the big ocean circulations is the sinking of saltier water in the North Atlantic. But it turns out if you start melting Greenland really quickly, you dump much of freshwater into the North Atlantic and that can make it less salty, which then makes it not sink, which then can slow down and eventually shut down the circulation. So climate models historically have not expected a shutdown this century, though they had expected to slow down in the last few years. There's been a couple more speculative papers suggesting that the models might be missing some things and that, you know, the possibility of a shutdown this century is is higher than previously anticipated. That said, this is still a very much on the bleeding edge of science. So I don't think any of us can say with confidence what's likely to happen this century. We just can't rule out a shutdown. Now, if a shutdown were to occur, it's important to emphasize this doesn't mean the Gulf Stream is shutting down. The Gulf Stream is driven by the rotation of the Earth and winds. It's not going anywhere, but the thermal healing is still very important for heat transfer, particularly to northern Europe. And so if we were to see a shutdown, we would see temperatures drop, you know, over, you know, coastal northern Europe, probably by, you know, three or four degrees centigrade on average. Some parts around Iceland, you know, you might even get to like eight degrees C drop compared to current temperatures. Not quite day after tomorrow levels, you know, we're not going to see the oceans freeze or, you know, New York become a a winter permanent winter arctic. You know, we're really talking more about the European side of of the North Atlantic, where the biggest effects could be felt. And over the long term, you know, the effects of warming for most countries in Europe would outweigh the cooling issues associated with the shutdown. It still be bad. You know what affect rainfall patterns a bunch in problematic ways. You know, it would mean it was a lot cooler, particularly in places like the UK. It wouldn't be a good outcome, but at this point, you know, we're still very much digging through the data and modeling and and trying to get a clearer picture of what exactly is happening with it and what is likely to happen as Greenland melt picks up. Yeah, I know there was a lot of buzz about this in the last couple of weeks with that I think was a nature communications paper that came out to kind of reignite that conversation back to the to the North Atlantic and the overall global oceans. Well, obviously, climate change is a big issue, which kind of the overall background driver. But talk a little bit about a couple of these other things that have kind of bubbled ahead or forward. On top of that, you know, obviously El Nino is going on, but there are there's discussions about an underwater volcano in the South Pacific, how fuels and shipping lanes in the North Atlantic might have changed. Could you just talk a little bit about those other kind of mitigating factors and what how much they may or may not be playing a role? So let's start with the volcano and then talk a bit about sulfur. So there was a very large eruption in Tonga in 2022 of of an underwater volcano. And it affected the climate not by providing key to the oceans because the amount of heat provided by volcanoes, the oceans is actually pretty negligible on a global scale compared to the amount of heat that's being trapped by greenhouse gases. But what this volcano did that was really weird compared to most volcanoes we see is it shot an incredible amount of water vapor, incredibly high into the atmosphere. It put about 150 million metric tons of water into the stratosphere, which is a part of the atmosphere that doesn't have much water vapor in it usually. And that matters a lot to the climate because water vapor itself is a strong greenhouse gas, But because water vapor, you know, rains out, if you get too much in the atmosphere, it it doesn't last for long. So it can't really accumulate. But the stratosphere is a little different because there's so little water vapor up there. If you put water vapor up there, it doesn't rain out. And it can stay in the stratosphere for a lot longer than you'd have water stay in the lower part of the atmosphere. It takes a couple of years to clear out, you know, water vapor and into the stratosphere. And so while most volcanoes actually cool the planet by putting sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, if they're really big volcanoes, this one unusually actually likely warmed the planet by putting a lot more water vapor in than it put in CO2. Now, there's been a couple of papers on this that estimated that globally, the magnitude, the effect is probably somewhere in the range of 0.15 Watch per meter squared. That's a very wonky number. We used to estimate the amount of energy trapped in their system, but to convert them to numbers, people might understand, You know, we're probably talking about somewhere in the range of, you know, five hundredths of a degree centigrade of warming associated this volcano. So 0.05 C, which is not nothing but is not nearly as big as the, you know, excursions and temperature we're seeing globally. Is there a limit to these temperatures? Is there a threshold like, you know, is there a certain level where the oceans can't get any warmer or are we going to continue to just sled? You know, now an X is going to be 101, 102. I mean, is there a threshold about a limit to where we're going to go and just kind of talk about how exceptional that 100 degree temperature really is? Yeah. So I think the provisional record was actually 101. Now, granted, it was in an area of very shallow water with a lot of like biomass in the water that can absorb sunlight. So those areas do get in the high nineties pretty frequently. But this was very, very high. And we've seen, you know, high 90 degree temperatures around the Florida Keys a lot this year. So I think that's, you know, another sign of this exceptional thing that's happening in the North Atlantic in terms of temperatures as far as like how hot it can get, you know, there's not a functional limit that says like when the oceans reach, I don't know, 102 degrees, they don't increase anymore. But what you do have is this sort of relationship where the hotter a surface is, the more heat it radiates. And it actually radiates heat at the fourth power of temperature to get a little wonky. So you have this Stefan Boltzmann equation at work. And so what that means is that the hotter it gets, the more heat it's getting up to the atmosphere, the harder it is to warm up further because it's giving off more and more heat as it gets hotter. And so that there ends up being a bit of a negative feedback, as we call it, a countervailing factor of it's just hard to get things that are already hot, hotter compared to getting up cool things. And so that does help provide a bit of a limitation to how hot it can get. I guess on some point it it's a limit of diminishing return once you gets to a certain temperature profile, I'm assuming. Yep. All right. Good deal. It's one of the reasons why climate change doesn't run away as easily on Earth, which is a good thing. Yes, we like to tell people the planet's not going to turn into Venus any time soon. We got to take a quick break. We'll have more with Zeke House father when we come back on the Across the Sky podcast. And we're back with Zeke House Father, a climate scientist with numerous organizations. There's a lot of work. Also has a wonderful substack for for folks who aren't very deep into climate science. He runs out with Andrew Dessler over at Texas A&M called the Climate Brink. I want to go back to the the current state of the oceans. We talked a little bit about the underwater volcano in the South Pacific, but there's been a lot of buzz on how fuels used in shipping. Traffic in the North Atlantic may have played a role. Can you talk a little bit more about that? Sure. So when we think about climate change happening more broadly on Earth, you know, we know that the greenhouse gases we're putting in the atmosphere are warming the planet, but it's not the only thing that humans but the atmosphere. We also put a lot of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere. You know, it comes as a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, primarily in sulfur dioxide, it turns out, is actually a strong cooling effect on the climate. And that's through two different mechanisms. The first is what we call the direct effect, which is that it's very like sulfur dioxide particles are very reflective. So some sunlight hits those particles in the atmosphere. It bounces back up to space and it just dims the sun essentially at the surface. You know, some people call it global dimming and in areas that are very polluted because of that. The second is the indirect effect where sulfur dioxide particles and aerosols in the atmosphere can serve as cloud condensation nuclei and so can increase the amount of cloudiness in regions where you have a lot of CO2. And you see this, you know, in contrails from planes and ship tracks, from ships that are going over the ocean where you see like clouds forming in the wake of the ship because of all the CO2 that's coming out of that stack. And it turns out those sort of clouds are good at reflecting sunlight and cooling the surface. So historically, we've used pretty dirty fuel for ships. You know, it's sort of the fuel that's leftover from oil distillation that's too dirty to burn on land because it would tell us how old are clean air rules. We actually call it bunker fuel. So it's very like tarry goopy stuff that's leftover at the bottom of the stack after oil distillation, and it turns out is a very high sale for content. And the reason ships are allowed to burn it is because they're mostly far from shore. And, you know, you have less air pollution concerns in the middle of the Atlantic or middle of the Pacific. But unfortunately ships are still using it near port. And a bunch of studies in recent years have found that it has some pretty nasty health impacts on people who live near shore. There's one study estimated that something like 60,000 people worldwide die prematurely a year because of ship based sulfur pollution. And so because of that, there's been a big push over the last decade to try to phase out sulfur in marine fuels to reduce the harmful human health impacts of burning it. But about 10% of all global sulfur emissions come from ships. And in the year 2020, the International Maritime Organization put in a new set of rules, essentially reducing the amount of sulfur that ships could emit by 90%. So if you think about 10% of all of our sulfur emissions globally coming from ships, we reduce that 90%. You get, you know, somewhere around a 9% reduction in all global aerosol CO2 emissions, sulfur dioxide emissions. And that's a pretty big deal. You know, in the recent IPCC report, our best estimate was that, you know, aerosols cooled the planet by about half a degree. C And so if you have a 9% reduction in one year going forward and all of aerosol emissions, you know, 9% of half a degree, C is still a pretty big number. You know, it's like .05 C And so there is likely roughly that level of additional warming globally from reducing these aerosol emissions. But the thing is, these ships are not emitting globally. They're emitting in particular regions, particularly the North Atlantic, in the North Pacific. And so in those regions we expect a much bigger climate effect from removing these aerosols, reducing the amount of ship tracks and cloudiness in those shipping corridors. So my colleague at Berkeley Earth, Robert Rohde, he did an analysis where he looked at essentially what's the difference between the temperatures we're seeing over the shipping tracks after the year 2021, the face of this fuel and the other parts of the ocean. And he found that after 2020, those regions warmed about 0.2 see more than the rest of the global ocean. And so we can say, you know, the sort of shipping track regions in the North Atlantic, North Pacific are probably had at least 2/10 of a degree warming in the last few years because we phased out this low sulfur or sorry, we based off the high sulfur fuel required muscle fuel. All right. So I'm going to turn this over to Matt before I do, I have two quick follow ups. One is for my own mind, when we think about CO2 being kind of reflective, are we are you saying the CO2 molecule or as as an aerosol with other impurities and too, what is the the the general lifetime of CO2 and those aerosols in the atmosphere before they finally settle out? The reflectivity is primarily the sulfur molecule itself, but it is in an aerosolized form when it's sort of moving around the lower atmosphere, the troposphere, the lifetimes are generally talking about on the order of weeks. You know, it falls up pretty quickly in the troposphere. If you were to put it in the stratosphere, as we see with like large volcanic eruptions like Mount Pinatubo, there you have the resonance time in the short years. You know, most probably about half of it falls out in the first year. But there's a bit of a tail before it all falls out of the stratosphere. That's why, you know, we saw something like half a degree C cooling globally the year after Mount Pinatubo erupted. It's because it put so much CO2 up into the stratosphere and that hung around for, you know, couple of years after that, suppressing temperatures. And while we're looking at these other issues that are that are playing into this, you know, another story and that's what I want to kind of focus on. It is a completely separate story, is it's tied together is the plastic pollution problem in the oceans. We keep hearing about the increasing amount of plastic in the oceans. And of course, there's lots of negatives associated with that. But I wonder if there's been any research at all. Is the plastic, the amount of plastic in the ocean having an impact on the sea surface temperatures, whether lowering them or raising them, or does it seem to not have an impact and it's just a separate environmental issue? It's a great question. You know, I haven't seen any research on no beetle effects of plastic. I think that even places like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which is a very evocative name, you know, it's not that dense. It's not like if you're going in a boat through there, it's just the surface of the ocean is covered with plastic. It's like there's pieces here and there. So I'm sure it has an effect because seawater is dark and absorbs sunlight. Plastic is generally not as dark as seawater and reflects sunlight. You know, there probably is on the margins, a cooling effect, but I suspect it's not particularly strong. But it is a big issue, obviously, for for wildlife. And I'm sure a lot of your listeners have seen, you know, David Attenborough's documentaries of like seabirds and remote islands with plastic in their bellies. And you know, these tragic pictures of, Yeah, let's think forward a little bit. We have made globally some progress in terms of of emissions at least regarding coal. Coal is in decline, at least in a lot of places. My understanding is that China is throwing everything out there, solar and coal and everything. But the demand for coal isn't as high as it used to be. Having said that, we still are burning a lot of fossil fuels that aren't necessarily coal. So some of the worst case scenarios we imagined 15, 20 years ago don't appear like they're going to be coming to fruition. It doesn't mean it's not going to be bad. But when we look at where policies have kind of evolved to now, how much warming you know, now in the pipeline should we kind of expect in the coming several decades? And that's a broad question, but let's just just kind of attack where we've come, how far we've come in the last ten or 20 years and and how that might translate forward. Yeah. So so a decade ago, things looked really dire for the Earth's climate in terms of where we were heading. You know, global coal use had doubled over the course of a decade. China was building a new coal plant just like every three days. And the idea that the 21st century could be dominated by coal, where we'd, you know, double or triple our emissions by 2100 didn't seem that far fetched. You know, today we're in a very different world. Thankfully, you know, clean energy has gotten cheap, but most of the new energy being built worldwide is renewables today, or at least clean energy. That's it's low carbon. And, you know, global coal use has pretty much flatlined since 2013 or so, which also means that global emissions of CO2 have more or less flatlined over the last decade. The problem is that when I say emissions of flatland, it sort of makes you think, oh, that means global warming is stopped too, Right? But it doesn't quite work that way. The world is going to keep warming as long as our emissions of CO2 remain above zero. That's really the brutal math of climate change, is that it's not enough just to stop emissions from increasing. You actually have to get them all all the way down to zero to stop warming. If we just line emissions like we are today, what that means is that warming continues at the rate that we've been experiencing for the last decade or 2.2 C per decade or so. And so if you look at a bunch of different assessments of where we're headed today, and it's been done by the International Energy Agency and the United Nations Governmental Program and groups like, you know, Climate Action Tracker, they all more or less agree that, you know, we're headed for a world of of around three degrees C, maybe slightly below by 2100. That compares to a world of, you know, four or five C that seemed possible a decade ago. And so that does reflect progress. You know, if we've bent the curve downward of future emissions, we've, you know, made some of these really, really catastrophic high end scenarios a little less likely. But a3c world is still a really bad one. I mean, we're experiencing a lot of severe impacts of climate change already in terms of heat waves and wildfires and, you know, extreme precipitation events just at 1.2 degrees today. And so if you, you know, more than double that, it's it's a pretty terrible world for for a lot of people and for a lot of nature to, you know, the natural world is a really tough time adapting to very rapid changes in temperature like we'd see. So three degrees is certainly a lot better than where we're headed, but it's by no means anywhere close to where we want to be. The good news, for me at least, is that the fact that we have started to make some progress means that it's a lot easier to imagine a world where we actually do make more progress. We continue to these positive trends and accelerate, and we actually do manage to limit warming to at least below two degrees by the end of the century. And I think unfortunately, 1.5 degrees is probably in the rearview mirror at this point, unless we, you know, do some crazy scenario where we pass it and then remove, you know, ridiculous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere to bring temperatures back down. But but certainly, I think you could say that limiting warming to two degrees or below two degrees is quite possible from where we are today. It would involve getting all of our emissions of CO2 to zero by, you know, 2070 or so globally, which is a big lift, but it's by no means impossible. And it's good to hear a little bit of good news because it is definitely by far mostly bad news. It comes to climate, but it's good that we're going in the right direction and hopefully the trend will continue. I want to kind of look in the short term, though, you know, we're in this El Nino and that's what's contributing partially to the high sea surface temperature that we're seeing and high global temperatures in general. But looking ahead to 2024 houses, El Nino going to play out. And what impact is it going to have on 2020 for us? Temperatures? Sure. So there is a growing strong El Nino in the tropical tropical Pacific right now that's really developed rapidly in the past few months. What was interesting is that we switched quite quickly from an unusually long La Nina event. We called it a triple dip, Nina, because it's when you sort of started to come out of La Nina conditions and then dipping back in. And that happens, you know, two more times after the initial one. Nina But because we rapidly transitioned from La Nina, conditions down, you know, conditions, you know, it's really added a lot of heat, particularly to the oceans. We expect the current El Nino events to continue and strengthen through the end of the year and, you know, stay fairly strong at least through early to mid 2024. There is some differences in the various modeling groups looking at El Nino, the dynamical models, the more like climate models tend to predict a stronger nino than the statistical models, which are more trying to infer based on you know, the statistics of past El Ninos. What's likely this time around. And that divide is actually kind of remarkable this year compared to the most past years. I, for one, probably would bet on the dynamical models because they think they capture more of the underlying processes like statistics only bring you so far. But in terms of the effects of the El Nino, you know, it's going to bump up global temperatures as well as sea surface temperatures for the remainder of 2023. You know, it means that this year is now the odds on favorite to be the warmest year since records began, since 1850. But it's really going to have a big effect next year. And so for 2024, it's likely to be even warmer than 2023 for the year as a whole. And we've seen historically that there tends to be a bit of a lag between when El Nino conditions peak in the tropical Pacific and when the global temperature response to that El Nino event peaks. And that lag is about three months. So three months or so after you hit peak El Nino conditions, then you have the peak surface temperature response globally across the land and the oceans. And that's been a pretty consistent relationship for the past, you know, 80 years or so at least. So if that holds this time around, you know, and the El Nino peaks in the near the end of 2023, we expect sort of the biggest push to be on early 2020 for temperatures. So what we'd probably be looking at is a particularly warmer end of winter and into the spring months. So I guess, you know, the groundhog would be predicting an early spring might be what we're seeing in a lot of places would be kind of an idea if this El Nino plays out as it's expected to. Yeah, that's globally like, oh, Nino has very specific patterns of heat and cool associated with it that may affect different regions differently. So you can't necessarily say like every part of the planet is going to be warmer because of the El Nino. It really ends up depending a bit. Like in California, we tend to get a slightly cooler and Rainier weather with an El Nino years, for example. So the overall pattern of what the impacts that El Nino bring is going to be overriding. But looking at the big picture, that's probably when temperatures are going to peak would be late winter, early spring. Yeah. All right. Let's go back south again. I was looking at a plot today, I think you actually shared about the Antarctic Sea ice and how it is way below the last 45 years of records. Is there anything that we should take away from that? I mean, it's kind of a frightening plot or is it just one of those things like we really don't understand the Antarctic ice surrounding the continent as well? It's a signal, but we we really shouldn't panic about it. I mean, what is your take when you see that that kind of graphic of what's going on in the sea ice around Antarctica? So it's it's definitely disconcerting. Like we've never seen anything like this in the historical record for Antarctic ice. At the same time, Antarctic sea ice has always been a lot more complex, heated and unpredictable than Arctic sea ice. The Antarctic sea ice. If you look at the data since 1979, which is when we first got good satellite coverage to get high quality Arctic wide records, it's pretty much been going down consistently. Like some years are higher, some years are lower, but there's a very clear linear downward trend as the Arctic warms Antarctica at least through 2020 or so, was bucking that sea ice was increasing overall in Antarctica between 1979 and 2020. And there was a lot of work among scientists to explain why that was. You know, part of it has to do with prevailing wind patterns, part of S2 actually, with the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica, which has a cooling impact for the region. And so, you know, it was always sort of a much bigger question mark of the climate impacts on Arctic sea ice compared to the Arctic words. It's much more straightforward. And so then we get to the last three years where that slight upward trend in sea ice, Antarctica suddenly reversed. You know, it went down, you know, pretty far in 2021 and 2022 and then 2023 hit. And we really have been at unprecedented lows for the entire year, particularly now, when sea ice should be growing rapidly. And it really isn't. And so there just needs to be a lot more work by scientists to untangle, you know, what are the drivers of this? You know, is it unusual warmth in Antarctica? Is it warm sea surface temperatures? Are air temperature is is it changing wind patterns that might be breaking up sea ice in ways that we haven't seen before? Like part of the problem is we only have a record going back to 1979 for this region. And so it may well be that there's some modes of variability that could lead to big shake ups in Antarctic sea ice that might have happened before, but just hasn't happened since 1979. So, you know, I don't think we can rule out that it's primarily caused by human activity. And certainly we expect long term as the Antarctic region warms to sea less sea ice there. But this is so far below what we'd expect to that. I think, you know, we need to take a close look at it and figure out all the different potential causes. And before we wrap up, every time we get someone on, you know, talking about climate change and what we're seeing out there and all the various issues, I think when it always comes back to is, you know, people read all these articles and it's all doom and gloom, but then it's like, well, what what can I do? What what can I do to make it better? I think when it comes to the oceans, this is a particularly unique because we don't live in the oceans, we're on land. And so people kind of see the impacts of what's happening on land and where. So I think so many of us are ignorant about what's going on in the ocean. So if you're if someone's listening to this and is alarmed and wants to make an impact and wants to again look at the whole issue, but let's just look at the oceans itself and what are things that individuals do if they want to see these sea surface temperatures not be as extreme? What are some things that are some proactive things that are people just reading this and saying, well, what do I do? What is your answer for when somebody asked that question? So I think one of the and it's fun, funny to use the word comforting in this environment given everything happening. But one of the more comforting findings out of the recent IPCC report was that if we can get emissions all the way down to zero, warming will stop. There's not a huge amount of warming in the pipeline that is inevitable, which means that ultimately, like humans are at the drivers wheel here, you know, are in the driver's seat. We get to determine based on how much fossil fuels we burn over the next century, exactly how warm it gets. You know, we're sort of stuck with what we have today regardless. But we can determine, you know, if it just gets a bit worse or if it gets catastrophically worse. And that's mostly on us in terms of how quickly we reduce our emissions of CO2 from burning fossil fuels and how quickly we switch switch to the clean energy alternatives. So as an individual you know, obviously it's a huge problem that requires collective action globally. But at the same time, you know, you can do a lot by supporting clean energy technologies because the more people who buy things like heat pumps or electric cars or put solar panels on the roof, the more the price of those technologies go goes down and the more other people can afford to adopt them and know we've really seen that with electric vehicles, which ten years ago were incredibly expensive and today are actually cheaper to own than a gas vehicle over the lifetime. You know, similarly, solar panels were nine times more expensive a decade ago than they are today. And a big part of what's driven those cost declines is just economies of scale, more and more being built, people learning how to build them more cheaply. You know, it's not fundamental breakthroughs in the physics. It's learning by doing. And so individuals making decisions to, you know, you know, pay a small premium to get clean energy in their personal lives. But hip hop and electric vehicle solar panel, you know, is an important way to to make it easier for other people who might not be as motivated to be able to adopt those or just make it the default because it's the cheapest thing for people to do. I think the other thing I'd say is that at the end of the day, individuals voluntarily taking action can only take us so far. You know, we need a stronger policy response by governments to make clean energy cheap and to hold polluters to account. And so I think, you know, at the end of the day, one of the most impactful things you can do on this issue is vote. Tell politicians what you think because they're going to have to help us address this. So I think you you hit the nail on the proverbial head. There is nobody can fix this all by themselves. But collectively, we can we can make a lot of progress. And there's a lot of good reasons to be optimistic. Before we let you go, in addition to people reading your stuff on Carbon brief and and the Substack, where else can people find your work if you know they're not true wonks or they're not policy wonks or they're not deep into the science, where else can people find what you have to say? Yeah, so you can you can always follow me on Twitter or whatever it's called this week, right? Or on Threads, which is the new matter owned Twitter competitor. You know, if you can also just read the coverage of climate that's going on in places like The New York Times, The Washington Post or the BBC, it's it's all quality. And, you know, they they talk to me occasionally and a bunch of other climate scientists, period of of mine who also a great insights in the stuff. So it's a you know it's hard to find good discussions of climate on TV these days. But you know if you turn to the news, you know it's it's dominates the headlines and a lot of it is really well written and really good. Yeah. One of the things that we've seen in polling is that people trust climate scientists, not so much people on TV. So that's why I always try to refer people directly to you, to Andrew, to Katherine, and have those kinds of folks ask again. Thanks so much for joining us. We appreciate it. And we hope that we get a chance to talk to you again soon. Definitely. It's great to chat. That is so much good information, Matt. I mean, every time I talk to see I've talked to him two or three times before this and I've been following him on Twitter and you heard me just kind of going on and on about the subject. But he has so much good actionable information. He's able to put so many myths to rest very quickly. And I could just talk to him all day long. But a lot of a lot of wonderful information about where we've come and where we're going. And he's got the data to back it up. Yeah, it really is a fascinating discussion because we re so, so much of the focus is on land and what people are experiencing. But the majority of the planet, 70% of the planet is the oceans, and they're absorbing a lot of heat and they're getting warmer as well. And when you're calculating these global temperatures, we talk about, you know, this is the warmest year on record, which 2023 seems to be on track to do. So it's not just all the thermometers on land that we're calculating, that we're using all of these booties to measure the temperature of the oceans. And that has a big impact. And that's why the fact that we're having an El Nino, it's an El Nino year when I mean, already we're talking about sea surface temperatures getting warmer and warmer. But during El Nino, they get even warmer than normal. And so that's what's going to contribute to seeing the high 2023 is going to be so warm. And then it was also interesting how we're kind of teasing ahead to 2024. There's potential for 2024 to be even warmer because we're especially going to start 2024. It seems so warm. And how even if El Nino starts to wind down the lag in the global temperatures because it has a global impact, will continue. So that's going to be something to watch. You know, it was it was disheartening to hear that about getting even warmer. No, but at the same time, I did like the where he did bring back, you know, it's good to find the positives where we can where we're at where it looks like though, his most dire predictions for what could happen not to play it down and so not to let people's guard down because he has emphasized, you know, three degrees of warming would still be really bad. But if we're going in the right direction, maybe avoiding that four or five degrees of warming by 2100, at least, that's progress. So let's not let our foot off the pedal. Let's let's keep working. Let's see if we can bring that trend out. How about two degrees instead of three degrees? I mean, the more we can do, you know, it's good to get some good news. But remember that three degrees is bad because we're already seeing, what, less than one and a half degrees is doing it. It's not good. Yeah. And that's three C, which is five and a half Fahrenheit. So we need to remember that sometimes we are deep into the science that we we kind of fall into the metric, the metric system, which is great. I love the metric system as a scientist, but a lot of people aren't as familiar with that. So yeah, three C that's about five and a half degrees Fahrenheit. And I was also very grateful that he went back and talked about how we know what the oceans were 150, 175 years in the past when we had some ocean temperature records directly. But now we get so much of it from satellites and these cool Argo floats spend a little time in Google, Argo floats because they're really, really cool pieces of equipment. Help us see what's going on into the oceans. Matt. You know, next week we've got, you know, football seasons coming. So let's go back on land. Right? But we're into August now and football practices are full tilt at this point, getting ready for four opening opening day in a few weeks and it's still hot. So we're going to talk to two Douglas Cossa at the Korey Stringer Institute up there at University of Connecticut and talk about the impact of heat on on football players. It can be a very sneaky killer, unfortunately. So we're going to talk to him about that and some of the best practices to keep our players safe so we can enjoy what they do a later on in the fall. Anything else? But before we take off, then I'll also be interested the impact of folks on the stands, because I've been at some awfully hot, late August, early September games in Texas. And, you know, especially if it's a middle of the day game, I mean, the crowd is in bags. Well, of course, the players absolutely the most, but the crowd as well. So that'll be an interesting discussion. And then also, you know, we're going to promote it again, if you ever have any questions for us, weather questions, things you'd like to hear us discuss, ideas for the podcast, shoot us an email podcast at Leeds dot net or begin to comment on the show we love to hear. All right, that all sounds good. I with that we are going to wrap for this week. So for Matt Holiner in Chicago, I'm meteorologist Sean Sublette in Richmond, Virginia at Lee Enterprises, thanks so much for listening. And we will talk with you again next week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My knowledge about fire safety at sea was pretty limited, at best. I was planning this episode for a long time, and then the disastrous fire happened at a car carrier near the Netherlands coast. In light of these events, I've reached out to Bogdan Racięga of the Baltic Fire Laboratory, a Polish maritime fire safety expert to discuss this particular incident and to delve into the intricate aspects of fire safety regulations on marine vessels.Bogdan explains and highlights the critical role of the International Maritime Organization in setting and enforcing fire safety standards, and the role of Class Societies in classifying and certifying these solutions for ships. Ever wondered about the unique challenges of protecting specific areas on ships? In the episode, we discuss protection strategies for machinery, cargo spaces, cabin balconies and galley areas. We unpack those challenges and discuss the differences between separation and extinguishing systems, including the necessity for perfect cooperation between passive and active solutions.  Discussing some tragic fires we consider what are the consequences of a delayed response when activating firefighting systems. And how does fire testing play into all this? Bogdan shares his expertise on these subjects, delving into the potential misuse of fire suppression systems and the importance of collaboration between manufacturers. I've had a blast recording this and I hope you will also enjoy learning about the maritime fire safety!

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: 'We're changing the clouds.' An unforeseen test of geoengineering is fueling record ocean warmth, published by Annapurna on August 7, 2023 on LessWrong. For decades humans have been emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect and leading to an acceleration of the earth's warming. At the same time, humans have been emitting sulphur dioxide, a pollutant found in shipping fuel that has been responsible for acid rain. Regulations imposed in 2020 by the United Nations's International Maritime Organization have cut ships' sulfur pollution by more than 80% and improved air quality worldwide. Three years after the regulation was imposed, scientists are realizing that sulphur dioxide has a sunscreen effect on the atmosphere, and by removing it from shipping fuel we have inadvertently removed this sunscreen, leading to an acceleration in temperature in the regions where global shipping operates the most: the North Atlantic and the North Pacific. We've been accidentally geoengineering the earth's climate, and the mid to long term consequences of removing those emissions are yet to be seen. At the same time, this accident is making scientists realize that with not much effort we can geoengineer the earth and reduce the effect of greenhouse gas emissions. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org

The shipping industry accounts for about 3% of global manmade greenhouse gas emissions.  In 2018, the International Maritime Organization, the UN body that regulates global shipping, set a target to cut the industry's greenhouse gas emissions by at least half by 2050. This goal has led to a variety of designs for eco-friendly ships, including […]

On this week's episode of Trade Guys, we discuss the EU-US data privacy framework, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen's visit to China, and the International Maritime Organization meetings.

Suat Hayri Aka, Turkiye's candidate for the secretary general's position at the International Maritime Organization, has probably the most diverse curriculum vitae of all seven candidates standing for election on Tuesday. He began his career as a deck officer, and after time at sea went ashore to work in shipmangement and other maritime businesses. In addition to seafaring and commercial experience, Aka's government roles include head of Turkiye's maritime authority, and secretary, deputy undersecretary, and undersecretary of the Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs. There, he became involved in the regulation of the country's aviation sector, which led to his appointment as the country's delegate at the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the United Nation's equivalent of the IMO. None of the other candidates have experience at this UN regulator, which Aka said was ahead of the IMO when it came to developing greenhouse gas emissions strategies. The secretary general's four-year appointment begins on January 1, with the winner to succeed the incumbent over the past eight years, South Korea's Kitack Lim. Bangladesh (Moin Uddin Ahmed), China (Zhang Xiajojie), Dominica (Dr Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry), Finland (Minna Kivimäki), Kenya (Nancy Karigithu), Panama (Arsenio Dominguez) and Türkiye (Suat Hayri Aka) all put forward their nominations for the position, which for the first time includes three women. As most secretary-generals are normally re-elected for a second term, the successful candidate will take the IMO through key climate change regulations in shipping and other challenges, such as autonomous shipping, a looming seafarer shortfall, as well as digitalisation and other internal reorganisations.

Moin Ahmed is one of two candidates nominated for the position of secretary general with a seafaring background.(The other candidate is from Türkiye). After 10 years at sea Ahmed came ashore to work at Bangladesh's national shipping line, but his journey to the International Maritime Organisation began when he was posted to the UK as the company's European regional representative more than 25 year ago. From there, he began representing his country at the UN agency and has used his marine technical expertise by serving as chair in key working groups. This included a period as chair of the technical cooperation committee, chair of the working group on the implementation of The International Conventionon Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. Moin also chaired the ship recycling working group at the IMO. The Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships only recently entered into force. Ahmed is one of seven nominated for the position of secretary-general with the International Maritime Organization. They are: Bangladesh (Moin Ahmed), China (Zhang Xiaojie), Dominica (Dr Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry), Finland (Minna Kivimäki), Kenya (Nancy Karigithu), Panama (Arsenio Dominguez) and Türkiye (Suat Hayri Aka). The 40 member states of the IMO council will be eligible to vote in the election on Tuesday, July 18, which incudes those from the three different categories. They include 10 countries with the largest interest in international shipping (Category A), 10 with the largest interest in international trade (Category B), and 20 with special interests in maritime transport or navigation that represent all major geographic areas of the world (Category C). These are: (A) China, Greece, Italy, Japan, Norway, Panama, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States; (B) Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates; and (B) Bahamas, Belgium, Chile, Cyprus, Denmark, Egypt, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, the Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Vanuatu.

The international shipping industry is a major greenhouse gas emitter, accounting for about three percent of all greenhouse gas emitted last year. For reference, this is roughly equivalent to the total annual emissions of Germany.  Because these emissions occur on international waters, the shipping industry was purposefully left out of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. Instead, a UN agency called the International Maritime Organization is the forum for multilateral diplomacy to curb emissions in international shipping. In early July members of the IMO met in London for negotiations.   Joining me to discuss why this meeting was so significant to international efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions is Susan Ruffo, Senior Director and Senior Advisor for Ocean and Climate at United Nations Foundation. We kick off discussing the impact of international shipping on climate change and then have an extended conversation about what happened at this meeting of the International Maritime Organization, which includes a new target for emission reduction and progress towards enacting a levy on carbon emissions from shipping.           

MINNA Kivimäki is the second candidate for the position of secretary general of International Maritime Organization featured in the Lloyd's List podcast ahead of voting next Tuesday for the top diplomatic job in shipping.The four-year appointment begins on January 1, with the winner to succeed the incumbent over the past eight years, South Korea's Kitack Lim. Lloyd's List has interviewed all the candidates, asking them to explain why they nominated and their plans for the IMO should they be successful. Today we talk to Kimivaki, who along with Panama's candidate, Arsenio Dominguez, is one of several favourites for the job. Her candidate brochure can be found here - Minna Kivimäki candidate brochure The current permanent secretary for Finland's ministry of transport and communications is no stranger to the IMO in London, nor Brussels. This makes her an attractive candidate for many of the European member states where the 27-country block is developing its own regional regulation on climate change for shipping alongside the IMO's global approach. [Sidebar#LL1145861] While nothing can be taken for granted despite this late stage of the campaign, Finland's candidature had the clear support of many of the European countries, with the exception of Greece, which declared its support for the Turkish candidate early in the peace. The candidates are: Bangladesh (Moin Uddin Ahmed), China (Zhang Xiajojie), Dominica (Dr Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry), Finland (Minna Kivimäki), Kenya (Nancy Karigithu), Panama (Arsenio Dominguez) and Türkiye (Suat Hayri Aka) all put forward their nominations for the position, which for the first time includes three women. The IMO must take critical decisions over the next four years, amid heavy criticism that the pace of decarbonisation regulation will compromise the United Nations agency's role as an international regulator. The secretary-general will not only set the tone at the secretariat, but as the public face of the IMO, the personality must bridge divisions and steer a course that will keep the IMO relevant and respected. As most secretary-generals are re-elected for a second term, the successful candidate will take the IMO through key climate change regulations in shipping and other challenges, such as autonomous shipping, a looming seafarer shortfall, as well as digitalisation and other internal reorganisations. Last time the council elected the secretary-general, there were multiple rounds of voting before the eventual candidate emerged.

The shipping industry can decarbonize. If the political stars align and the right demand signals can be emitted, even the most ambitious zero carbon scenarios are no longer limited by the technology. Or commercial readiness of zero-carbon fuels, or infrastructure or yards. At least they are according to the slew of papers and studies being pumped out as the world's governments sit down next week to consider the crucial question of just how quickly shipping can decarbonise. The industry, however, remains uncertain and unconvinced. There is still a massive gap between the rhetoric and reality in shipping. Shipping is awash with zero-carbon commitments, coalitions, pilot projects, green corridors and studies, all charting the industry's alignment to the 1.5°C temperature increase goal of the Paris Agreement. But a fraction of them have actually committed solid science based targets to action those promises. Green corridors are currently a paper exercise and dual fuel capability is essentially a hedge bet on the part of owners. A vessel theoretically capable of burning a sustainable fuel will not generate any value — environmental or commercial — from that capability until those fuels are produced in a genuinely sustainable form and become widely available, with an acceptable mechanism to bridge the inevitable cost differential against conventional fossil fuels. And yet, that's not the whole picture. Because real progress is being made. Shipping tonne-miles have increased 40% in the past 15 years and yet total CO2 emissions from shipping have decreased 14% over the same period. In all other transport sectors, the opposite has happened. Even without access to sustainable fuels, a carbon price or anything approaching regulatory clarity, the shipping industry has quietly pulled off a minor miracle of efficiency. So, as the governments of the International Maritime Organization sit down to map out how shipping realistically decarbonises itself between now and 2050, we are bringing you a special progress report in this extended edition of the podcast, looking at how the industry is changing and where the key blockers to shipping's zero carbon future remain. Featuring insights from shipowners, but also the likes of Shell, the World Bank and class societies, the podcast this week considers the progress achieved, but also the blockers still preventing action. Joining Lloyd's List Editor-in-Chief Richard Meade for this special progress report on shipping's zero carbon revolution are: • Andy McKeran, maritime performance services hub director at Lloyd's Register • Simon Bergulf, head of energy transition & operations at Maersk • Alexander Saverys, chief executive of CMB • Dr Alexandra Ebbinghaus, general manager decarbonization at Shell Marine • Isabelle Rojon and Rico Salgmann, transport specialists at the World Bank

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, May 5th, 2023. Watch out for the revenge of the 5th if you’re into that… or cinco de mayo, take your pick. https://tvpworld.com/69620835/us-navy-deployed-drag-queen-influencer-to-boost-youth-recruitment As part of a recruitment drive aimed at the country’s youth, the U.S. Navy deployed a "drag queen influencer" to assist in boosting lagging numbers in the military. In November of last year Joshua Kelley aka “Harpy Daniels”, who has over 1,300,000 likes on TikTok, revealed that he was to be the Navy’s ‘Digital Ambassador’. Whilst the U.S. Navy only recently revealed about approaching Kelley, the drag queen claims to have danced in drag in front of an audience of service officers on a number of occasions, even sharing one video from 2018 on his Instagram. Kelley was part of a Digital Ambassador initiative that lasted from October 2022 to March 2023, “designed to explore the digital environment to reach a wide range of potential candidates,” a Navy spokesperson told Fox News. The spokesperson also said that the Navy is navigating “the most challenging recruiting environment it has faced since the start of the all-volunteer force.” “The Navy did not compensate YN2 Kelley or any others for being Navy Digital Ambassadors. The pilot has concluded and we are now evaluating the program and how it will exist in the future," the spokesperson added. Regarding his role as Digital Ambassador, Kelley wrote on his Instagram page: “Thank you to the Navy for giving me this opportunity! I don't speak for the Navy but simply sharing my experience in the Navy! Hoorah, and let's go Slay!”. Not only the Navy but more broadly the U.S. military face big problems in convincing young people to join. Only 13 pct of 18-29-year-olds are “highly willing” to join the military, whilst 25 pct declared themselves “somewhat willing” and 26 pct are “not willing at all.” Gender ideology has become a hot topic in the Navy and all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. In March, a group of House Democrats proposed legislation to prevent the Department of Defense from standing in the way of transgender people who want to serve in the military. Some critics have argued that the purpose of the U.S. military is to provide security for the country, not to be a tool for gender ideology politics. Whilst others have suggested that in an unstable world, where a lot of military strategy is played out through bravado, such as with military drills, it is perhaps surprising that the U.S. would do the opposite of striking fear into their enemies. It’s a good thing we have Joshua to scare off said enemies, which ties in nicely for this next story! https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2023-05-03/second-oil-tanker-in-a-week-seized-by-iran-in-gulf-u-s-navy Iran Seizes Second Oil Tanker in a Week in Gulf -U.S. Navy Iran seized a second oil tanker in a week on Wednesday in Gulf waters, and the U.S. State Department called for its release, in the latest escalation in a series of seizures or attacks on commercial vessels in Gulf waters since 2019. The Baa-rain-based Fifth Fleet of the U.S. Navy said the Panama-flagged oil tanker Niovi was seized by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) at 6:20 a.m. (0220 GMT) while passing through the Strait of Hor-mooz. In Iran's first response, Tehran's prosecutor announced the oil tanker was seized on a judicial order following a complaint by a plaintiff, the judiciary's Mizan news agency said. No further details were provided. The incident comes after Iran on Thursday seized a Marshall Islands-flagged oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman called the Advantage Sweet. That tanker is being held by Iranian authorities in Bandar Abbas, the Marshall Islands flag registry said on Tuesday. Maritime security firm Ambrey has said it believed the Advantage Sweet's seizure was in response to a recent seizure via a court order by the United States of an oil cargo aboard the Marshall Islands tanker Suez Rajan. The Niovi oil tanker seized on Wednesday had been travelling from Dubai toward the UAE's Fujairah port when it was forced by IRGCN boats to change course towards Iranian territorial waters, the Navy said. The Niovi last reported its position at 0231 GMT on Wednesday off the coast of Oman in the Strait of Hormuz with the UAE as its destination, Refinitiv ship tracking data showed. According to the International Maritime Organization shipping database,, the Niovi's owner is Grand Financing Co, and the ship is managed by Greece-based Smart Tankers, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Vedant Patel, a deputy spokesperson at the U.S. State Department, told reporters the Biden administration and the "international community" call on Iran and its Navy to release the ships and their crews. "Iran's harassment of vessels and interference with navigational rights in regional and international waters are contrary to international law and disruptive to regional stability and security," Patel said. About a fifth of the world's crude oil and oil products passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point between Iran and Oman, according to data from analytics firm Vortexa. Since 2019, there have been a series of attacks on shipping in the strategic Gulf waters at times of tension between the United States and Iran. Indirect talks between Tehran and Washington to revive Iran's 2015 nuclear pact with world powers have stalled since September over a range of issues, including the Islamic Republic's violent crackdown on popular protests, Tehran's sale of drones to Russia and acceleration of its nuclear program. https://justthenews.com/nation/crime/alleged-texas-killer-captured-following-manhunt Fugitive illegal alien accused of mass killing in Texas captured Authorities on Tuesday apprehended an individual suspected of killing five people in Cleveland, Texas, following a Friday evening altercation. Authorities arrested Francisco Oropesa without incident on Tuesday evening, NBC News reported, citing the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office. His arrest marks an end to the manhunt that had baffled law enforcement for days. Authorities indicated earlier this week that they had "zero leads" as to his whereabouts. As of Monday, it was believed that Oropesa had slipped past a network of roadblocks in the Cleveland area, despite extensive efforts by law enforcement to contain him within a set perimeter. During the manhunt, reports emerged that the fugitive had been deported four times, twice in 2009, and again in 2012 and 2016. The manhunt ensued following Oropesa's alleged killing of five of his neighbors after reportedly being asked to stop shooting his firearm. Authorities indicated that four adults were found dead at the scene while one child died at the hospital later. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-03/gun-rights-advocates-renew-legal-fight-over-californias-10-day-wait-on-firearm-purchases Gun rights advocates renew legal fight over California’s 10-day wait for firearm buyers Renewing a legal battle that some had considered settled, gun rights advocates filed a federal lawsuit this week challenging a California law that places a 10-day waiting period on most firearm purchases. The law, which requires people to wait the prescribed “cooling off” period even if they’ve passed a more immediate background check, is aimed in part at deterring people from rushing to harm themselves or others with newly purchased weapons during periods of sudden distress or anger. Gun control advocates and state officials say the law reduces gun violence, including suicides, and the law has been upheld in the face of legal challenges before — including by the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 2018 declined to hear an appeal to a lower court decision upholding it. However, things have changed since the high court ruled last year — in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen — that restrictions on firearms violate the 2nd Amendment if they aren’t deeply rooted in the nation’s history or analogous to some historical rule. According to the San Diego gun owners and advocacy groups suing the state, the high court’s 2018 decision allowing the waiting period law to stand was “abrogated,” or undone, by its more recent Bruen decision, and, therefore, the law is unconstitutional under the court’s newer historical standard. The plaintiffs argue enforcement of the law “prevents law-abiding people from taking possession of lawfully acquired firearms for immediate self-defense and other lawful purposes — even after [state officials] know the individual is eligible to exercise their fundamental, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.” The office of California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said it was reviewing the lawsuit Tuesday but could not otherwise comment. Bonta is the lead defendant in the lawsuit. According to legal experts, the revived challenge reflects how massively the legal landscape around gun laws has changed since President Trump shifted the Supreme Court to the right and the court issued its Bruen decision. It also reflects the increased confidence among gun rights advocates that the high court is ready and willing to overturn more gun laws, the experts said — even those it may have allowed to stand in the past. Jake Charles, an associate professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law and an expert in firearms law, said he was “surprised it took until May of this year” for the waiting period law to be challenged again under Bruen — in part because it is obviously vulnerable. Prior to Bruen, federal courts across the country judged gun laws not only through a historical lens, but by assessing whether they served a well-reasoned purpose of modern government. When the California-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s 10-day waiting period law in 2016, it did so based on such a review. Writing for the court, Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder found that the 10-day waiting period was “a reasonable safety precaution,” and therefore constitutional. Now, however, Bruen has changed the relevant legal analysis and Schroeder’s reasoning is now irrelevant, the plaintiffs argue. The law rvive, they argue, because waiting period laws were not enacted in the country until 1923 — making them too recent to be considered part of the nation’s tradition under Bruen. Gun law experts said it’s a strong argument. Attorneys for California may still argue the law is similar enough to some historical law that didn’t institute a waiting period for purchased weapons but restricted the purchase of them in some other way. The state has already argued that other modern gun laws being challenged — including its bans on assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines — are similar enough to other historical laws to survive Bruen’s test, even if they aren’t exactly the same.

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, May 5th, 2023. Watch out for the revenge of the 5th if you’re into that… or cinco de mayo, take your pick. https://tvpworld.com/69620835/us-navy-deployed-drag-queen-influencer-to-boost-youth-recruitment As part of a recruitment drive aimed at the country’s youth, the U.S. Navy deployed a "drag queen influencer" to assist in boosting lagging numbers in the military. In November of last year Joshua Kelley aka “Harpy Daniels”, who has over 1,300,000 likes on TikTok, revealed that he was to be the Navy’s ‘Digital Ambassador’. Whilst the U.S. Navy only recently revealed about approaching Kelley, the drag queen claims to have danced in drag in front of an audience of service officers on a number of occasions, even sharing one video from 2018 on his Instagram. Kelley was part of a Digital Ambassador initiative that lasted from October 2022 to March 2023, “designed to explore the digital environment to reach a wide range of potential candidates,” a Navy spokesperson told Fox News. The spokesperson also said that the Navy is navigating “the most challenging recruiting environment it has faced since the start of the all-volunteer force.” “The Navy did not compensate YN2 Kelley or any others for being Navy Digital Ambassadors. The pilot has concluded and we are now evaluating the program and how it will exist in the future," the spokesperson added. Regarding his role as Digital Ambassador, Kelley wrote on his Instagram page: “Thank you to the Navy for giving me this opportunity! I don't speak for the Navy but simply sharing my experience in the Navy! Hoorah, and let's go Slay!”. Not only the Navy but more broadly the U.S. military face big problems in convincing young people to join. Only 13 pct of 18-29-year-olds are “highly willing” to join the military, whilst 25 pct declared themselves “somewhat willing” and 26 pct are “not willing at all.” Gender ideology has become a hot topic in the Navy and all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. In March, a group of House Democrats proposed legislation to prevent the Department of Defense from standing in the way of transgender people who want to serve in the military. Some critics have argued that the purpose of the U.S. military is to provide security for the country, not to be a tool for gender ideology politics. Whilst others have suggested that in an unstable world, where a lot of military strategy is played out through bravado, such as with military drills, it is perhaps surprising that the U.S. would do the opposite of striking fear into their enemies. It’s a good thing we have Joshua to scare off said enemies, which ties in nicely for this next story! https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2023-05-03/second-oil-tanker-in-a-week-seized-by-iran-in-gulf-u-s-navy Iran Seizes Second Oil Tanker in a Week in Gulf -U.S. Navy Iran seized a second oil tanker in a week on Wednesday in Gulf waters, and the U.S. State Department called for its release, in the latest escalation in a series of seizures or attacks on commercial vessels in Gulf waters since 2019. The Baa-rain-based Fifth Fleet of the U.S. Navy said the Panama-flagged oil tanker Niovi was seized by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) at 6:20 a.m. (0220 GMT) while passing through the Strait of Hor-mooz. In Iran's first response, Tehran's prosecutor announced the oil tanker was seized on a judicial order following a complaint by a plaintiff, the judiciary's Mizan news agency said. No further details were provided. The incident comes after Iran on Thursday seized a Marshall Islands-flagged oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman called the Advantage Sweet. That tanker is being held by Iranian authorities in Bandar Abbas, the Marshall Islands flag registry said on Tuesday. Maritime security firm Ambrey has said it believed the Advantage Sweet's seizure was in response to a recent seizure via a court order by the United States of an oil cargo aboard the Marshall Islands tanker Suez Rajan. The Niovi oil tanker seized on Wednesday had been travelling from Dubai toward the UAE's Fujairah port when it was forced by IRGCN boats to change course towards Iranian territorial waters, the Navy said. The Niovi last reported its position at 0231 GMT on Wednesday off the coast of Oman in the Strait of Hormuz with the UAE as its destination, Refinitiv ship tracking data showed. According to the International Maritime Organization shipping database,, the Niovi's owner is Grand Financing Co, and the ship is managed by Greece-based Smart Tankers, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Vedant Patel, a deputy spokesperson at the U.S. State Department, told reporters the Biden administration and the "international community" call on Iran and its Navy to release the ships and their crews. "Iran's harassment of vessels and interference with navigational rights in regional and international waters are contrary to international law and disruptive to regional stability and security," Patel said. About a fifth of the world's crude oil and oil products passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point between Iran and Oman, according to data from analytics firm Vortexa. Since 2019, there have been a series of attacks on shipping in the strategic Gulf waters at times of tension between the United States and Iran. Indirect talks between Tehran and Washington to revive Iran's 2015 nuclear pact with world powers have stalled since September over a range of issues, including the Islamic Republic's violent crackdown on popular protests, Tehran's sale of drones to Russia and acceleration of its nuclear program. https://justthenews.com/nation/crime/alleged-texas-killer-captured-following-manhunt Fugitive illegal alien accused of mass killing in Texas captured Authorities on Tuesday apprehended an individual suspected of killing five people in Cleveland, Texas, following a Friday evening altercation. Authorities arrested Francisco Oropesa without incident on Tuesday evening, NBC News reported, citing the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office. His arrest marks an end to the manhunt that had baffled law enforcement for days. Authorities indicated earlier this week that they had "zero leads" as to his whereabouts. As of Monday, it was believed that Oropesa had slipped past a network of roadblocks in the Cleveland area, despite extensive efforts by law enforcement to contain him within a set perimeter. During the manhunt, reports emerged that the fugitive had been deported four times, twice in 2009, and again in 2012 and 2016. The manhunt ensued following Oropesa's alleged killing of five of his neighbors after reportedly being asked to stop shooting his firearm. Authorities indicated that four adults were found dead at the scene while one child died at the hospital later. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-03/gun-rights-advocates-renew-legal-fight-over-californias-10-day-wait-on-firearm-purchases Gun rights advocates renew legal fight over California’s 10-day wait for firearm buyers Renewing a legal battle that some had considered settled, gun rights advocates filed a federal lawsuit this week challenging a California law that places a 10-day waiting period on most firearm purchases. The law, which requires people to wait the prescribed “cooling off” period even if they’ve passed a more immediate background check, is aimed in part at deterring people from rushing to harm themselves or others with newly purchased weapons during periods of sudden distress or anger. Gun control advocates and state officials say the law reduces gun violence, including suicides, and the law has been upheld in the face of legal challenges before — including by the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 2018 declined to hear an appeal to a lower court decision upholding it. However, things have changed since the high court ruled last year — in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen — that restrictions on firearms violate the 2nd Amendment if they aren’t deeply rooted in the nation’s history or analogous to some historical rule. According to the San Diego gun owners and advocacy groups suing the state, the high court’s 2018 decision allowing the waiting period law to stand was “abrogated,” or undone, by its more recent Bruen decision, and, therefore, the law is unconstitutional under the court’s newer historical standard. The plaintiffs argue enforcement of the law “prevents law-abiding people from taking possession of lawfully acquired firearms for immediate self-defense and other lawful purposes — even after [state officials] know the individual is eligible to exercise their fundamental, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.” The office of California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said it was reviewing the lawsuit Tuesday but could not otherwise comment. Bonta is the lead defendant in the lawsuit. According to legal experts, the revived challenge reflects how massively the legal landscape around gun laws has changed since President Trump shifted the Supreme Court to the right and the court issued its Bruen decision. It also reflects the increased confidence among gun rights advocates that the high court is ready and willing to overturn more gun laws, the experts said — even those it may have allowed to stand in the past. Jake Charles, an associate professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law and an expert in firearms law, said he was “surprised it took until May of this year” for the waiting period law to be challenged again under Bruen — in part because it is obviously vulnerable. Prior to Bruen, federal courts across the country judged gun laws not only through a historical lens, but by assessing whether they served a well-reasoned purpose of modern government. When the California-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s 10-day waiting period law in 2016, it did so based on such a review. Writing for the court, Circuit Judge Mary Schroeder found that the 10-day waiting period was “a reasonable safety precaution,” and therefore constitutional. Now, however, Bruen has changed the relevant legal analysis and Schroeder’s reasoning is now irrelevant, the plaintiffs argue. The law rvive, they argue, because waiting period laws were not enacted in the country until 1923 — making them too recent to be considered part of the nation’s tradition under Bruen. Gun law experts said it’s a strong argument. Attorneys for California may still argue the law is similar enough to some historical law that didn’t institute a waiting period for purchased weapons but restricted the purchase of them in some other way. The state has already argued that other modern gun laws being challenged — including its bans on assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines — are similar enough to other historical laws to survive Bruen’s test, even if they aren’t exactly the same.

In today's episode, Christine MacMillan speaks with Ms. Eva Lianne Veldkamp, an IMO Policy Coordinator representing the Commonwealth of Dominica Maritime Registry at the International Maritime Organization. Ms. Veldkamp believes that mariners and seafarers are the real assets of our industry and will always stand tall in support of the human element. Ms. Veldkamp leads a working group for the Center for Ocean Policy and Economics - COPE° on Psychological Safety and Sexual Assault and Harassment in the Maritime Sector. Translating talk into action addressing the psychological welfare and safety of today's mariner.In addition, Ms. Veldkamp is connecting maritime professionals globally in order for them to benefit from the online learning simulators, training, examination, and certification platforms NEMO° and HALO° developed by Northeast Maritime Institute. Serving as a dual-licensed maritime officer, Eva Lianne Veldkamp started her career by crossing the many oceans of our globe on large container vessels.More information about NEMO and COPE:The Center for Ocean Policy and Economics – COPE. COPE° is a facilitator for cogent maritime and ocean policy and economic development project initiatives linking academic, corporate, non-governmental, and governmental partners to create impactful solutions. The working group on psychological safety, bullying, and SASH is the first project that we successfully worked on. The work that they are doing from Dominica Maritime Administration is going beyond just registering vessels. They are continuously improving maritime policy in general in a very efficient way. Dominica Maritime Administration is managed from Fairhaven in the USA by the same people who run Northeast Maritime Institute – College of Maritime Science. This private maritime school also developed NEMO and HALO and online learning, simulation, and examination tools.You can find more information on NEMO here: NEMO° | Online Maritime Courses - Global Maritime Training (northeastmaritimeonline.com)More information about HALO exams and simulators can be found here: HALO° Education Systems - Accessible Learning Tools For All (haloeducation.com) The STCW courses that they currently provide online for seafarers globally can be found here (including prices): All Courses - NEMO° | Online Maritime Courses (northeastmaritimeonline.com)They have several courses available for free as well. These NEMO Professional Development Courses can be found here: https://northeastmaritimeonline.com/professional-development-courses/ . Please feel welcome to try out these courses and forward them to interested people in your network.   Have a Listen & SubscribeThe Women Offshore Podcast can also be found on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, and most podcast apps. Make sure to subscribe to whatever app you use, so that you don't miss out on future episodes.What did you think of the show?Let us know your thoughts by leaving a review on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also reach out by sending us an email at hello@womenoffshore.org.