Messina criticises the EU over the ETS, ‘but the proposed revision is an opportunity’
The president of Assarmatori: ‘We are in favour of nuclear propulsion for ships.’ On the Strait of Hormuz: ‘We reject any suggestion of a toll.’
Key points
Assarmatori has criticised the EU Commission over the ETS taxation of the maritime sector, which, according to the association’s president, Stefano Messina, needs to be radically overhauled, given that suspending it ‘is a pipe dream’. The aim is, among other things, to secure ‘an automatic support mechanism for the purchase of alternative and clean fuels’ through revenue from the Emissions Trading System, whilst also focusing nuclear propulsion, which is more suited to the Italian maritime sector than electric propulsion, favoured by some Northern European countries. Turning to the international political scene, Messina rejects any suggestion of toll payments in the Strait of Hormuz.
Opening the Assarmatori meeting, Messina noted that ‘the European Commission’s proposal to revise the ETS scheme is expected in July, and we are facing a perhaps once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to limit the damage caused by what is effectively an untimely, unfair, disproportionate and, above all, pointless, even for the very purposes of decarbonisation’. Europe, he adds, “seems to be living in a bubble because it continues to tighten existing regulations as if it were oblivious to the global geopolitical context and were not, on the contrary, called upon to protect the competitiveness of European businesses rather than undermining them. The damage to the automotive sector is emblematic, and we cannot afford to lose any more key parts of our industry’.
“Unilateral EU measures affecting industries and citizens”
Messina points out that shipowners have asked for a suspension, “but officials from the Commission’s Climate Directorate tell us, ‘bear with it a little longer, and road transport will pay too’.” But what sort of democracy are we talking about? That of a Commission where officials impose unilateral positions on politicians that have a drastic impact on industries and therefore on citizens. Decisions that cut to the quick of Member States, yet without the latter having the necessary leverage to change course’. Decisions, he points out, “often championed by highly organised and structured pressure groups, which receive substantial funding from countries that are among the world’s biggest polluters”.
We need to ensure, says Messina, that the larger islands are excluded from the ETS scheme. ‘We are talking here about territorial continuity, citizens’ mobility, the supply of goods, tourism: in a word, social cohesion. Finally, an automatic mechanism to support the purchase of alternative and clean fuels needs to be included in the ETS directive. Europe has imposed obligations and taxes but has not implemented any effective financial instruments to encourage the purchase of these fuels.”
“Innovation fund ineffective”
The Innovation Fund (funded by the ETS), Messina adds, “is completely ineffective and is based on a research and development approach that rewards only synthetic fuels and the electrification favoured by Northern Europe. Our proposal, which has also been adopted by the Government, is to have a mechanism similar to that in aviation where, under the ETS, free allowances exist to bridge the price gap between alternative fuels and traditional fuels’. Messina goes on to state that it is inconceivable “that the revenue generated by our sector should not be reinvested in measures aimed at decarbonisation, namely, above all, support for the Motorways of the Sea, and the renewal and refitting of fleets”.
