without distortion of competition port or maritime

Need to reduce CO2 emissions. It is obvious. Maritime transport, although it does contribute to a minor share of global emissions, must take part in the collective effort. We, French shipowners, are satisfied. This is not a reason to do anything. In a sector as global and fluctuating than ours and a problem also fledgling solutions, pragmatism must prevail.

Europe Board currently on inclusion of maritime transport in the exchange of "rights to pollute" device ("emission trading scheme": ETS) which exists for the industry to the ground and soon for air transport. A "copy - paste" offering of thinking, of course, but that is not so guaranteed efficiency, on the contrary.

First, there is something disturbing to trade in rights to pollute! " It is as if pollute the planet was a negotiable fee. Look more closely, this "ETS" is a plant to gas, and not just greenhouse, as it is all adapted to the shipping that the tax is migratory birds.

In essence, in effect, the device has all means to avoid.

A European device All the extra traffic (both third while of global traffic) escape the charge. An international convention It would apply only to States which have ratified it. It would therefore develop carjackings trafficking between States non-parties, leaving it to the coasting trade between States signatories to pay for other. Typically, China and the India keep join and promote flows to a few ports at the gates of Europe. This redistribution of maritime flows will have no effect on the volume of CO2 emitted. However, it will be devastating to the ports of the virtuous, in particular European States. This ETS is a green, but bureaucratic and inappropriate concept: as firing a bullet in the foot... Marine.

Let us look at the goals. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and repair as much as possible the damage so far to the planet. If the ETS gives good (and green) consciousness, it reaches into nothing these fundamental goals.

The bulk of emissions comes precisely from the Earth. We must also reduce emissions at sea and we will reduce. But, while we diviserions our emissions by two, we would have saved only a small per cent and a half of overall emissions.

Left, therefore, to be "green", we "eco-logical"!

Reduce, even by a few points only, land-based emissions, which constitute 97 of global emissions, would not more sensible And developing States to allow the more emitters such as China, to reduce their wouldn't be good administration

What to do then Tax! Tax smart tax "assigned", tax, tax, tax international. How Simply "at the pump."

Each year, the maritime transport consumes 400 million tonnes of fuel. If for each tonne of fuel a lump-sum tax was collected by the provider and paid to an international fund for compensation, billions of dollars would be so collected. International dimension, this tax would apply to all without discrimination... without distortion of competition port or maritime.

Statutorily, the Fund, where bicameral States, would fund research in terrestrial renewable energy, studies on the uptake of CO2, the improvement continues of the energy efficiency of our vessels, the remediation of nature... More transmitters in developing countries would be the first beneficiaries: it would be a powerful incentive to ratify the international convention on the establishment of this Fund.

A Danish proposal to this effect has been made on the table of the international maritime organization, the specialized Committee met from 6 to 10 October to study the contributions. Or quick solution in this Chamber, Europe will force its own device. It is therefore urgent to think. It is therefore urgent to choose!