Latest news with #HugoTagholm
Euronews
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Euronews
UK unveils ‘golden opportunity' for wider ban on bottom trawling
Conservationists are celebrating a proposal from the UK government to ban bottom trawling in dozens more marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs are sections of the ocean that a country aims to protect because they are of particular ecological importance. Bottom trawling - a destructive type of fishing that drags weighted nets across the seafloor - is allowed in many of these sensitive areas. Currently, only four of the UK's 377 MPAs are fully protected from bottom-towed fishing gear - an area covering 18,000 square kilometres. A new proposal announced at the start of the third United Nations Oceans Conference (UNOC) in Nice would see an additional 30,000km2 protected, with the ban extended to 41 MPAs. Size wise, that's roughly half of English MPAs. 'Bottom trawling is damaging our precious marine wildlife and habitats. Without urgent action, our oceans will be irreversibly destroyed - depriving us, and generations to come, of the sea life on which we all enjoy,' Environment Secretary Steve Reed said in a statement this morning. 'The government is taking decisive action to ban destructive bottom trawling where appropriate.' Its first step is a consultation, launching today (9 June) until 1 September, which will invite marine and fisheries stakeholders to share their views and give evidence about the proposed ban. If adopted, the measures would protect marine habitats ranging from subtidal sandbanks to gravels to muds, and support important marine species such as lobster, clams, soft corals and langoustines, the government says. 'Destructive bottom trawling has no place in marine protected areas. These proposals provide a golden opportunity to safeguard these vital marine sanctuaries from the most damaging fishing practices,' says Hugo Tagholm, Executive Director of the ocean advocacy group Oceana UK. 'If these whole-site bans are fully implemented, this could provide an invaluable and urgently needed lifeline for England's seas, which are so crucial for wildlife and climate resilience.' Joan Edwards, Director of Policy and Public Affairs at The Wildlife Trusts, also emphasises that properly protecting MPAs is 'a win-win for both nature and the climate.' 'Removing this pressure is a great step forward towards protecting not only the wildlife and fish stocks within those sites, but also the carbon stored in the seabed muds beneath,' she says. Still, conservationists are anxious to ensure promising words are backed by action, even after the spotlight of UNOC3 has dimmed. 'The government should now strengthen the ban to cover all parts of our marine protected areas, and other types of destructive industrial fishing like supertrawlers and fly-shooters. Only this will ensure our marine ecosystems are protected in reality - not only on paper,' comments Ariana Densham, Head of Oceans at Greenpeace UK. Clare Brook, CEO of Blue Marine Foundation, calls the announcement 'highly encouraging and very welcome. If delivered (and remember this is a consultation) it will mean that England's offshore MPAs are at last given the protection they claim.' The ocean conservation charity is making waves with the release of its satirical short film featuring Stephen Fry and White Lotus star Theo James. The Bottom Line takes place in a fine dining restaurant, where James's character is presented with the gruesome bycatch behind his 'sustainable' hake order. 'As a keen diver, I've long been captivated by the ocean and been horrified by the impact humans are having on it. Having had a load of bycatch dumped on me, it really drove home just how grotesque and devastating the practice of bottom trawling is,' said James, who is an ambassador for the charity alongside Fry. "Conservation policy is awash with shiny new announcements and impressive sounding targets whereas what is needed is actual delivery,' Jonny Hughes, Senior Policy Manager at Blue Marine Foundation, said of today's news. 'This, at first glance, seems to be about delivering conservation. We need to see the full details but initial reading is positive." France's stance on bottom trawling is also under review. The co-host of UNOC has announced strict protection measures for 4 per cent of its mainland waters (15,000 square kilometres), banning harmful human activities including bottom trawling. But the announcement falls short of implementing a comprehensive ban on bottom trawling across all MPAs, environmental lawyers note. 'This is an important turning point,' ClientEarth CEO Laura Clarke said of the UK and French updates. 'We welcome these pledges at UNOC - and we would like to see more of them. We also need to see these bans effectively enforced.' Last year, Greece became the first European country to announce a ban on bottom trawling in its protected areas, starting with its three national marine parks by 2026. Sweden has gone a step further by promising to ban the damaging practice in all its territorial waters as of next month. The EU's 2023 Marie Action Plan calls on member states to phase out bottom trawling in all MPAs by 2030. But recent research from NGOs Oceana, Seas At Risk and ClientEarth revealed that no EU country currently has a comprehensive plan in place to phase out destructive fishing practices in these protected areas. As momentum builds, environmental organisations are pressuring all European countries to follow suit. ClientEarth, Oceana, Danish NGO Danmarks Naturfredningsforening and the Seas at Risk coalition last week threatened legal action against Denmark, the Netherlands and Spain for allowing widespread bottom trawling in its MPAs. World leaders are gathering in the French city of Nice on Monday for the United Nations Ocean Conference. It comes as just 2.7 per cent of the world's oceans are effectively protected from extractive activities, according to the non-profit Marine Conservation Institute. This is far short of the target agreed by nearly 200 countries in 2022 to protect 30 per cent of the the world's oceans by 2030. With increasing threats from climate change, overuse of marine resources and pollution, leading marine experts are calling on governments to use this opportunity to protect fragile underwater ecosystems. Without a healthy ocean, they warn, wider climate goals will remain out of reach. Taking place from 9 to 13 June, it is the largest ocean summit ever organised and could provide a vital chance for key agreements to be finalised, promises to be delivered upon, and new pledges to be made. Co-chaired by France and Costa Rica, the conference aims to confront the deepening global ocean emergency. Scientists warn that climate change, plastic pollution, the loss of ecosystems and the overuse of marine resources are all pushing our oceans to the point of no return. In an effort to spark collaboration and subsequent solutions to some of these problems, UNOC is bringing together world leaders, scientists, activists and businesses. Specifically, it focuses on the implementation of UN Sustainable Development Goal 14: Life Below Water. The overarching theme of this particular conference is 'accelerating action and mobilising all actors to conserve and sustainably use the ocean'. This is the third UN Ocean Conference, and over 10,000 people will be in attendance. It is set to welcome leaders like Brazil's Luiz Inácio Lula and France's President Emmanuel Macron will be in the spotlight. The week-long talks will end with the adoption of a political declaration. While this won't be legally binding, it sets the tone for future global ambition, serving as a signal to governments, investors and civil society and hopefully motivating support for new initiatives. UNOC identifies three key priorities for the declaration: defending ocean ecosystems, sustainable ocean economies and accelerating actions. A successful conference would result in a final and signed political declaration which would be called the Nice Ocean Action Plan. More ratifications of the landmark UN High Seas Treaty are also expected as efforts intensify to ensure its implementation. A strong outcome could also help lay the groundwork for more biodiversity and climate wins at COP30 in Brazil later this year. France is co-hosting the conference with Costa Rica, and it is being held in Nice on the country's Mediterranean coast. Ahead of the summit, President Macron and the French government have been encouraging countries to improve ocean protection. And on Sunday, Macron called on nations to commit to a mortorium on deep-sea exploration. "I want us to reach an agreement for the entire planet. Because it's completely crazy. It's completely crazy to go and exploit, to go and drill in a place we don't know. It's frenzied madness," he said. Macron said around 30 heads of state and government have committed to a moratorium on deep-sea exploitation. 'We've…had the leadership from the French government engaging with countries to increase the ratification for the BBNJ (UN High Seas Treaty),' says Rita El Zaghloul, director of the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People. In late May, the European Union and six of its member states formally ratified the High Seas Treaty after France and Spain did so earlier this year. It is hoped that this international agreement will garner enough ratifications before the end of the summit to enter into force as international law. France has been actively leading efforts to engage with countries on ocean protection, El Zaghloul adds, to ensure that the conference ends with some concrete results. Earlier this year, Chile and France announced the '100 per cent Alliance', urging coastal and ocean states to commit to 100 per cent sustainable management of their national ocean areas. But Enric Sala, National Geographic explorer in residence and founder of Pristine Seas, emphasises that France has to be a 'leader in actions, not just words'. 'France is the co-chair of the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People, committing to at least 30 per cent of the ocean protected by 2030,' he explains, 'and in France…there are all these protected areas, but most of these protected areas are open to commercial fishing, including bottom trawling.' France, the conference co-host, claims to have surpassed the 30 per cent target for marine protection. But environmental groups say only 3 per cent of French waters are fully protected from harmful activities like bottom trawling and industrial fishing. In 2024 alone, more than 100 bottom-trawling vessels were recorded spending over 17,000 hours fishing within France's six marine nature parks, according to ocean advocacy group Oceana. Sala says just 1 per cent of French waters are no-take areas that actually allow marine life to recover. These areas also bring huge benefits for tourism, jobs and local, small-scale fishermen. 'Everybody expects President Macron to make some announcements of designation of new marine protected areas that are truly protected. Also, there is a great expectation for President Macron to make some commitment about phasing out bottom trawling in marine protected areas.' That criticism is echoed across the continent. A new World Wildlife Fund report found that although more than 11 per cent of Europe's marine area is designated for protection, just 2 per cent of EU waters have management plans in place. The pledges made both at the conference and before will mean nothing, however, without the funds to back them up. And global marine protection efforts are already critically underfunded. In 2022, nearly 200 countries agreed to designate 30 per cent of the world's oceans as protected areas by 2030. As of 2024, just 8.4 per cent were covered, and only 2.7 per cent have been assessed to be effectively protected - meaning there are regulations and active management in place to ensure minimal or no damaging activities. That latter figure has dropped earlier this year as a result of the Trump Administration's rollback of the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument. Just two countries - Palau and the United Kingdom - have effectively protected more than 30 per cent of their waters, although effectively protected areas in UK waters are overwhelmingly located in remote, overseas territories. Around $15.8 billion (€13.8 billion) a year is needed to achieve the 30 per cent by 2030 target, but a new report by a global coalition of nature NGOs and funders has found that just $1.2 billion (€1.05 billion) is currently being spent. That is a massive funding gap of $14.6 billion (€12.7 billion) - a figure the environmental groups point out is just 0.5 per cent of annual global defence budgets. Brian O'Donnell, director of Campaign for Nature, which led on the finance gap analysis, says protecting the ocean is 'no longer just an ecological imperative - it's an economic one.' 'For just $15.8 billion (€13.8 billion) a year, we can protect one of our planet's most valuable assets while avoiding costs and unlocking long-term returns in the tens of billions.' The report's authors say it sends a clear message ahead of UNOC: governments can't afford to underinvest in ocean protection. And the conference is a critical opportunity to build momentum, ratify key international agreements and recognise the value of the ocean.
Euronews
25-03-2025
- Science
- Euronews
Bottom trawling in European waters costs society up to €11bn a year, new study finds
ADVERTISEMENT Bottom trawling in European waters costs society up to €10.8 billion each year, according to a first-of-its-kind study released today. It found that this cost is largely due to carbon dioxide emissions from disturbed sediments on the seafloor. 'We discovered recently that bottom trawling, by churning up the sediments on the seafloor, releases CO2 on the scale of global aviation and that half of those underwater emissions will end up in the atmosphere,' explains Enric Sala, National Geographic Explorer in Residence and one of the authors of this report. Bottom trawling is a destructive fishing practice which involves dragging a net - some so large it could fit a Boeing 747 plane - across the seafloor to catch fish. It disturbs sediment, destroys marine habitats and far more than just the target species gets caught in these nets. 'The fishing lobby argues for the benefits that bottom trawling provides for society, jobs, economic revenue and food,' Sala adds, 'but they never mention the costs.' Related NGOs and fishermen call for urgent action to end bottom trawling in marine protected areas Ocean dumping or climate solution? Inside the race to lock away planet-warming carbon in our seas So, he says, for the first time they decided to calculate the costs and benefits of this fishing practice to both the industry and society at large. The result? The costs of bottom trawling far exceed the benefits. What is the cost of bottom trawling in Europe's waters? The study is the first to measure the full economic cost of bottom trawling in European waters - including the EU, UK, Norway and Iceland. It shows that this damaging fishing practice imposes somewhere between €330 million and €10.8 billion in annual costs to society. The range of estimates in the study is so large because there is no globally agreed value on the cost of a tonne of carbon. But even at the lower end of the estimate, Sala says 'society still loses'. While bottom trawling does support jobs across the continent, bringing in both a source of food and revenue, the study's authors say climate costs, environmental impacts and issues for small-scale fishermen outweigh these benefits. Forbidding this fishing practice in marine protected areas (MPAs), they add, would benefit marine life, the climate and even the fishing industry. Many fishermen are already on board with the fight for tougher restrictions . Small-scale, sustainable fishers are seeing their livelihoods ripped away along with the reefs and seagrass meadows that are bulldozed by the weighted nets. Hugo Tagholm Executive director of Oceana UK 'Small-scale, sustainable fishers are seeing their livelihoods ripped away along with the reefs and seagrass meadows that are bulldozed by the weighted nets,' says Hugo Tagholm, executive director of Oceana UK. 'And all this to line the pockets of a few. The truth is that thriving marine wildlife supports flourishing coastal communities.' Bally Philp is the national coordinator for the Scottish Creel Fishermen's Federation which represents small-scale, inshore fishing vessels, line fishing vessels and hand-diving vessels. 'These are some of the most low-impact and highly selective fishing methods,' he explains. 'They actually already employ the majority of fishermen.' ADVERTISEMENT Philp says that types of gear are often mutually exclusive. Allowing bottom trawling in areas means other forms of fishing, like hand diving for scallops or putting pots on the seabed, can't take place. If you were to restrict trawling in the area three miles from the Scottish coast alone, he adds, the country could double its number of fishermen and the amount of revenue generated by fisheries. 'We could do it without catching an extra fish.' 'Citizens pay the cost of government subsidies' The study's authors also point out that European taxpayers are funding the destruction of their own oceans. ADVERTISEMENT European governments spend an estimated €1.3 billion on subsidies for bottom trawling every year, they say, a figure that is nearly equivalent to the value of the jobs the industry creates. Italy, Norway, Denmark, Great Britain and Sweden offer the highest amounts. In some countries, researchers even found that bottom trawling wouldn't be profitable for the companies doing it without these subsidies . 'Our analysis found that society always loses to industry when it comes to bottom trawling. Industry makes a profit only because it externalises its cost,' Sala says. Citizens pay the cost of government subsidies which come from taxpayers' hard-earned money. Enric Sala National Geographic Explorer in Residence and one of the authors of this report 'Citizens pay the cost of government subsidies which come from taxpayers' hard-earned money.' ADVERTISEMENT In France, says director of NGO BLOOM Claire Nouvian, the government has been subsidising trawling for decades. Related Why is France protesting a UK ban on bottom trawling in protected areas? 'The transition away from trawling could have happened and should have happened,' she argues, 'and it would have cost nothing because we could have organised it, but we didn't.' Research from BLOOM and French researchers from L'Institut Agro and the French Natural History Museum has found that around 800 French bottom trawling vessels destroy roughly 670,000 square kilometres of seabed each year - an area bigger than France itself. Despite what Nouvian calls the country's 'love affair' with this destructive fishing practice, President Emmanuel Macron is convening the SOS Ocean summit at the end of March in Paris. It will together global thought leaders, policymakers, scientists, and ocean advocates to create a roadmap to the UN Oceans conference being held in Nice in June this year. ADVERTISEMENT Ahead of these events, Macron announced €700 million for the fishing industry to modernise its fleets, strengthen food sovereignty and more. 'The trawling lobby was blasting with joy, they were so happy,' Nouvian claims. 'They were jumping around because they could not believe that money was coming from the offshore wind tax going straight into their pockets.' Redirecting subsidies away from trawling could provide a pathway for financing a fair transition for the fishing industry, according to the report. A fifth of EU bottom trawling happens in marine protected areas The study comes as a coalition of civil society organisations calls for governments in Europe to ban bottom trawling in MPAs. ADVERTISEMENT These areas are meant to be safe havens for marine life but around 13 per cent of Europe's bottom trawling happens within their borders - a figure that rises to 20 per cent in the EU. 'The solution is obvious. Let's start by eliminating bottom trawling in marine protected areas and not relocating that effort elsewhere,' Sala says. 'That will work for marine life, the climate and society at large. It would also allow marine protected areas to fulfil their goal to protect marine life, and eventually help replenish nearby fishing grounds.' EU member states are already supposed to be working to phase out bottom trawling in MPAs by 2030. So far, Greece and Sweden are the only countries to have announced bans or strong restrictions. ADVERTISEMENT Related Greece becomes the first country in Europe to ban bottom trawling in marine protected areas The bloc's nature laws and international biodiversity commitments bind member states to rigorously protect these supposed safe havens for marine life. They were also given a deadline last year for submitting roadmaps to outline how they plan to phase out destructive fishing in these areas. 'A proper interpretation of the Habitats Directive would mean that bottom trawling should already not be tolerated in EU Marine Protected Areas,' says John Condon, wildlife lawyer at ClientEarth. 'We heard from Commissioner Kadis (Costas Kadis, European Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans) this month that he is committed to the full enforcement of our nature laws - which we hope means we can expect bottom trawling to be conclusively phased out of EU MPAs designed to protect seabed ecosystems.' But a recent analysis from marine NGOs Oceana, Seas At Risk and ClientEarth found that no EU country has comprehensive plans to phase out destructive fishing practices in MPAs by the end of the decade. ADVERTISEMENT More than half failed to submit a roadmap. Of those that did, Estonia refused to disclose what was in this roadmap and none had comprehensive plans to phase out destructive fishing practices. As a result, the coalition of marine NGOs is taking governments to court in France , Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden for infringing EU nature laws by failing to protect their MPAs against the impacts of bottom trawling.
Euronews
11-03-2025
- General
- Euronews
‘It's a budget-buster': Why Trump wants to spend €40 million a year shooting owls
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency is assessing what counter pollution action is needed, as people voice concern for porpoises and seabirds. ADVERTISEMENT The collision of two ships off the east coast of England has created an environmental 'tragedy' in the North Sea, wildlife experts warn. Fires are still burning on an oil tanker carrying jet fuel and the cargo ship loaded with toxic chemicals that crashed into it yesterday morning (10 March) off the coast of East Yorkshire. One crew member from the cargo ship is missing and the search for them has sadly been called off, according to an update from HM Coastguard this morning. The other 36 crew members from both vessels were safely rescued, with one in hospital. An assessment of what counter pollution response will be necessary is being carried out by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. While it's too early to gauge the extent of the damage, environmental groups have been sharing their concerns about the incident. Related Switzerland told it must do more to comply with landmark climate ruling by Council of Europe What is jet fuel and what damage can it do at sea? The oil tanker - MV Stena Immaculate - was carrying jet fuel for the US government when it was struck, operator and joint owner US logistics firm Crowley confirmed. Some of that aviation fuel has been spilling into the sea since the crash at around 10am GMT yesterday. Jet fuel is a kerosene-based liquid with a high boiling point, meaning it evaporates slowly. Data from ship tracking site MarineTraffic indicates the tanker was partially laden, with other sources showing it held 140,000 barrels of the aviation fuel. The fire on Stena Immaculate will burn off some of the fuel. And bacteria in the sea can break down jet fuel, experts say. But that still leaves an unknown amount of a substance toxic to marine life pouring into a sensitive environment. What wildlife lives in the area where the crash occurred? 'We are now seeing toxic oil pouring from the 183 metre-long tanker into - or very near - a sensitive area designated to protect declining harbour porpoises,' Hugo Tagholm, executive director of Oceana UK, tells Euronews Green. 'As these animals are forced to come to the surface to breathe, they risk inhaling poisonous fumes and choking on oil.' Oceana says it believes the collision took place in or near two protected areas: the Southern North Sea marine protected area, designated for harbour porpoise, and the Holderness Offshore marine protected area, marked out for seafloor habitats. Smoke billows from a vessel after a cargo ship hit a tanker carrying jet fuel off eastern England on Monday, 10 March, 2025. Bartek Śmiałek via AP There are also breeding seal colonies and numerous species of seabirds along the coast which could be impacted by pollution. Dave O'Hara, senior site manager at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Bempton Cliffs, told the BBC that the area is home to England's largest gannet colony and internationally important populations of seabirds. Around half a million seabirds, including Gannets, Kittiwakes, Guillemots, Razorbills and Puffins breed in the area each year, on the 122-metre-high chalk cliffs. What damage could a sodium cyanide leak do in the North Sea? The cargo vessel, Portugal-flagged container ship Solong, was also carrying a dangerous load: 15 containers of sodium cyanide, according to Lloyd's List intelligence. It is not yet clear whether the chemical, which is highly water-soluble, has leaked into the sea. ADVERTISEMENT Dr Paul Johnston, a senior scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at Exeter University, says the organisation is extremely concerned about 'multiple toxic hazards'. 'While we don't know about the status of the containers holding sodium cyanide, we're dealing with a highly toxic chemical that could cause serious harm. 'Any release of bunker fuel could also pose serious risks to nearby nature sanctuaries,' he adds. 'Authorities need to urgently assess the situation and put in place measures to contain the release of jet fuel and any other toxic substances from the two vessels where possible. We must hope an environmental disaster can be averted.' ADVERTISEMENT Local wildlife groups offer their services Environmental organisations big and small have been responding to the incident, with local residents also keen to assist. Cleethorpes Wildlife Rescue, a volunteer-led organisation based in a nearby town on the Humber Estuary, has convened to discuss the care it can provide if oiled wildlife reach Cleethorpes Beach. 'We are currently adapting our oil spill response protocols - originally designed for factory spills - to ensure we are prepared for this incident,' the group said in a post on Facebook. It has set up a dedicated oiled wildlife hotline, and is urging members of the public to call this number (01472 472662) if they encounter an affected animal, rather than attempting to handle it personally. ADVERTISEMENT Hundreds of people have shared or commented on the post to offer their help, including one woman who volunteered during the last major oil spill in UK waters, when the Sea Empress tanker ran aground at Milford Haven, Wales, in 1996. Incident shows dangers of 'Big Oil' dominance While environmental groups are concerned with the immediate impact on the marine ecosystem, some also say the incident spotlights the risks of fossil fuels. 'This tragic event shows once again that spills occur everywhere Big Oil goes, be it drilling the ocean floor or transporting fossil fuels around the world,' says Tagholm. 'Local livelihoods could well be threatened in the North East, since oil contamination can impact commercial fish populations, along with the shellfish industry, in addition to the potential impacts on human health. ADVERTISEMENT 'We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the destruction this industry causes. Ending the era of Big Oil and building a future powered by clean, renewable energy is paramount, for UK seas, for our communities and our future.'
Euronews
11-03-2025
- General
- Euronews
Marine animals could ‘choke on oil' after UK crash, experts warn
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency is assessing what counter pollution action is needed, as people voice concern for porpoises and seabirds. ADVERTISEMENT The collision of two ships off the east coast of England has created an environmental 'tragedy' in the North Sea, wildlife experts warn. Fires are still burning on an oil tanker carrying jet fuel and the cargo ship loaded with toxic chemicals that crashed into it yesterday morning (10 March) off the coast of East Yorkshire. One crew member from the cargo ship is missing and the search for them has sadly been called off, according to an update from HM Coastguard this morning. The other 36 crew members from both vessels were safely rescued, with one in hospital. An assessment of what counter pollution response will be necessary is being carried out by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. While it's too early to gauge the extent of the damage, environmental groups have been sharing their concerns about the incident. What is jet fuel and what damage can it do at sea? The oil tanker - MV Stena Immaculate - was carrying jet fuel for the US government when it was struck, operator and joint owner US logistics firm Crowley confirmed. Some of that aviation fuel has been spilling into the sea since the crash at around 10am GMT yesterday. Jet fuel is a kerosene-based liquid with a high boiling point, meaning it evaporates slowly. Data from ship tracking site MarineTraffic indicates the tanker was partially laden, with other sources showing it held 140,000 barrels of the aviation fuel. The fire on Stena Immaculate will burn off some of the fuel. And bacteria in the sea can break down jet fuel, experts say. But that still leaves an unknown amount of a substance toxic to marine life pouring into a sensitive environment. What wildlife lives in the area where the crash occurred? 'We are now seeing toxic oil pouring from the 183 metre-long tanker into - or very near - a sensitive area designated to protect declining harbour porpoises,' Hugo Tagholm, executive director of Oceana UK, tells Euronews Green. 'As these animals are forced to come to the surface to breathe, they risk inhaling poisonous fumes and choking on oil.' Oceana says it believes the collision took place in or near two protected areas: the Southern North Sea marine protected area, designated for harbour porpoise, and the Holderness Offshore marine protected area, marked out for seafloor habitats. There are also breeding seal colonies and numerous species of seabirds along the coast which could be impacted by pollution. Dave O'Hara, senior site manager at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Bempton Cliffs, told the BBC that the area is home to England's largest gannet colony and internationally important populations of seabirds. Around half a million seabirds, including Gannets, Kittiwakes, Guillemots, Razorbills and Puffins breed in the area each year, on the 122-metre-high chalk cliffs. What damage could a sodium cyanide leak do in the North Sea? The cargo vessel, Portugal-flagged container ship Solong, was also carrying a dangerous load: 15 containers of sodium cyanide, according to Lloyd's List intelligence. It is not yet clear whether the chemical, which is highly water-soluble, has leaked into the sea. ADVERTISEMENT Dr Paul Johnston, a senior scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at Exeter University, says the organisation is extremely concerned about 'multiple toxic hazards'. 'While we don't know about the status of the containers holding sodium cyanide, we're dealing with a highly toxic chemical that could cause serious harm. 'Any release of bunker fuel could also pose serious risks to nearby nature sanctuaries,' he adds. 'Authorities need to urgently assess the situation and put in place measures to contain the release of jet fuel and any other toxic substances from the two vessels where possible. We must hope an environmental disaster can be averted.' ADVERTISEMENT Local wildlife groups offer their services Environmental organisations big and small have been responding to the incident, with local residents also keen to assist. Cleethorpes Wildlife Rescue, a volunteer-led organisation based in a nearby town on the Humber Estuary, has convened to discuss the care it can provide if oiled wildlife reach Cleethorpes Beach. 'We are currently adapting our oil spill response protocols - originally designed for factory spills - to ensure we are prepared for this incident,' the group said in a post on Facebook. It has set up a dedicated oiled wildlife hotline, and is urging members of the public to call this number (01472 472662) if they encounter an affected animal, rather than attempting to handle it personally. ADVERTISEMENT Hundreds of people have shared or commented on the post to offer their help, including one woman who volunteered during the last major oil spill in UK waters, when the Sea Empress tanker ran aground at Milford Haven, Wales, in 1996. Incident shows dangers of 'Big Oil' dominance While environmental groups are concerned with the immediate impact on the marine ecosystem, some also say the incident spotlights the risks of fossil fuels. 'This tragic event shows once again that spills occur everywhere Big Oil goes, be it drilling the ocean floor or transporting fossil fuels around the world,' says Tagholm. 'Local livelihoods could well be threatened in the North East, since oil contamination can impact commercial fish populations, along with the shellfish industry, in addition to the potential impacts on human health. ADVERTISEMENT 'We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the destruction this industry causes. Ending the era of Big Oil and building a future powered by clean, renewable energy is paramount, for UK seas, for our communities and our future.'
Euronews
11-03-2025
- General
- Euronews
Environmental groups warn of ‘multiple toxic hazards' after North Sea ship crash
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency is assessing what counter pollution action is needed, as people voice concern for porpoises and seabirds. ADVERTISEMENT The collision of two ships off the east coast of England has created an environmental 'tragedy' in the North Sea, wildlife experts warn. Fires are still burning on an oil tanker carrying jet fuel and the cargo ship loaded with toxic chemicals that crashed into it yesterday morning (10 March) off the coast of East Yorkshire. One crew member from the cargo ship is missing and the search for them has sadly been called off, according to an update from HM Coastguard this morning. The other 36 crew members from both vessels were safely rescued, with one in hospital. An assessment of what counter pollution response will be necessary is being carried out by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. While it's too early to gauge the extent of the damage, environmental groups have been sharing their concerns about the incident. Related Switzerland told it must do more to comply with landmark climate ruling by Council of Europe What is jet fuel and what damage can it do at sea? The oil tanker - MV Stena Immaculate - was carrying jet fuel for the US government when it was struck, operator and joint owner US logistics firm Crowley confirmed. Some of that aviation fuel has been spilling into the sea since the crash at around 10am GMT yesterday. Jet fuel is a kerosene-based liquid with a high boiling point, meaning it evaporates slowly. Data from ship tracking site MarineTraffic indicates the tanker was partially laden, with other sources showing it held 140,000 barrels of the aviation fuel. The fire on Stena Immaculate will burn off some of the fuel. And bacteria in the sea can break down jet fuel, experts say. But that still leaves an unknown amount of a substance toxic to marine life pouring into a sensitive environment. What wildlife lives in the area where the crash occurred? 'We are now seeing toxic oil pouring from the 183 metre-long tanker into - or very near - a sensitive area designated to protect declining harbour porpoises,' Hugo Tagholm, executive director of Oceana UK, tells Euronews Green. 'As these animals are forced to come to the surface to breathe, they risk inhaling poisonous fumes and choking on oil.' Oceana says it believes the collision took place in or near two protected areas: the Southern North Sea marine protected area, designated for harbour porpoise, and the Holderness Offshore marine protected area, marked out for seafloor habitats. There are also breeding seal colonies and numerous species of seabirds along the coast which could be impacted by pollution. Dave O'Hara, senior site manager at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Bempton Cliffs, told the BBC that the area is home to England's largest gannet colony and internationally important populations of seabirds. Around half a million seabirds, including Gannets, Kittiwakes, Guillemots, Razorbills and Puffins breed in the area each year, on the 122-metre-high chalk cliffs. What damage could a sodium cyanide leak do in the North Sea? The cargo vessel, Portugal-flagged container ship Solong, was also carrying a dangerous load: 15 containers of sodium cyanide, according to Lloyd's List intelligence. It is not yet clear whether the chemical, which is highly water-soluble, has leaked into the sea. ADVERTISEMENT Dr Paul Johnston, a senior scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at Exeter University, says the organisation is extremely concerned about 'multiple toxic hazards'. 'While we don't know about the status of the containers holding sodium cyanide, we're dealing with a highly toxic chemical that could cause serious harm. 'Any release of bunker fuel could also pose serious risks to nearby nature sanctuaries,' he adds. 'Authorities need to urgently assess the situation and put in place measures to contain the release of jet fuel and any other toxic substances from the two vessels where possible. We must hope an environmental disaster can be averted.' ADVERTISEMENT Local wildlife groups offer their services Environmental organisations big and small have been responding to the incident, with local residents also keen to assist. Cleethorpes Wildlife Rescue, a volunteer-led organisation based in a nearby town on the Humber Estuary, has convened to discuss the care it can provide if oiled wildlife reach Cleethorpes Beach. 'We are currently adapting our oil spill response protocols - originally designed for factory spills - to ensure we are prepared for this incident,' the group said in a post on Facebook. It has set up a dedicated oiled wildlife hotline, and is urging members of the public to call this number (01472 472662) if they encounter an affected animal, rather than attempting to handle it personally. ADVERTISEMENT Hundreds of people have shared or commented on the post to offer their help, including one woman who volunteered during the last major oil spill in UK waters, when the Sea Empress tanker ran aground at Milford Haven, Wales, in 1996. Incident shows dangers of 'Big Oil' dominance While environmental groups are concerned with the immediate impact on the marine ecosystem, some also say the incident spotlights the risks of fossil fuels. 'This tragic event shows once again that spills occur everywhere Big Oil goes, be it drilling the ocean floor or transporting fossil fuels around the world,' says Tagholm. 'Local livelihoods could well be threatened in the North East, since oil contamination can impact commercial fish populations, along with the shellfish industry, in addition to the potential impacts on human health. ADVERTISEMENT 'We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the destruction this industry causes. Ending the era of Big Oil and building a future powered by clean, renewable energy is paramount, for UK seas, for our communities and our future.'
