IMO 2020 Sulphur Cap - Scrubbers - A Country Guide
The following table lists countries which have imposed bans on vessels fitted with open-loop SOx scrubbers calling at their ports, and on the discharge of washwater from these scrubber systems within their port waters. The information in the table, which is not exhaustive, is correct to the best of our knowledge at the time of publication. The table will be updated as and when additional information comes through. Members are recommended to check for any potential adoption of additional requirements and changes to the current regulations prior to their vessels calling at these ports.
If Members have any questions relating to the IMO 2020 sulphur cap, please do not hesitate to get in touch with your usual Club contact who will be pleased to assist you.
Updated 18/10/2019
| Country | Is there a ban on open-loop scrubbers? | If not, is there a ban on the discharge of scrubber wash water within port waters? | Regulations |
| Australia | No, but under review | No, but under review | EPA 2015/0695 (different regs for cruiseships) |
| Belgium | Yes | Yes, within 3nm of coast | No specific provisions |
| China | Yes, as of 01/01/19, in the waters of Inland River ECA, ports within Coastal ECAs and Bohai-rim Sea Area | Yes | Click here for Regulations |
| China - Hong Kong | No | Yes | Air Pollution Control (Ocean Going Vessels) |
| Denmark – Aalborg, Frederecia, Kalundborg | Yes | ||
| Finland – Porvoo | Yes | ||
| France – Port Jerome, Le Havre, Ambes and Seine River | Yes | ||
| Germany – Wesser ports, Elbe ports, Kiel canal ports and Rostock | Yes | Yes, in certain ports and Kiel Canal | § 13 Abs. 7 SeeUmweltverhaltensverordnung |
| Ireland - Dublin, Waterford and Cork | Yes | Yes | Regulations here |
| Italy – Ravenna | Yes | ||
| Japan | No | Yes | No specific provisions are currently available |
| Latvia - Ventspills | Yes | N/A | N/A |
| Lithuania - Klapeida | Yes | N/A | N/A |
| Norway | Yes, as of 01/03/19 | Yes | Amendments to the Norwegian Regulation of 30 May 2012 No. 488 on environmental safety for ships and mobile offshore |
| Panama | Yes | ||
| Russia - Primorsk, St Petersburg | Yes | ||
| Singapore | Yes, as of 01/01/20 | Yes | No specific provisions are currently available |
| Spain – Algeciras, Cartagena and Huelva; Gibraltar | Yes | ||
| Sweden – Brofjorden, Gavle, Norrkoping, Umea, Sundsvall, Skelleftehamn | Yes | ||
| UAE - Abi Dhabi | No | Yes, unless free of pollutants or into an approved facility | Regulations |
| UK – Finnart, Hull | Yes | ||
| UAE - Fujairah | Yes, as of 22/01/19 | Yes |
|
| US - California | Yes | Yes | Ocean Going Vessel (OGV) Fuel Regulation |
| US - Connecticut | Yes | Yes | VGP 2013 Section 6.5.9 Click here |
| US - Hawaii | No | Yes, but reporting has to be in line with 6.7.1 of the 2013 VGP | VGP 2013 Section 6.7.1 'Blanket Section 401' Water Quality Criteria |
Staff Author
UK P&I
Date18/10/2019
Share this
You may also be interested in:
On the 3rd of June 2022 the EU published its 6th package of sanctions against Russia. This circular is not intended to be a comprehensive summary of the EU sanctions against Russia.
Great Lakes vessels trading is typically performed by dry bulk vessels that carry a variety of cargoes including ores, limestone, salt, cement, sand, grain, coal and gypsum. This article provides some insight into commercial shipping on the Great Lakes and some of what one might expect when transiting the area.
The IMO Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) held its 78th session (MEPC 78) remotely from June 6-10, 2022, and this article seeks to summarise the outcomes from MEPC 78.
Just two months after the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022 was introduced into Congress (see our previous article here), the Federal Maritime Committee (FMC) Fact Finding Final Report #29, Effects of Covid-19 Pandemic on the U.S