CIL OF EUROPE EIL DE L

AUTHORITIES OF E U R O P E

DES POUVOIRS L O C A U X

ET R É G I O N A U X DE L'EUROPE

Strasbourg 5 June 1981 CPL/Env/Poll (15) 2 Or. Engl„

/ ENVIRONMENT AND TOWN PLANNING COMMITTEE

SUB-COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION

PRELIMINARY. DRAFT REPORT ON • MARINE POLLUTION CAUSED BY SHIPPING

AND LAND-BASED POLLUTION

vRapporteur : — c e s s i

CONGRESS00688b

72.1C2 09.2

This paper drawn up by the Rapporteur is to be submitted for discussion to the Sub-Committee on Pollution at its meeting

on 2 7 May 1982 in Strasbourg

A S THIS DOCUMENT WILL NOT BE DISTRIBUTED DURING THE MEETING

PLEASE IBRtNG THIS COPY

C'PL/Env/Pol 1 • (15) 2 - i -

C O N T E N T S

Page

IntlTOdlwlCtlOr"! ooooooeoeooooooooooooooooooooooooo 2

Marine Pollution mechanisms »o»..»»..«.»»«.»»....»..» 5 Effects of oil pollution oooooooooooooooooooooo 22 Present state of pollution in the different rn 3 JT* 1 t 1 mê basins ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 30

- the Mediterranean Sea oooooo«ooooooooo 30 - North Sea, Channel and Atlantic Ocean. 41

Historical backgrou n d O O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O ' & Q O O O O O O O O O

Important maritime disasters oo»»«»».,, oo°o°ooooo 57 Important milestones in the fight against POllUtlOfl OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI» oooooooooo 63 Effects of pollution at local level (replies to the questionnaire) 0000000.000000000 77 General comments on replies to the questionnaire 114 A p p 6 d 3- C 6 S oooooooooeoooooooooooooo'ooooooeoooooo "1*1 3 RêÎGlTGnCêS ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo "124

PREFACE

The Rapporteur wishes to thank Mr Y DE RIDDER who, as consultant to the "Pollution" sub-committee, has contributed to those parts of this report which deal with maritime pollution problems in the North Sea, the Channel and the Atlantic Ocean.' He is also grateful to Mr J L SALIBA, Secretary of the Maltese Council for the Human Environment, for his technical assistance and helpful advice during preparation of several parts of the report.

Finally, the Rapporteur wishes to underline the co-operation and support he has received in his work from- members of. the "Pollution" sub-committee and in particular the Chairman, Mr J LAUWEREINS, who has put his customary competence and much personal effort into the direction of the work.

Dr George VELLA

MARINE POLLUTION FROM MARITIME SOURCES

INTRODUCTION

During the 12th Session of the Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe (24-26 May 1977), a motion for a resolution was tabled by Mr. Pierre Lacour and others, concerning the problems of maritime regions (CPL (12) 15).

I This motion shows concern for shores and the dangers to whoich they are exposed from pollution. It evokes relevant recommendations and other work of both the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly and the European Parliament and the Galway Declaration (First Convention of the Authorities of European Peripheral Regions - 14-16 October 1975), It th€:n asks the Environmental and Town Planning Committee to study:

1. ' proposals for the setting up of a European Conference of Ministers responsible for maritime questions;

2. prospects for better co-operation between local and regional authorities;

3. the role and powers of European local and regional authorities and co-ordination of their actions;

4. the establishment of a "joint provident fund" to finance further research in dealing with oil spillages, and

5.s the establishment of a "European Maritime Pollution Control Agency".

During the 13th Session of the Conference (20-22 June 1978) Mr. Le Pensec and others, still bewildered by the magnitude of the AMOCO CADIZ disaster, tabled a motion for a resolution on means of combatting marine.pollution by oil (CPL (13) 12).

In this motion, the Council of Europe member states wefce urged to give priority to large scale emergency action in* the field of pollution. The enforcement of the SOLAS and MARPOL Conventions on ship building norms, and the ILO Convention Noi. 147 on the minimum social rules to be respected by merchant shiips was strongly recommended. Various recommendations to avoid and also control pollution were forwarded in this motion, an<3 the CLRAE was urged to present a report on what the states were actually doing to combat marine pollution.

On 21 June 1978, the Environment and Town Planning Committee organised a hearing of local and regional representatives from Brittany to gather firsthand evidence and feel the "human problem" behind the AMOCO CADIZ disaster.

•A

On 22 June 1978 the Standing Committee decided to put on the agenda of the next general session of the conference in October 1979 a report on pollution problems o

The title was eventually changed to Maritime Pollution Problems, and the full report by Mr. K Evers and recommendations (CPL (14) 4) were adopted during the plenary session 16-18 October 1979.

In its meeting of 25 October 1979, the Standing Committee agreed that the final report to the conference should emphasise the problems of prevention and reduction of pollution in maritime regions.

Resolution 111 (1979) was formulated and subsequently adopted.

The Environment and Town Planning Committee at its meeting on 2 5 October 1978 decided to form a sub-committee to study the problems of pollution by shipping and other forms of pollution,

A draft mandate of this sub-committee was adopted in Aachen (3-5 April 1979 - Doc. CPL/Env (13) 17), and the members were nominated.

At its first meeting in September 1979, the sub-committee noted that the range of subjects in its work was very wide and that a number of priorities would have to be laid down. The problems of pollution caused by shipping and of pollution from inland sources, in the light of national legislation and international conventions on the subject, were chosen as of prime importance.

It was envisaged to have two co-rapporteurs, one for marine pollution from maritime sources and the other for land based pollution.

Subsequently, at its meeting in October 1980, the sub-committee decided to produce one report, possibly divided in two parts, (Maritime/land based) but dealing with the pollution problem as one whole.

While accepting the fact that pollution at sea is the sum total of pollutants coming from different sources be they maritime, atmospheric, or telluric, it is to be realised that the problems posed by the prevention, control and management of such pollution are specific to the nature of the source. Each aspect has to be treated in the context of the whole problem -pollution, and by discussing all the aspects in one whole report greater balance is achieved.

The problems posed by the shipping of oil and the resultant pollution of the sea are definitely not the same as those posed by industrial and municipal waste reaching the sea and polluting it. These are different problems altogether, which are related only in so far as eventually they combine to create a bigger problem.

I Unfortunately we tend to overlook the long-term insiduous poisoning of our seas, and are confused and alarmed by dramatic acute catastrophe and traffic incidents, such as by an oil tanker colliding, running aground or exploding and spilling thousands of tons of oil thereby creating a sudden massive threat to the•environment.

All factors which in a bigger or smaller way contribute to the deterioration of the state of our seas and coastal waters thereby upsetting the balance of the ecological systems found therein are our concern. No one factor is more important than the other. All things and substances which pollute are pollutants. The alarming state of our seas and coastal waters as it is today is nothing but the result of all those factors added up altogether.

'Treating these factors separately, according to whether they originate from the land, or from the sea itself is just a way of being schematic.

A few spectacular shipping accidents upsetting local feelings or damaging local interests have been enough to awaken public opinion to the grave consequences of such spillages, but only where powerful, developed countries are affected do the competent authorities take an interest: elsewhere at sea such accidents have gone unnoticed. They have all caused pollution for a time in relatively limited sectors of the sea and/or coastline. Although this is the only kind of pollution generally referred to, its scale is tiny in comparison to total oil pollution and still more insignificant in relation to pollution as a whole. Though eye-catching, it is probably not the most harmful kind.

Every ecosystem has its own defence mechanisms and manages to regain its natural balance whatever type of pollution may occur, provided that it is not too Sequent or consistent. One given type of pollutant will also produce a chain of harmful effects because it upsets the balance of an entity all of whose elements are inter-dependent, though at different levels. The equilibrium of the sea is a delicate one; volume is its only asset, but its vital signifi-cance as an ecosystem, not only for man but for the whole planet, lies mainly in the surface layer and the few dozen metres below, which is where most of the pollution ends up. The shallow North I Sea is one such case.

Inseparability of pollution from maritime, land-based and even airborne sources

Should an individual, a commercial undertaking, an administra-tion or even a government either deliberately or unintentionally fail to realise the risks its actions pose to itself, to others or to mankind as a whole, means of coercion must be available, and this implies the need for suitable legislation. The North Sea basin, of vital importance for European countries, stands in great need of such legislation. Legislation means surveillance and means of enforcement. If they are to be effective the pollution problem must be considered in its entirety.

The reason why international organisations have tackled these matters separately is simply their inability to exceed the limits of their jurisdiction. IMCO, for example, is an organisation whose only possible approach is from the maritime angle.

Moreover, some pollutants have more than one source. For example, oil pollution is not solely caused by ships. It also ^derives from drilling platforms, but a proportion of it is of land-based or even airborne origin.

International agreements to protect the marine environment arrived at by organisations with no specific maritime purpose always jdeal with pollution as a whole.

The need to protect the marine environment

The main ocean currents have a blending effect and make practically all the seas interdependent, thereby helping to maintain the overall balance, but they are also vehicles for pollution. At the present time it is no longer possible to regard the oceans and ;seas as so vast that whatever man does to them will have no significant effect.

It takes centuries for the waters of the deep ocean basins to be renewed but it is the surface waters that play the most important part in the subsistence of all aquatic species (flora, and fauna). Plants live in only one-tenth of the average depth of the oceans. The photosynthetic activity which is at the root of all marine biomass occurs in the surface waters. Phytoplankton and zooplankton (the first and second links in the food chain) represent the basis needed to sustain all aquatic life and are found in coastal and shallow waters, from which man usually draws his|seafood supplies. Unfortunately, as we said earlier, pollution ends up mainly in those waters and therefore tends to become fixed on the seabed there, creating the risk of fungal development and persistent pollution. The pollution trapped in these biotopes (waters and seabed) is introduced into the food chain. Each move from one link to the next has a cumulative effect. This is all the more serious as laboratory experiments and on-site chemical and biological inventories show that numerous marine species are extremely resistant to certain forms of pollution (eg heavy metals and * pesticides) which makes the marine ecosystem itself resistant to some extent. However, living matter turns out to be a remarkable pollution trap, accumulating harmful elements in quantities which, in some cases, have already reached levels dangerous to man.

' Though the sea may be endangered as an important food source, the,part it plays in the balance of nature over the entire planet is still more important. The atmosphere and the ocean interact mainly by exchanging energy, heat, water vapour and substances in solution or suspension between the bottom layers of the atmosphere and the ocean's upper levels (1). i

• CO2 is present in the atmosphere in quantities which vary seasonally according to the plant cycle. Yet since we have been using fossil fuels intensively, the cycle has been upset by the constant increase in the atmospheric CO2 content. The annual increase is 2-3 ppm (2).

1 About half is found in the atmosphere, the other half is fixed geologically and found mainly in surface waters and in the oceans. At the surface of the water, which normally has a lower CO2 content as a result of CO2 consumption by phytoplankton, the balance is re-established by an exchange at the air/sea interface. The balance is controlled by the amount of calcium bicarbonate in solution, which acts as a regulator or buffer. This entire chemical process plays a rejuvenating role. The exchange occurs in a 5-10 year cycle (2).

i • / •

(1) • See (MODELSEA) - Mathematical Models of Continental Seas (4 vols), Math. MODELSEA - Liège 1975.

(2) Scientific American - Organic Chemistry of Life - W H W H Freeman & Co. - San Francisco 1973.

This balance is therefore threatened by man himself, but he is unable to intervene at this level. Should he rethink a major part of his technology?

"The story of circulation of carbon in nature teaches us that we cannot control global balances. Therefore we had better leave them to revert to the natural state that existed until the

5 beginning of the industrial revolution. Out of the realisation of this necessity may come a new industrial revolution" (1). !.

In addition to its biological role, oxygen also acts as a chemical oxidant. The breakdown of exogenous organic matter

l thus increases oxygen consumption, a process which determines ' the "chemical oxygen demand" (COD). This is another facet of water's self-cleansing power. Most types of matter are considerably transformed in an aquatic medium.

(

With the exception of the anearobic processes, almost the entire process of self-purification of water will depend on the

0 quality of dissolved oxygen enabling the BOD and the COD to be satisfied.

Atmospheric oxygen normally dissolves through the surface. The physical mechanism of surface turbulence caused by the winds helps this process considerably.

"The friction of the air (wind) on the surface, of the water causes turbulence (waves and swell). It affects the surface layer

| (which is considered to extend to a depth of 10 metres)" (2).

"Rainfall also increases turbulence. An arttficial surface coating (soap, detergent, grease or oil), however, will reduce it" (2) .

A further source of oxygen is photosynthesis, which depends j mainly on sunshine and therefore also on limpidity.

On that level, man is incapable of intervening. Nature, on the other hand, has always been able to adapt to natural or artificial overloading or shortage. Nevertheless this adaptability

« has its limits. The overstepping of certain thresholds causes ' changes which are rarely favourable to man.

Industrialisation, which is on the increase, is the main source of inorganic waste raising the consumption of oxygen in the water. In addition, man himself and his entire bio-industry represent the main source of pollution by organic matter. Further-

0 more, this has two consequences: the numerous and varied micro-organisms consume organic matter to ensure their subsistence and therefore consume oxygen, but a surfeit of such matter will promote

(1) Scientific American - Organic Chemistry of Life -W H Freeman & Co.. - San Francisco 1973.

s

their growth and allow them to proliferate. The consumption of 1 :mg of organic matter necessitates about 3 mg of oxygen. Given that under favourable circumstances there are 10 mg of oxygen in a litre of water, a surplus of about 2-3 ppm of organic matter becomes critical. As we know that domestic waste contains up to 3 00 ppm of it, it is clear that only wide dispersion can re-establish tolerable proportions.

| If this micro-organic proliferation continues, it leads in the end to eutrophication of the environment. This is the result of a dual process in which we must essentially consider not only oxygen but also carbon dioxide (C02). When most organic matter is consumed, CO2 is produced. i ^ CO2 is consumed by phytoplankton (and by plants), which with

water, phosphorus, nitrogen and metals, transforms it into plant matter. It is released during decomposition. Here the cycle is rapid: processes reckoned in years and decades for land plants are recknoned in days and weeks here.

Solar radiation promotes intense phytoplanktonic activity. Waste and the corpuses of micro-organisms (and other species) are ei'ther reconsumed or sink and settle as sediment. Slowly, the seabed becomes loaded with calcium carbonate. But these imm,ense oceans are animated by slow, deep movements on a massive scale. The cold polar waters slip gently towards the ocean deeps, drawn by Coriolis force, driven to and fro by the winds and finally joining the great ocean currents (eg the Humboldt current and the Gulf Stream) and the continental upwellings (eg the Chile coast upwelling). The movement is complex and slow and it has been estimated that renewal of the ocean deeps takes 1,000 years.

As in the atmosphere, there is a continuous exchange of CO2 in the water through consumption and liberation. There is also an exchange between the atmosphere and the water, in which the sea plays the most important part.

Oxygen is essential to life although the atmosphere contains oriily 21% oxygen and a litre of water can dissolve only 10 mg. Mó'st plants and animals depend on this small quantity of oxygen fòr breathing. Breathing allows oxygenation, releasing the energy required for life and its subsistence, creation and development. Thfe minimum necessary for this process is 5 mg per litre. Below th'is amount, certain bacteria called anaerobia achieve this chemical combustion without oxygen.

Through its metabolism, all aquatic life, whose various forms are practically interdependent, provides a large proportion of water's self-purifying power. The survival of that life, which depends primarily on the amount of dissolved oxygen, determines thè "biological oxygen demand" (BOD).

Physical processes

Since the continents acquired more or less the form we know today, erosion by winds, rain, watercourses and even the seas themselves has carried material torn from the land into the oceans,

1

The material disintegrates, disperses and settles out. In this way the sea acquired its present composition, which is maintained by a natural balance. The sea also absorbs all the matter reaching it from terrestrial and aquatic biomass. The only thing which really upsets this balance is man.

Initially, it was man's proliferation and concentration which confronted him with the problem of his waste. First of all, he adopted an easy solution. When the problem became technical, he sought the most economical method. This was true of both his individual waste and his industrial waste. Two exponential,increase ensue, the second being the consequence of the first. The $aste becomes a nuisance once a certain threshold is passed. In excess, it becomes first annoying, then harmful and finally dangeroufe. The thresholds have been reached almost everywhere. The sea,is suffering the same fate. •

As well as playing a part in man's means of transport, the sea offers man its resources. If those resources are to be conserved, the sea must remain "viable". The places that enjoy the greatest protection are precisely those places most affected by pollution. Continental shelves, coastal waters, bays and estuaries are the spawning, reproduction and development grounds for fish, crustaceans and shellfish. Unfortunately, they are also the parts of the sea which generally have the least major oceanic movement. They are the most vulnerable parts.

Solar radiation does not penetrate the rough North Sea waters very deeply, which restricts photosynthesis to a depth of a few metres, but in the relatively shallow waters, especially near coasts and above sandbanks, the stratification of the water is disturbed and phytoplankton production is abundant. Along coasts, the nutrient content is still further increased by the . material washed down by watercourses and by land erosion (containing phosphates in particular). These regions are the spawning and development grounds for numerous species of fish, crustaceans and filter feeders.

The productivity of a marine sector can be measured by the quality of carbon fixed by the phytoplankton. In the North Sea, productivity is high (11 gm C/m^/year). n

Sedimentation and_2Y£es

Sedimentation

Waste water, from both domestic and town drains, always ultimately joins the freshwater cycle and ends up in the sea, if it was not discharged directly into it in the first place.

Urbanisation engendered the need to ensure the removal of rainwater. Of necessity, the drain, system was subsequently also used for removal of waste water.

Griggs and Hopkins (USA) have studied the consequences of such discharges. When untreated domestic waste water is released into the environment and the current is slight, the. heaviest

particles settle out near the release point and cause an accumulation of unoxidised organic matter. If anaerobic conditions are prevalent, black anoxic mud covers the seabed and most benthic life forms disappear (1).

Polluting sedimentation can endanger breeding grounds not only by covering the seabed but also by causing oxygen deficiency and a reduction in salinity which will harm fish eggs and young crustaceans and fish.

| The breeding grounds for fish and crustaceans are thus eliminated and even the adults can no longer find food there. A natural habitat is destroyed.

i , Sediments in suspension can be considered as pollutants.

The amount of sediment in rivers, estuaries and coastal waters is increased still further by man's intérference through his domestic and .industrial waste and by increased soil erosion. The rise in turbidity and the fall in transparency slow the development of organisms.

, As a result of their physico-chemical properties and their large specific surface area, argillaceous and organic sediments are,able to fix heavy metals. This natural purifying effect is subsequently reversed by bacterial decomposition which puts the sett!led-out matter back into circulation. The toxic elements will be introduced into the biological cycle if they are absorbed by benthic species and will thus enter the food chain.

: Sédimentation (at sea) and seabed erosion depend principally on currents and wave action.

Estuaries, characterised by areas in which fresh and sea water mix, constitute an important transition route for a wide variety of the products of human activity. By their very nature, estuarine areas have specific physical, chemical and biological characteristics, whose properties are still not well-known (2) .

| Estuarine zones often act as powerful traps in which pollutants accumulate in the form of sediments, as is the case with the Escajut (2) .

! Three extreme examples of this are:

1. Tees Bay in which the rich aquatic flora of the littoral and sub-littoral has totally disappeared in the space of about a century.

2. The Gulf of Athens, whose bed is being increasingly encroached upon by sedimentation from urban waste.

./• (1) « Décharge a la mer des eaux residuaires urbaines et industrielles,

, third International Congress, Sorrento (June 1975). (2) Projet Mer (Vol. 1-30 - Rapport Final -Programme National de

Recherche et de Développement - Ed. J NIMOUL & F GULLENTOPS 1977 .

3. The Bay. of New York, which is being invaded by what has become known as the "Sludge Monster".

The problem does not only concern non-degradable waste. Even certain types of normally degradable waste persist through accumulation at the point of release. The main reason for this is often slow degrading fibres.

' i Obviously, dispersion plays a very large part. Such an,

accumulation does not occur in the Thames estuary as the str'ong sea currents promote dispersion. This is all the more remarkable as it was true even before the cleaning up of the Thames, which though once dead now contains up to 91 different species of fish again.

When sewer water is released into a watercourse it mixes with the water in the watercourse. When the fresh - though polluted -water reaches the estuary it usually flows out on the surface for a fairly long time and therefore spreads over a fairly wide area. This stratification is caused by the density (and indeed the temperature) of the fresh water and its subsequent mixing with the sea water will depend on its flow rate, the depth of the estuary and in particular the amount of sea currents and turbulence.

Estuarine zones are also characterised by profound changes in the physico-chemical parameters and a significant proportion of the solids transported by the rivers accumulate there. The chemical substances undergo significant physical, chemical and biological dissolution in such zones.

The solids in suspension in fresh water, which is extremely turbid, rapidly flocculate and settle out when the fresh water is mixed with increasingly saline water (Wollast 1973 - Peeters 1973) (1).

Suspended matter which comes into contact with sea water tends to agglomerate into "floccules" mainly because of the higher electron "content of the receiving medium but partly also for. biological reasons (1).

The major causes of flocculation in sea water are the presence of Ca"4"* and ions and the amount of faecal agglomerates (2)..

Two transport mechanisms must be considered:

1. flocculation and sedimentation of the suspended solids brought downstream by fresh water. This occurs as salinity increases, and is responsible for the formation of muddy deposits;

2. transport, near the seabed, of marine sand whose net movement is upstream owing to density currents. •/.

(1) See MODELSEA, op. cit.

(2) See Projet Mer, op. cit.

Some of the suspended sediment is nevertheless carried seawards, especially during floods (this is the case with the Escaut, for example); in the end it accumulates at the river mouth in the gyre zone, where it settles out (1).

The final sedimentation process will depend on the final displacement, ie that caused by the residual current.

f) The residual current is the current integrated over a sufficiently long period to cover several tidal cycles and to eliminate the majority of the random factors.

; It can be said with certainty that turbulence plays the major part in preventing constant sedimentation and that the residual currents transport the suspended matter.

The fine part of the sediments - the silt - remains in suspension longest. It is responsible for turbidity and, in sufficient quantity, can cause pollution in its own right.

The transparency of the water is a decisive factor for phytoplankton, hence the importance of the euphotic layer (the transparency factor) and the incident radiant energy.

Silt is chemically very active owing to the presence of mineral, organic and colliodal elements which are highly absorbent because of their large specific surface area. Sedimentation thus has an initial purifying effect by removing all sorts of pollutants from the medium. Later, these are put back into circulation by turbulence, chemical oxidation and biodégradation (2).

Gyres

When residual currents from different directions meet, they produce great whirlpools called gyres. The transported matter has the greatest chance of settling out in these areas, where the residual current is zero. It is thus doubtless the absence of gyres (or the continuity of the currents) which prevents heavy sedimentation in the Thames estuary. However, in a gyre (such as . the'one on the Belgian coast) the ecosystem becomes unhealthy as the intense phytoplankton activity does not fulfil its traditional function, ie that of providing food as the first link in the food chain. The majority of the phytoplankton is unused and the nutrients are recycled by bacteria acting on the dead phytoplankton.

The phytoplanktonic organisms are principally responsible for'the initial process of organic matter (primary production) in the marine ecosystem. They trap and concentrate dissolved sub-stances - both nutritious and toxic - and, by their position in the food chain, help to transfer those substances to the organisms populating the ecosystem.

(1) See Projet Mer, op. cit.

Moreover, the abundance and type of the species forming the phytoplankton condition the abundance and type of higher organisms feeding on it. As the phytoplankton is very sensitive to variations in environmental conditions, its composition changes in line with those variations. The changes have repercussions, and may be amplified, throughout the ecosystem (1).

There are naturally also local and seasonal variations, (eg less activity in the spring) and a difference between the activity in the sea and that in estuaries, producing imbalances at the contact zones (1).

\

The amount of phytoplankton also decreases the further ¡pne goes out to sea. The variation can in addition be provoked &>y human action.

Freshly deposited sediments usually contain highly reactive materials in disequilibrium with their new environment. These materials are responsible for the early diagenesis observed in recent sediments. In this respect the organic matter constitutes a category of compounds whose development is all the more rapid as the top layers of sediment are the site of intense bacterial activity which breaks down organic matter. This breakdown is accompanied, in the interstitial water of the sediment, by the dissolution of nutrients such as NH4~ and PO4 . o

The elimination of the organic matter removes the protective layer from organisms that have a skeleton and allows the skeletons to be dissolved if they are in disequilibrium with the environment. This is what happens for example with opal, which forms the skeleton of the diatoma and dissolves, releasing silicic acid.

As bacterial breakdown of organic matter is an oxidising process, it is accompanied by successive consumption of the various oxidants in the environment, subject to the energy require-ments imposed by chemical thermodynamics. The bacteria thus use in turn the dissolved oxygen available in .the aerobic layer, then the nitrates and nitrites. They then reduce the oxidised manganese and iron compounds available and finally reduce the sulphates dissolved in sea water to sulphides. Under these highly anaerobic conditions, where there is a surplus of organic matter, fermentation ultimately occurs, in which matter is decomposed into CH4 and CO2.

These reactions considerably affect the composition of the interstitial water, which becomes enriched with nutrients and poorer in oxidants. The existence of concentration gradients between the interstitial water and the sea water causes an exphange of matter enabling a proportion of the nutrients deposited during sedimentation to be recycled. However, the sediment consumes oxidants such as, dissolved oxygen, nitrates and sulphates contained in sea water.

I' The majority of the benthic microbiological activity occurs in the first few centimetres of sediment. In addition, disturb-ances of the interstitial water in these first few centimetres, caused by shear effects, wave action or the activity of benthic organisms, greatly speed up the exchange of dissolved matter wi til the superjacent column of water.

| Numerous authors have already pointed out that benthic organisms can mix the uppermost layers of sediment to a depth of about 10 cm. This activity affects both the substances ; dissolved in the interstitial water and the deposited solid matter.

1 3 Generally speaking, the contribution of the top layer of

sediment to the process of early diagenesis is much more important thari that of the subjacent layers, particularly as regards the U breakdown of organic matter. The effect of the disturbed layer is probably more marked in coastal regions than in deep oceanic zones as the very existence of that layer is bound up with the effects of bottom currents or intense benthic activity. Marine pollution from maritime sources

'' Pollution has been described as any introduction, be it natural or by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy, into the environment resulting in deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger human health, harm living resources and ecosystems, impair amenities, or interfere with other legitimate uses of the environment.

Excluding the negligible pollution by radio-activity from nuclear powered warships and submarines, and the chemical pollution from natural underwater gaseous emissions (continuous or of a cataclipsical or volcanic nature) the pollutants par excellence remains by hydrocarbons - colloquially known as oil.

toil pollution forms only part of what can be generally referred to as chemical pollution of our seas. This includes pollution by industrial effluents, atmospheric fall out of chemicals in suspension (eg sprayed pesticides, etc) and pollution directly related to the exploration, transportation and.handling of oil.

I Oil transportation by sea represents 55% to 60% of total « tonnage of world maritime transportation (1). It is the largest single item in the movement of basic commodities in the,world. Over six million tons of oil are loaded into tankers every day, and at any one time it is calculated that well over 100 million tons of oil are at sea en route to its destination. About 2,000 million tons of oil are transported every year. Between 500 and 600 million tons a year arrive in NW Europe and', about one million tons every day passes through the western approaches and the English Channel (2).

The development of the Middle East and North African oilfields together with Europe's growing demand, have made the Mediterranean one of the world's major oil transit areas, and it has been estimated that 40% of the world's oil transport passes through it (3).

Sources of pollution

Starting from natural phenomena one has to mention atmospheric fall out and natural Seepage» The 1973 global' estimate for the former by the National Academy of Science was 0.6>million tons. Other authorities quote much higher figures. The same figure of 600,000 tons was attributed to natural seepage by the NAS (1973) but other authorities (2) are of the opinion that a much lower figure of 50,. 000 tons actually is more exact.

Natural pollution

It is also the Ocean Affairs Board which estimates the number of underwater leaks at 190, producing a flow rate of 600,000 tonnes a year. This type of pollution is not increasing and has never been seen as harmful since the natural ecological equilibrium has come into play. Yet since we are witnessing excessive man-made pollution of the same type, the amount is growing. Even if the North Sea is not directly affected by such natural pollution its connection with the ocean means that it forms part of the world marine ecological balance. It is thus not inconceivable that its potential for self-purification should be retarded as a result. Clearly, from this point of view, the effects can only be considered in the very long-term.

The atmospheric intermediary

As soon as it is extracted, oil releases toxic volatile elements into the atmosphere. The waste gases from combustion also release quantities of unburned or partially burned hydrocarbons into the air. On top of those, there is the evaporation from cleaning agents, solvents, stain removers, oils and greases and a large number of other products containing petroleum derivatives.

These residues and hydrocarbons reach the sea by direct or indirect routes: they can fall out on their own or combine with other suspended matter in the' atmosphere and then fall out or be carried down by precipitation.

Once again according to the above-mentioned report, the annual total is 600, 000 tonne's a year.

o / •

The terrestrial intermediary

In addition to the fallout mentioned above there are all the accidental, unintentional and even deliberate discharges caused by leaks and breaks in pipes and tanks, handling errors and negligence. Yet more serious and more important still are the oil and oil derivatives deliberately released by man after use of them as lubricants, grease removers, solvents etc. These products are either released directly into the environment or put down the drain. To all these we must add the natural washing of tarmac, tar, roofing, paint etc. All that will run off, percolate and run away into watercourses and thence into the¡sea. It is estimated in the USA that about 2 million tonnes of lubricants per year "disappear" into the environment (.1) .

[ , i As this source of pollution is estimated at 3.3 million tonnes

a year (Ac. Sc. - USA - 1975) it represents over half the total (53.99% to be exact). Moreover, the breakdown of this estimate is 4ery interesting, giving the following figures (in million tons):

Coastal refineries 0.2 Industrial discharges 0.3 Town discharges 0.3 Atmospheric fallout 0.6 Run-off from urban areas 0.3 Washed down by rivers 1.6 (2)

"Man-made" pollution starts with exploration of the seabed for oil deposits and results from operational and accidental discharges as well as accidental blow-outs (30,000 tons from flow-outs and 30,000 tons from other sources).

Pollution caused by exploration and exploitation of the continental shelf, the seabed and the marine sub-bottom

When drilling and extraction platforms were erected in the North Sea a new risk of pollution emerged. Breaks during drilling, breakage of, and leakage from, pipes, valves and oil and gas pipelines, handling, transfer and storage accidents are all potential causes of pollution. As early as 1975, Prof. HARROY (ULB) sounded a warning: The oil crisis is compelling the North Sea coastal states to intensify their exploration and drilling operations and to drill deeper and deeper. The risk of an oil slick from such a source thus cannot be ruled out in the North Sea. Alas, this prediction was fulfilled in 1977 with the breakage of a valve on the Ekofisk rig causing the spillage of 20,000 tonnes of oil into the sea.

• • / .

(1) CDSM No. 1 - Pollution des eaux cStieres -Pollution de la mer par rejets d'hydrocarbures - 1970.

(2) Tees Side Sewage Disposal - Final Report -J D and D M WATSON, March 1968.

Drilling itself is a source of pollution through the discharge of matter extracted from the sub-bottom (drillings). If we estimate the number of wells drilled in the North Sea at 2,000, the amount of drillings released is probably over a million tonnes. Some of the matter extracted already contains hydrocarbons and/or gases. In addition, chemical sludges of various'compositions are used in great quantities; highly corrosive substances, solvents, liquifying agents, emulsifiers, as well as thousands of litres of super-detergents.

Once they are being worked, these stationary wells become an almost constant source of pollution for the above-mentioned reasons, which is even more serious than isolated instances.

In view of the increase in exploration and exploitation of the marine sub-bottom we can no longer consider the 1973 estimate of 8 0,000 tonnes of pollution a year to be accurate. The intense activity of this type in the North Sea should disturb even the most optimistic among us.

Operational and accidental spillages, as well as accidents also occur during the loading and the unloading of the oil.

Oil transportation itself makes up for the major part of the pollution of the sea by oil. Before dealing with "surface" transport one has to consider "below surface" transportation, ,ie through pipe lines. As yet, in European waters we have been lucky not to have had any pollution accidents due to rupture of underwater pipelines. In the United States such accidents caused by corrosion, or accidental dragging by an anchor are not unknown of. Considering the rapid development of such areas as the North Sea Oil Fields and the ever increasing number of off-shore oil rigs in the Mediterranean, one has to assume that the underwater pipe line system is always getting longer and longer.

Surface transportation of oil by tankers is however more common. Tankers can cause what could be termed "voluntary" and "involuntary" pollution.

"Voluntary pollution" can be caused by discarded lubricants, • ballasting and deballasting operations, discharge of oil bilge water and tank cleaning operations at sea. All those are voluntary acts undertaken by the ship's crew, and this is one area where proper legislation and enforcement can decrease the amount of pollution caused by these acts.

Another "voluntary" act of pollution to be mentioned for completion's sake is the discharge of cargo (be it oil, dangerous chemicals or whatever) into the sea in emergency conditions, as in trying to refloat a ship after grounding (cf CHRISTOS BITAS accident on the coast of Wales in October 1978)

Pollution caused during transport

a. Deliberate pollution

Until recently, all oil-fired steam ships and diesel-engined vessels caused pollution because of their very method of construction. Residues from lubrication, cleaning, spillage, leakage from tanks and engines were pumped from the bilges and straight into the sea. Ships,were designed in this way until international agreements prohibiting the release of such waste came into force. The new shipbuilding regulations will undoubtedly help to remedy the situation, but will never eliminate this form of pollution completely, the more so as it will be'some time before all ports are equipped to accept and treat the waste which all ships are supposed to collect. Estimates of the quantity of waste involved vary considerably: a NATO report put the figure at 500,000 tonnes a year in 1970, while a UN report put the figure for the same year at 200,000 tonnes.

To this must be added the release of waste caused by drainingjand cleaning holds, either because of a change of cargo or because the holds had been used for (liquid) ballast. The UN report mentioned above estimates the total amount released at 1.3 million tonnes. This is not in the least surprising as the US Federal Water Control Administration estimates that 0.5% of the cargo remains in the holds after complete unloading.

The "load on top" (LOT) and "crude oil washing" (COW) systems are in theory good answers to this problem but even if the ship, is equipped for this type of operation it is not always practised br even practicable, especially if a different type of cargo from !the previous one is to be taken on board. Immobilising a ship for operations of this type is obviously not profitable for ship-owners and shipping companies, which means that even responsible and conscientious captains often have no choice. Very often the captains are even constrained by a system.of bonuses and penalties to arrive at loading ports with clean tanks.

The amount of oil discharged through these voluntary acts is difficult to assess. Measures like the "load on ton" system, the system of separate ballast tanks, the technique^ of crude oil washing, and the establishment of more tank cleaning forms or b lge washing receiving depots along the European coasts and in ports, all help to decrease the amount of oil pollution through these acts drastically.

"Involuntary pollution" is caused when there are forces majeures. This is the type of pollution resulting after accidents in which damage to the oil carrier results in spilling of the cargo. Under this heading one can include any imaginable accident. However, the most common cases undoubtedly are groundings,collisions between ships or against shore, installations or off-shore installations, explosions, breaking and sinking and also washing away of 'on-deck1 cargo (eg dangerous chemicals in canisters) by rough seas.

According to the National Academy of Sciences, the total worldwide estimated spillage in 1977 was 4.95 million tons of which 0.682 million tons was in European waters (6)„ Of these only about 0.3-0.4 million tons was due to accidents. A slightly bigger figure is quoted by the Institute Français du Pétrole(500,00 0 tons).

This figure represents only about 6% of total spillage Whereas it is not a big percentage it is alarming and causes an immediate alarm and public outcry because contrary to the insiduous chronic and insensible pollution from other sources, . which unfortunately is poisoning our sèas gradually but steadily, pollution from this source results in the dumping of numerous amounts of pollutants in one spot,creating a sudden acute threat to the environment.

Data from the Institut Français du Pétrole shows that shipping accidents of oil tankers are predominantly due to groundings 37%, collisions 27%, and explosions 11.5%.

Of all tanker accidents 17.6% happened off the Atlantic Coast of Europe, accounting for 27.2% of total spillage, whereas 10.9% happened in the Mediterranean accounting for 6.6% of total world spillage. These data are also from the IFP and cover the years 1955-79.

The Mediterranean appears to have up to now been relatively unaffected by pollution from tanker accidents. However one has to realise that because of its almost closed nature, any major spill in this sea will have devastating consequences.

The Atlantic Coast of Europe seems to be the most vulnerable zone and one.of the most involved, because of the large volume of oil shipped along its coasts.

b. Unintentional pollution due to perils of the sea : Unfortunately, this form of pollution is inherent to shipping.

Shipwreick, hull-cracking, foundering, collision, fire and explosion are all risks faced by ships. However well-designed, built, commanded, equipped and maintained they may be, disaster is always ahead of them.

. Inclement weather, atmospheric conditions, currents, reefs and sandbanks complicate the matter. Mechanical failure, instrument error or electronic short-comings will not make things any easier. Yet, worse still, are negligence, incompetence and disregard for regulations, which are becoming serious offences at sea - offences which can have disastrous consequences.

Certain ship-owners., and not the small-time ones either, register their ships under flags of convenience, for obvious reasons. Such ships are often in poor condition and badly maintained, with poor quality equipment, and have no regard for safety and route regulations or pollution.

The Torrey Canyon and the Amoco Cadiz, for instance, doubtless fell into this category in some respects. Yet such accidents, spectacular though they are, are not as serious in the long-term as they appear. The NATO Committee on the Challenges to Modern Society, in its report for the Brussels Oil Pollution Symposium in 197 0, said that only 5% of pollution would be caused by shipping accidents (the figure is now estimated at 10%). Up to that time accidents had always been reckoned in figures up to 10,000 tonnes but since then there has been the 23 0,000 tonne Amoco Cadiz disaster.

c• Dredging and waste mud - dumping

As sediments constitute pollution traps, attention must be drawn to one of marT'̂ s activities which involves the displacement -and usually the discharge at'sea - of vast quantities of sedimentary deposits by dredging, thereby putting ¡the numerous pollutants trapped in the mud and slime back into circulation.

v. Although dredging is necessary to maintain the required

depth in ports, rivers and even certain navigable channels at sea, it redistributes an enormous amount of pollution which had been trapped in sediment at ecologically less important points.

The mud is formed by the sedimentation of alluvial matter alreiady charged with organic and chemical pollutants from inland via the hydrological basins. To this is added local waste which has been only slightly broken down.

Through his industrial activity (particularly at sea) man no longer allows rivers to change their course by sedimentation. As a result, nearly all the suspended matter flows into the sea. Scientific studies have made it possible to estimate that the Escaut, for instance, empties 2 million tons of suspended matter into the sea per year.

- 2.1' -

Enormous quantities of mud from dredging are continuously-discharged at points at sea from which the currents carry them away. They thus combine with all the other sediments shifting in the North Sea.

In the same connection, we should also mention the discharge of sludge produced in the purification of urban waste water. As

0 the sludge is the end result of the total or partial purification of such water, it therefore contains all the non-degradable and un-degraded pollutants. Bio-degradation of the latter is very

' considerably reduced as many types of bacteria die in a marine environment. Although we have succeeded in this way in eliminating, or at least considerably reducing, pollution of the surface waters and, for a time, the sea water at the dumping point, as the sludge is nevertheless dumped at sea, we are not much further forward in the long-term. It is known that the purification of urban waste water produces 7 00 kg of sludge per person per year. Therefore, although the Thames is "clean" and its biomass has been resuscitated, the fact remains that this waste sludge is dumped into the sea at the rate of 5 million tonnes per year.

This sludge represents a threat to the environment and disposal of it is costly. The European Community has decided to allocate 6 million.EUA to the search forvways of improving basic treatment procedures and to the study of safe methods of storage of non-recyclable elements which contain a high proportion of toxic metals.

? . 1

More serious still is the organised and fairly well regulated discharge of highly toxic industrial waste. This comprises production waste considered as effectively or economically non-neutralisable or untreatable. As storage of it is also considered pointless, impractical and unfeasible, the easy way out has been chosen: discharge at sea under the pretence or belief in the infinite ability of the ocean to absorb and neutralise. For

* instance, the Netherlands daily discharges 220 tonnes of waste containing 10% sulphuric acid and 2.5% iron sulphate. Yet every conceivable type of toxic matter is dumped into the North Sea at some point or other.

Another source of maritime pollution which strictly speaking is not "maritime" in origin but can be adequately dealt with here is dumping, ie the deliberate disposal at sea of wastes and other matter - meaning materials and substances of any kind, form or description - from ships or aircraft.

Every conceivable material can be dumped into the sea. Some of them are very harmful, others completely harmless.

The effects of oil pollution

Direct_effects

s Crude oil and the various fractions are highly toxic for marine life. The direct toxicity is due to three main fractions, all of them fairly complex. These are:

1. low boiling point saturated or paraffined hydrocarbons;

2. low boiling point aromatic hydrocarbons;

3. defines.

Crude oil also contains other components which are particularly important because of their high solubility in water and their toxicity. .(We shall pay special attention to the carcinogenic fractions.)

| The toxic effect varies from one aquatic species to another. It depends on their specific reaction and their stage of develop-ment, with larvae being more sensitive. One of the most serious problems is the long-term permanence of toxic effects produced by low.concentrations.

Fish, crustaceans and shell fish can also take the taste and smell of oil, which makes them inedible.

High mortality is usually observed in sea birds affected -even slightly - by hydrocarbons, which dissolve the grease coating their plumage to protect them from the cold. In addition, by trying to clean their oiled feathers the birds become intoxicated, äome species are already endangered.

The consumption of fish contaminated by oil is a potential danger for man too.

Quite apart from the actual.contamination of the produce, apparent contamination will make it impossible to sell.

Contamination of the environment in general, while not on the stale of an oil slick, will nevertheless have an adverse effect on tourism. I 5 The degree of toxicity will also depend on the mineral product's origin. The effects on the environment will depend on the proportion of the components of hydrocarbons retained by the oil or lost in the column of water or in the atmosphere.

Following an accident, the oil slick will weather, ie its composition will change as a result of evaporation, dissolution, chemical oxidation and biodegradation. The duration of these processes varies and will also depend on the (air and water) temperature, the wind and the turbulence of the water. In the end, fairly large agglomerates of residues will remain,- which will be washed ashore or sink and settle out.

Plankton is the first to be affected, along with plant production and the fertility of copepoda: the three species which are really the first link in the chain of aquatic life, which forms a large part of the food chain.

j The narcotic effect hinders breathing and movement. •' Ingestion acts at the physiological level and causes death or reduces reproduction. Certain elements are highly toxic for eggs and larvae floating near the surface. Pelagic fauna may perhaps survive intermittent and highly diluted discharges but contaminated fish will take the taste and will be inedible. If the pollution is not too persistent they will revert to their normal state, but if the pollution affects breeding grounds, the eggs and young fish will suffer the toxic effects mentioned.

Benthic fauna, crustaceans and filter-feeding molluscs will obviously be contaminated by the residual particles that

' settle out. An emulsion containing 0.1% diesel oil, for instance, : kills molluscs by clogging up the branciae. Such residues will therefore also affect fish such as herrings which spawn on the

' seabed.

Although species die if exposed to polluted water for a long time, a rapid return to or of pure water enables them to recover. One question nevertheless remains; what contamination will result, in the long-term, from the carcinogenic elements retained by these species.

The entire world's coasts are affected in three different ways:

sporadically, by agglomerates washed onto them from time to time and therefore with limited consequences?

by regular pollution which, even if it is minimal, is chronic. Examples of this are the pollution occurring near oil shipping routes and that occurring near oil terminals. In extreme cases, this may cause the destruction of the affected areas, as happened to the beach at Ostia;

by a real oil slick. In such cases the effect will be sudden and violent although the consequences are usually temporary. They require cleaning up operations* on a massive scale. On isolated coasts the consequences will last until the residues disintegrate naturally. Occasionally, however, ecological scars will remain.

It is a known fact that chronic pollution is by far the most harmful form. This is true of all types of pollution, as the species affected have not time to eliminate the toxic elements. Pollution of the littoral by oil will affect all its fauna and aquatic flora, including the foreshore flora. Birds will be unable to find food or will be intoxicated. An oil slick in nesting areas would be catastrophic.

When the surface of the water is covered by a film of oil there will be a further effect - less visible but nevertheless important - caused by the elimination of surface exchanges: CO2 will accumulate in the water and the oxygen needed to enable

'

2.

3.

marine organisms to breathe will run out. The film becomes thinner but prevents renewal of the oxygen required for chlorophyllic synthesis by plankton. Deprived of their plant environment, as well as their own oxygen supply, the fixed and mobile animal species will disappear. The accumulation of CO2 is all the more consequential in the deeper waters.

One of the most harmful substances so far identified is 3,4-benzpyrene., which is carcinogenic. While it is the most ejasily identifiable, it is not the only one of its type for all tjhat.

Research into the carcinogenic effect of oil pollution began in 1958, revealing the widespread presence of 3,4-benzpyrene in the broncho-pulmonary and ganglionary system. Its presence i's almost constant in the urine of smokers, non-smokers and children. The scale of this pollution suggests that the human race is not the only species affected.

Until the '70s it was assumed that all pollution of the marine environment by polybenzene hydrocarbons of the 3',4-benzpyrene type was of thermal origin (ie resulted from combustion). Then other types of fixation were observed;

1.. in plankton: the formation of carcinogenic hydrocarbons which are liposoluble and fixed by the planktonic organisms (phytoplankton and zooplankton rich in lipids);

2. fixation by biosynthesis by anaerobic bacterial flora (putrefactive bacteria).

Extensive research brought Lucien MALLET to the conclusion that: "our recent research has demonstrated that the lipids contained in plankton (oleic, palmitic and'myristic acids) could be transformed into polybenzene hydrocarbons under the influence of anaerobic bacteria, especially Clostridium putreficium". Considering the position of 3,4-benzpyrene in the overall context o:£ oil pollution, he goes on to say "the pollution comes from a wide range of sources: urban, industrial, removal of ballast from ships. At these various levels, the dangers from the health point of view vary: some hydrocarbons are toxic fairly immediately other affect oxygenation, while others become involved in the metabolism of life and have_delaYed_effects_on_tissue_develogment

coñtribütIñ2_to~CAÑCER"7

In the NATO Study Committee's report it is suggested that the marketing and consumption of fish and crustaceans contaminated by oil similarly at the very least increases the amount of carcinogens in the body, which is likely to endanger public health

Although the quantity of pollutants discharged by man is supplemented by the effects of biosynthesis by anaerobic bacteria, Lucien MALLET goes on to say that certain factors attenuate or reduce the amount of carcinogens: ozone, ultraviolet radiation and the biological regression caused by aerobic bacteria. The result would be a natural balance and some measure of stability.

r\ Here we are concerned with a highly probable harmful efftect

of oil pollution of the sea. Numerous biological processes important to the survival of marine organisms and playing key roles in the various stages of their lives are dictated by messages in the form of extremely low concentrations of chemicals in the sea water. The search for food, flight from predators, choice of routes and habitat and sexual attraction are made possible by chemical concentrations lower than one part per thousand million. It therefore requires only minute concentrations of other elements to disturb the minute concentrations of these remote biological mediators, which means there is a risk that the gustatory detectors will become clogged or that the natural stimulants will be wrongly simulated, causing inappropriate reactions.

Such effects are attributed to saturated and aromatic hydrocarbons with a high boiling point and the whole range of olefinic hydrocarbons. At extremely low concentrations they will have disastrous effects on the survival of a marine species and therefore that of numerous other marine species linked to it by the marine food chain.

Summarised effects of the various forms of pollution

1. Turbidity is increased (reducing photosynthesis) by discharge of suspended matter resulting from drilling, dredging, dumping in general and by direct discharge at sea.

2. Many pollutants contained in suspended matter are put into circulation and then enter the food chain. j

3. This matter settles, and by covering the bottom has an adverse effect on benthic fauna and flora, which"it either partially or wholly destroys by fungal development and contamination and the presence of pollutants.

4. Bacteria and viruses are introduced by municipal waste; some of these organisms have a directly harmful effect on fauna or flora, while others may be harmful to man when he drinks or eats contaminated foodstuffs.

5. Discharge, effluent and fall-out contain chemical products and derivatives whose toxicity or corrosiveness destroy or contaminate parts of the biomass, and cause a sharp rise in the chemical oxygen demand and a drop in oxygen production.

6. The discharge of partially degradable detergents causes eutrophication, overburdening the environment by an increase in the biochemical oxygen demand.

Their emulsifying properties interfere with the surface and, through the tensio-active effect, lower the surface tension? when it drops to below 4 0 or 45 dynes/cm2, irreparable respiratory damage results. f 7'. The inflow of chemical fertilisers (nitrates, nitrogenous substances and phosphates), mainly by run-off, influences tjirbidity and salinity and causes eutrophication.

8. Pesticides, herbicides and fungicides are introduced as a result of run-off, discharge and fall-out, and once in the marine environment continue to act destructively on species with no résistance to them. When absorbed by resistant species, their concentration in the organism rises and they become present in the food chain. t 9. Heavy metals reach the sea by discharge, dumping, run-off and fall-out. Lead, zinc, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, nickel etc are present in various chemical combinations. Some are toxic, others become toxic by conversion. They are absorbed by fauna and flora in a process of accumulation which varies according to the species and can cause synergic or antagonistic phenomena. When present in the food chain, they are still dangerous even after cooking. These are among the most dangerous substances.

10. Any increase in the normal water temperature resulting from an inflow of warmer water has an adverse effect on growth, lowers the concentration of oxygen in solution, diminishes the self-cleansing effect, fosters eutrophication and can even result in the destruction of a biotope.

11. Radioactive pollution may come from nuclear power stations, industry, laboratories and atmospheric fall-out after bomb tjests/ and finally by dumping of radioactive waste. Even had this not yet actually been carried out in the North Sea, the physical and biological interdependence of the seas could easily cause an unwanted and unexpected transfer. This is a dangerous pollutant through its mutagenic, genetic and pathogenic effects.

12. The effects of oil pollution are many and varied:

1. Oil deposits on shores and the sea bottom destroy flora and fauna. They also have a negative effect on tourism.

2. When mixed with water they lower the turbidity.

3. In an emulsified form, they interfere with the surface and shallow water.

4. A surface oil film prevents exchange processes.

Through their breakdown, they aggravate the chemical oxygen demand and also the BOD.

They damage fauna and flora by adhering to it and pass on their taste and smell.

Their narcotic and gill-blocking effect causes death in species affected.

t Some of their constituents have a pathogenic, mutagenic and carcinogenic effect (3,4-benzpyrene). They have probable harmful effects on the remote biological mediators of marine species, placing their survival at risk.

Conventions and agreements concerning dumping (eg "Convention for the prevention of marine pollution by dumping from ships and aircraft",London 1972/73 Oslo 1972; Dumping Protocol of the Barcelona Convention 1976) take into consideration the nature of the material intended for dumping and consider its toxicity, persistence and accumulation. In classifying materials intended for dumping, one is guided by the "(characteristics and the composition of the waste, the nature of the discharge site and the state of the receiving marine (environment (cf Annex I of the London Dumping Convention, and JThe Dumping Protocol of the Barcelona Convention) . i . The factors to be considered in establishing criteria governing the issue of permits for the dumping of matter sea are many. Consideration has to be given to (i) total amount and average compositions of matter dumped (ii) whether solid, sludge, liquid or gaseous (iii) the physical (solubility ¡and density) , chemical and bio-chemical (oxygen demand) and biological (presence of viruses, bacteria, yeasts, parasites) properties (iv) the toxicity (v) the physical chemical and biological persistence (vi) the accumulation and bio-transforma-tion in biological materials or sediments (vii) Susceptibility to physical chemical and bio-chemical changes and interaction in the aquatic environment with other dissolved organic and inorganic materials and (viii) the probability of production of taints or other changes reducing marketability of fish, shellfish, etc.

Characteristics of the dumping site and method of dumping are also important.

; Important considerations are (i) location, and location in relation to amenity areas, spawning, nursery and fishing areas, (ii) rate of disposal for specific period (iii) methods ;of packaging and containment if any (iv) initial dilution of |a chemical by proposed method of release, particularly the speed of the ships (v) the disposal characteristics taking into 'account currents, tides and wind, (vi) water characteristics, like temperature, PH, salinity, stratification, dissolved oxygen, 'chemical oxygen demand, bio-chemical oxygen deman, nitrogen content, (vii) the topographical geochemical and geological as •well as biological characteristics of the sea bottom (viii) the 'existence or otherwise, and effects of other dumpings which have been made in the same area.

» I

Other considerations should include the possible effects on amenities such as the presence of floating or stranded materials, turpidity, odours, discolouration or foaming. Effects on sea-harvesting, aguaculture and fisheries should also be considered. Also important are the possible effects of such dumped material in other uses of the sea such as impairment of water quality for industrial use, underwater corrosion of structures, interference with shipping from floating materials, and interference with fishing or navigational procedures through deposit of waste or solid objects on the sea bottom. 1

Lastly, one should consider the availability of alternative land based methods of treatment, disposal or elimination or '2 of treatment to render the matter less harmful for sea : .dumping (7),

Present state of pollution in the different maritime basins

- 1. The Mediterranean Sea (1)

The Mediterranean Sea.constitutes the southern, and in some cases the entire, maritime border of seven member states of the Council of Europe (Spain, Prance, Italy, Malta, Greece, Cyprus and Turkey). The European coast of the Mediterranean- is shared with Monaco, Albania and Yugoslavia. The position of Portugal (generally classified as a Mediterranean state for Council of Europe purposes) and • the iuropean Black Sea states (Rumania, Bulgaria and the USSR) should be seen in the light of the 1976 Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution. The boundaries of this sea as defined in ,this I convention are the meridian passing through Cape Spartel lighthouse at the entrance of the Straits of Gibraltar to the west, and the southern limits of the Straits of the Dardanelles between Mehir.etcik and Kumkale lighthouses to the east.

The problem of transfrontier pollution within the Mediterranean can hardly be described as a purely European one,¡although, up to the present day, most pollutants entering this sea originate from its European seaboard, particularly along the north-western coastline and the'Adriatic. Collaboration between states at sub-regional European level would assist considerably in alleviating the situation, but from, the purely technical viewpoint, taking the Mediterranean basin as an integral ecological entity, transfrontier pollution via the maritime, freshwater and aerial routes affecting this sea originates from, and affects, states from different geographical, political and organisational groupings. Such groupings involve western European states, both coastal and non-coastal, eastern European states (to a significantly less extent) and North African and Middle East States, which between them constitute the whole of the southern and eastern borders of the Mediterranean Sea proper. In addition, the position is complicated by the several "user" states, whose vessels regularly or occasionally use the Mediterranean as a •maritime transport route. Pollution from such vessels, whether originating in open international waters or within the territorial waters of any particular coastal state within the region, affects the waters and coastline of any number of coastal states depending on the particular pollutant, the amount released, and the climatic and related conditions during and following such release.

(1) Case-study presented at the Aachen Congress on "the prevention of transfrontier pollution and co-operation between local and ¡regional authorities" (3-5 April 1.979) by LJ SALIBA, Malta Human Environment Council, Ministry of Health and Environment,Mait

f

Pollution in the Mediterranean •• •»

a. General factors affecting pollution

The amount of literature on the state of pollution in the Mediterranean Sea, especially that based on research and monitoring studies performed during the last decade, has now assumed voluminous proportions, although most of this is of "localised significance. It is only r'ecently that a fairly rcomprehensive picture of the general situation is being slowly and painstakingly built up. !

The hydrographie conditions prevailing in the Mediterranean Sea are particularly conducive to pollutant retention within its marine zone in general, and to transfer of such pollutants across its internal international boundaries. Apart from its own intrinsic regional pollution cycles, it is a regular .receiver and retainer of pollution originating from external sources. Though officially described as a semi-enclosed sea, the Mediterranean is practically enclosed except at the Straits of Gibraltar at its westernmost end, the Straits of the Dardanelles to the north-east, and the Suez Canal to the south-east. Exchange of seawater mainly takes place at the Straits of Gibraltar, with water from the eastern Atlantic entering through surface currents» After following a fairly complicated pattern of movement through the western and •eastern basins, water flows out again to the Atlantic via the Straits of Gibraltar at intermediate level of between 200 and '600 metres in depth. This results in any floating pollutants entering the Mediterranean remaining within it. At the same time, the average circulation time of 80 years between incoming and outgoing waters results in any pollutant particles in suspension settling on to the bottom of the Mediterranean well before they could move out again.

: Some exchange of waters also occurs with the Black Sea ' via the Dardanelles and with the Red Sea via the Suez Canal. • These exchanges, however, are considered to be of relatively minor significance. Four major rivers, the Ebro, the Rhone,; zne Po and.the Nile, discharge their waters into the Mediterranean. The influx of freshwater from the Nile has

t decreased since the construction of the Aswan Dam. A considerable amount of pollutants reach the Mediterranean through rivers, which total 500.

The general circulation of water through the Mediterranean results in good mining in open waters, but poorer exchange between these and the deeply indented coastal zone. The

• situation, however,- differs between the various localities. In general, transfrontier pollution does not appear to present a gross problem in the case of effluents discharged off the coastline, as a considerable amount of these tend to remain

o f o

near the point of discharge. Continuous release of pollutants into the coastal zone, however, will result in dispersal into open waters, and thence into the territorial waters of other states, even under relatively static oceanographic conditions. Gross contamination is liable 'co occur (and has frequently occurred) when amounts discharged are exce ssive. and under favourable climatic a *

conditions, especially where distances involved are not great. The greatest degree of transfrontier pollution-is in the case of pelagic fish, which can move for long

'distances through open and/or coastal waters. ' ̂ Major sources of pollution

• The major sources of pollution in the Mediterranean (as is the case in other seas) can be conveniently divided into two categories: land-based and maritime. Both categories cause transfrontier problems. Land-based pollution mainly • originates from (1) domestic sewage, (2) industrial waste water, (3) agricultural run-off, (4) river discharges, (5) radioactive discharges. All these enter the Mediterranean either directly from coastal dr offshore outfalls, or indirectly through rivers and/or surface or subsurface runoff. This type of land-based pollution is caused by activities within states either having a Mediterranean coastline, or having rivers discharging into the Mediterranean. In the case of pollutants such as pesticides and certain heavy metals, the aerial route assumes major importance and land-based pollution can and does reach the Mediterranean from much farther afield via this route, depending on particular localities, prevailing winds, and the specific forms of the pollutants in question. The problem .of transfrontier pollution is therefore at two levels here: (1) within the Mediterranean basin itself, and (2) between continental Europe and the Mediterranean basin. The third Ijbvel: between non-European states not possessing a Mediterranean coastline and the Mediterranean basin, does npt appear to present any significant problem at the moment. i

Domestic sewage presents a problem mainly to the discharging state, and the comparative lack of admixture between coastal and open waters has lea to the accumulation o,f organic matter, thus causing eutrophication, in certain areas, while the sea as a whole remains relatively depleted from the nutritional aspect. Less than 20% of municipal wastes are either treated or discharged out to sea through sufficiently long pipelines in the Mediterranean region, and with the ever-increasing tourist population along the Mediterranean seaboard, the sewage problem has become acute in certain localities. Nevertheless, pollution from this source only rarely affects the coastline or territorial waters of any other state directly»

o f o

Industrial waste waters entering the Mediterranean directly-through outfall structures originate from complexes and individual industries located at or near the coastline. The major industrial areas involved here are concentrated all along the northern coastline of the western basin of the Mediterranean and in the Adriatic» Industrial concentration along the remainder of the coastline is still relatively sparse. Substances discharged from these sources include acids and alkalis, heavy metals, and a comprehensive range of synthetic organic compounds» Apart from ad hoc discharge via their own specific outfall structures, a significant amount of industrial waste water also reaches the Mediterranean through municipal sewage systems»

Although the general tendency is for any material discharged near the coastline to concentrate in that area, diffusion and exchange patterns vary with individual pollutants While the dispersion of ordinary domestic sewage from a point source would present no problems in the open sea, as the organic material would serve as a nutrient following dispersal, the spread of most inorganic and synthetic organic pollutants would raise their concentrations to values over the tolerable range even over wide areas» The steady influx of industrial effluents into the Mediterranean is therefore creating a transfrontier problem of regional, rather than inter-state (ie country to country) significance» In considering this type of pollution, whi'ch' affects primarily^' the living resources of the sea, one should also note tha;t in some cases, such as mercury pollution, it is still not known with any degree of exactitude as to what proportion of the current content of pollutant in the sea and in living resources is of anthropogenic as opposed to natural origin»

Agricultural runoff material includes mainly fertilisers and pesticides. Of these, the latter, especially the persistent organochlorine insecticides, are of major importance as transfrontier pollutants» It has been recently estimated that the pesticide consumption in the Mediterranean watershed over'an area of 1.25 million square kilometres is of the order of 0.25 million tons of active ingredient per year. Of this figure, nearly 5,700 tons represent organochlorine insecticides These figures, which form part of the results of a survey on pollution in the Mediterranean from land-based sources carried out by several UN agencies under overall UNEP sponsorship, represent an indication, rather than an accurate estimate , as (1) some countries were not included, and (2) the total area quoted contains duplication between the various types of pesticides. The same source estimates the annual organo-chlorine pesticide pollution load of the Mediterranean as ranging from 50 to 200 tons» This represents surface runoff, directly or through rivers»

River discharge is a significant factor in Mediterranean pollution, and in many instances it is difficult to estimate the relative amounts of pollutants which enter through rivers as opposed to coastal runoff. Approximately 500 rivers discharge their waters into, the Mediterranean, of which the largest ten, the Rhone (France), Po (Italy), Ebro (Spain), Nile (Egypt), Neretva (Yugoslavia), Drini (Albania), Evros (¡Greece), Tevere (Italy), Adige (Italy) and Ceyhan (Turkey), represent 44$ of the present day total water discharge from land» The most recent estimates indicate that, except in the case of organic matter, a larger quantity of pollutants enter the Mediterranean through rivers as compared with those originating in the coastal zone. The difference is perhaps the most pronounced in the case of radioactive discharges, where approximately 85$ of the tritium and 40$ of other radionuclides discharged stem from power plants on major rivers, and only the remainder from coastal sources.

Atmospheric transfer to the marine environment from l'and-based sources is now accepted as a significant route for pollutants, but is still comparatively unstudied. The atmosphere has been identified as such a route for the trans-fer of both metal and organic (including chlorinated and petroleum hydrocarbons to open ocean.areas. Considering the relatively large surface area of the Mediterranean Sea (3«5 million square kilometres), there appears to be little doubt that it receives a fairly significant amount of airborne . pollution, mainly from the European continent, which could also include pollutants transferred aerially to the North-Eastern Atlantic and thence into the Mediterranean via its surface layer water inflow.

Although the major pollution load in the Mediterranean Sea originates from land-based sources, the maritime source is equally significant. By far the most important pollutant here is crude oil and its derivatives. The development of tjhe North African and Middle East oilfields have led to the Mediterranean becoming the world's most used route for maritime cfil transport. Though the sea's total area is only 0.7$ of the global ocean area, it has been estimated that approximately

of the world oil traffic currently passes through it, and 1<975 estimates of oil crossing or landed in the Mediterranean aire of the order of 1500 million tons. Approximate estimates of crude oil and its by-products entering the Mediterranean through discharge of ballast by tankers and leakage at sea and from terminals give a current annual figure of nearly 0„5 million tons. If one considers the dramatic expansion in seabed oil exploration and exploitation all over the Mediterranean, coupled with the ever-increasing accident risk as a result of greater traffic, the potential figure becomes significantly .higher.

« / o

The importance of oil'as a pollutant in so far as effects on living marine resources are concerned may have been slightly over-rated in tne past. Nevertheless, there are no doubt:: nz to its significance, as deleterious effects on most organise exposed to it are continually being reported. Irrespective of this aspect, oil pollution poses a continuous threat to tourism and recreational amenities and can be considered as a classic case of transfrontier pollution, as its effects are continuously being felt well away from its original points of discharge. Q

i The Mediterranean has so far been spared the experience of

a disastrous oil spill on the scale of the Torrey Canyon or Amoco Cadiz, but the frequency of small-sized tar balls has rendered the situation precarious.

Apart from oil and its derivatives, the other maritime source of pollution is the dumping of chemicals and other wastes at sea. Such dumping does not occur frequently in the Mediterranean, arid represents only a minor hazard. The accident-risk involving a large tanker carrying toxic chemicals in bulk, of course, remains.

Prevention and control measures

The importance of protecting the Mediterranean environment, particularly the marine zone, through which the effects of pollution could be significantly felt by all eighteen coastal states, has been recognised throughout the last- decade at inter-national levels. At an early stage, it was recognised that the problem could not be solved purely by national legislative action, but required intergovernmental concertation to achieve positive results, but there appeared to be some disagreement on the level (regional, subregional or multilateral) and on. the precise modalities of such concertation.. The multi-prolonged overlapping approach evident in the first half of.the present decade resolved itself into a unified one with the adoption of the current Action Plan for the Mediterranean at an Intergovern-mental Meeting of Mediterranean Coastal States convened by the United Nations Environment Programme in Earcel'ona between : 28 January and 4 February 1975. The Action Plan, to which practically every Mediterranean government is subscribing through active participation, essentially consists of three main com-ponents - legal, scientific and integrated planning.

The legal component of the Action Plan consists in the 1976 Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution, and its associated protocols. The convention itself is of the "umbrella" type, specific action on each aspect of pollution being catered for by individual protocol or any other agreement deemed appropriate by the Contracting Parties. Two protocols were signed in Barcelona at a Plenipotentiary Conference of Mediterranean Coastal States con-vened by UNEP • in February 1976, one on dumping ; from ships and aircraft, and the other on co-operation in cases of pollution emergencies.

In association with the latter Protocol, the 1976 Barcelona Conference also passed a resolution approving the establishment of a Regional Oil Combating Centre for the Mediterranean Sea, which was officially opened in Malta under the joint auspices of UNEP and the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation (IMCO) in December of the same year» Discussions onf] a draft protocol to control pollution of the Mediterranean fr'pm land-based sources have been in progress since February 1977« Unlike the first two Protocols, this has resulted in a degree of disagreement on some fundamental issues, which is understandable in' a situation of heterogenity such as that prevailing between the eighteen Mediterranean Coastal States„ The crux of the matter lies in the fact that pollution from land-based sources is' intimately linked with agricultural, industrial and general sobio-economic development. It is hoped, however, that sufficient progress will be registered during 1979 to enable final agreement, and signature, of the Protocol towards the end of! the year. Preparations fox5 a further Protocol aimed at controlling pollution arising out of the exploitation of the continental shelf, the seabed and its subsoil commenced in December 1978 with a preliminary meeting of experts jointly convened by UNEP and the International Juridical Organisation (IJO) in Rome o

The Barcelona Convention and the first two Protocols came into force in February 1978, following the Sixth ratification. To-date, eleven Mediterranean coastal states have ratified the Convention and both Protocols, and accession by non-Mediterranean states is..now possible. Problems have been raised by the fact that both Contracting and non-Contracting Parties to the convention are actively participating in the Action Plan as a whole, and to solve the problem of participation, at least ad interim, the first meeting of the Contracting Parties, held in Cannes' in- February 1977 took place jointly with an intergovernmental reyiew meeting of Mediterranean coastal states.

The environmental assessment component of the Action Plan represents the scientific part, and is specifically aimed at assessing the real state of pollution in the Mediterranean, and providing the basic data for the technical annexes to the. various Protocols. The annexes to the dumping Protocol, signed in 1976, have been formulated on the basis of similar international agreements, such as the London (1972) and Oslo (1972) dumping conventions, with slight alterations to cater for Mediterranean conditions as judged by knowledge prevailing at' the time.

O

Unlike other regional seas, such as the North Sea ana the Baltic, information on the Mediterranean from the integrated pollution viewpoint has been relatively scanty, and the current scientific studies are aimed at remedying this deficiency. The studies are currently organised into a number of pilot projects, each operated by their national

. governments, and jointly co-ordinated by UNE? and the relevant UN specialised agency. ,

c • ; The establishment of the networks of participating

laboratories following approval of the scientific component in Barcelona in 1975 has involved the drafting and finalisation of detailed project documents taking the special requirements of the Mediterranean into account,

| equipping laboratories in developing countries, catering for training and.other needs, and standardising methodology

I to enable^accurate comparison of results. Originally scheduled to commence in 1976 and run for a two year period, it is only recently that the networks have started to function with satisfactory operational efficiency, and the projects will continue in their present pilot phase until the end of 1980. Eventually, they will be converted, into a permanent regional monitoring system under the terms of Article X of the 1976 Barcelona Convention, in order to provide a continuously updated picture of the situation along'with the effectiveness of remedial and preventive measures implemented. Apart from providing the technical basis for regional legal instruments, the projects are also highly useful for determining the requirements of national legislation in the pollution field.

This particular component of the Action H a n has raised problems of various natures. At fairly fundamental level, one main problem is over the confidentiality of information supplied by national institutions. - Some of the data, by its very nature, is confidential, and the fact .that all data

! supplied is being made, for practical purposes, freely ! available, is leading to reluctance to supply complete figures, wi th the result that the overall picture eventually drawn up might very well not reflect the true situation. Another problem lies in the fact that most of the"research elements

. in the projects are being performed by well-established 1 laboratories in various countries, most of which had already ongoing programmes in the marine pollution research field.

1 As a result of the inevitable reluctance of several institutions to reorient these programmes, the overall plan had to be tailored to fit the programmes of individual institutions, rather than the reverse. The overall results of the projects so far (at least in so far as their research element is concerned) resembles a mosaic rather than an integrated scheme, and more co-ordination and persuasion will be necessary in future work.

/

The third, or integrated planning component aims at reconciling socio-economic development with environmental 'preservation, and seeks to provide governments with the facts on which to formulate plans for optimum development on a sustainable basis without environmental degradation. This component, while promoting co-operative efforts, also ¡•takes into account the requirements of each individual '/pountry, and consists of two major elements: (l) the 'blue plan" for the' Mediterranean, a multistage study on 'an intersectoral basis, aimed at providing a complete 'scenario of the links between development and environment ¡in the various fields of Mediterranean activities, and i(2) the priority actions programme (PAP), consisting of •various fields of activity in which the state of existing knowledge justifies immediate practical action on a regional collaborative scale« To date, the necessary preparatory work for collaboration in the fields of soil protection, ^ water resource management, fisheries and aquaculture fnanagement, human settlements, tourism and renewable 'sources of energy, is in various stages of progress.

The essential nature of this integrated planning component of the Action Plan is that it caters for the Mediterranean basin, rather than only for the sea. A.t the same time, it does not limit itself to the control of current pollution through regional and national legal instruments based on periodic or continuous technical assessments of the situation, but rather seeks to prevent the incidence of further pollution through sound planning techniques, based on the realistic assumption that most of the countries within the region have to continue to develop, industrially and otherwise, in order to achieve their optimum stage of socio-economic self-sufficiency. It is seen as one way ,/-to eliminate or at least reduce'pollution within the region f priori through planned collaborative effort. This '

component is essentially a long-term one, and requires a [considerable degree of overall co-ordination and individual collaboration. 'Analysis of the situation !

The Mediterranean Action Plan is a classic example of ¡collaborative efforts at intergovernmental level .to control both national and transfrontier pollution. V/ith a common marine environment, these two are intimately linked in :the Mediterranean region. Implementation of the Plan has pot been without problems. First and foremost, unlike !otiier regional seas, the Mediterranean is bordered by states -exhibiting a wide degree of diversity in developmental status and political and economic interests.

0 / 0

Secondly, and perhaps related to the above, one should consider the differences between countries who.belong to the "polluter" category, and others who, up to the present time, have been receivers, rather than producers of pollution. Thirdly, the programme was, or appeared to be, mainly financed by United Nations (mainly UNEP) funds up to the end of 1973, whereas as from this year (1979)* the

•actual costs have started to be progressively borne by "Mediterranean governments themselves. This has led to long discussions over the distribution of funds between United Nations agencies and Mediterranean'governments during the current transitional phase, and over the proportions payable by individual governments. The continued functioning

, of the Action plan as a 'whole has, in fact, been the result of a large degree of goodwill and compromise on all sides.

The situation is of course complicated by the fact that Mediterranean pollution is a classic continuous transfrontier process which cannot be identified at individual or bilateral country level, but has to be recognised as a common pool, where, to varying extents, both causes and consequences are shared, though recognisably, on somewhat unequal terms. A further complication is caused by the intimate environmental links between the Mediterranean basin and continental Europe (which really form two overlapping regions with European states having a Mediterranean coast forming part of both) and the inevitable pollutant transfer between the two, in which .the Mediterranean receives more than.it transmits. Thirdly, there is the inescapable fact that the Mediterranean Sea is not the exclusive domain of its riparian states, but is regularly used by vessels of practically every nationality, all of which contribute, to greater or lesser extents, to its condition. Protection of the Mediterranean, therefore, cannot be justifiably described as a purely Mediterranean responsibility, but as one which should be shared first and

( foremost with continental Europe, and, perhaps to a lesser ¡extent, with other nations.

Continued implementation of the Action Plan by Mediterranean coastal states alone, without the involvement of other states, will therefore only partially solve the problem. It will, of course, alleviate it to a considerable extent, as the ;major source of pollution originates within the basin. A significant contribution towards the Mediterranean's protection can however be made by European states, especially those which are members of the Council of Europe, as these states, if not actually Mediterranean coastal states themselves, are to varying extents, the more likely to affect the Mediterranean because of their geographical proximity. This contribution could be twofold in character. Firstly, a more direct involvement in the Mediterranean Action plan itself through accession to the 1976 Barcelona Convention by individual European states.

Secondly, the co-ordination of environmental programmes in order to obtain a more accurate assessment of the common transfrontier pollution problems existing between the two regions, especially where airborne pollution is concerned. Such co-ordination of the relevant programmes would result in mutual assistance and collaboration between two overlapping ecological entities while at the same time preserve the existing individuality of each.

2. NORTH SEA, CHANNEL AND ATLANTIC OCEAN

Foreword

This report goes beyond the strict confines of its subject: it was to have dealt only with maritime pollution from land-based sources in the Atlantic Ocean, the English Channel and the North Sea, but it also discusses pollution by hydrocarbons from marine sources. But as the objective is to protect and safeguard the ^environment in question, I shall show that all forms of pollution rare inextricably bound up with one another.

Further, I see no point in dealing separately with the Atlantic (or at least its north-eastern sector), the English Channel and the North Sea.

The Channel forms part of the North Sea. Only the European shores of the Atlantic are of immediate interest, but they are' part of an immense marine ecosystem which ensures a better ecological balance.

The English Channel has the advantage of being windswept, and in particular the prevailing currents are such that pollution is carried towards the North Sea. The main pollution danger in the Channel results from another factor, namely concentrated shipping movements: it is used by 300 merchant vessels per day and 150 to 200 cross-Channel ferries, plus fishing boats and pleasure craft» This traffic includes a high volume of oil cargo, amounting to about one million tonnes per day.

It is therefore in no way surprising that statistics (from the Journal of Navigation - 25 - 19 72) show that 30% of all collisions occur in the Channel and a further 40% in the North Sea, the Baltic and the west European waters.

The scientific study of maritime pollution is under way in practically all countries which are sufficiently developed to carry it out. Much research already done has shown how serious jthe situation is. Positive proof of the need for action exists. There is a wealth of literature on the subject, and this report therefore has little that is new to offer; but by reiterating what has already been said and by collating disparate items of information, it sets out to spur to action those who hold responsibility for our future.

Pollution from land-based sources

Domestic pollution

The effluent discharged by sewers into hydrological basins and the sea contains mainly organic matter in suspension, emulsion or solution: nutrient salts, detergents, antibiotic substances and a wide variety of chemical and petrochemical compounds, all coming from domestic drains and run-off from impermeable urban surfaces. But it sometimes contains up to 50% of industrial waste, which considerably increases the pollutant effects both by its very nature and by the reactions it causes, limiting the water's self-cleansing potential and counteracting human efforts to purify it.

Urban waste water contains bacteria and viruses. The risk of contamination for man when bathing is minimal (except in the event of an epidemic) and even a matter of dispute. Analytical isolation of pathogenic organisms from sea water contaminated by sewer outfall is an indicator more of risk to the population at large than of risk to bathers. This form of pollution may nevertheless reach man when he eats uncooked filter-feeding molluscs such as oysters and other bivalves. In addition, certain bacteria are pathogenic for some aquatic species (plants and ; J animals) . They are thus indirectly harmful to man since they. j ¡contaminate links in the food chain. In fact such waste has much more profound and serious effects in the long term as it contains all types of pollutant in various quantities and concentrations. As 11 million cubic metres of urban waste are released into the (North Sea each day, it is easy to see how necessary and urgent jit is that we take action. /

Chemical pollution

! The chemicals discharged by industry are an endless variety of unsaleable manufacturing by-products. There are some which are unstable while others are unreactive; some are degradable and others not. Most of them, from the moment they reach the receptor environment trigger a series of.chemical reactions, which increase the chemical oxygen demand. They frequently destroy elements of the surrounding biomass or become part of it. When discharged into an environment with high biological oxygen demand (BOD), they often kill it altogether. t

Certain substances which are non-toxic at the time of discharge may become so by association, chemical conversion or synthesis after absorption, and their effects may take unsuspecting scientists by surprise. Some of them may destroy parts of the food chain, while others may themselves become part of it. r̂.

I Listing all these substances and their probable effects would

be an impossible task. i ! Almost all countries have drawn up lists of substances whose discharge on land, underground,, in surface waters, at sea- or into the atmosphere is forbidden or subject to certain standards. Few of these standards are the result of specific in-depth studies emd they are not harmonised. ! As for the discharge of waste by dumping (as mentioned above) it is more than doubtful whether any serious monitoring is carried out. i

Detergents and phosphates

The use of phosphate-containing detergents has increased so much in the industrialised countries that the level of phosphate discharge is one kilogramme per inhabitant per year, as high in quantity as the whole of human and animal excretory waste together with all the phosphates leached out of chemical fertilisers. ! Detergents or tensio-active substances are derived from mineral or synthetic greases which have the property of solubilising"greases and the majority of stains. They contain up

/

to 4'0% phosphates, which improves saponification, stabilises PH and softens water, keeping the calcium.and magnesium salts in suspension. All these phosphates, as well as the nitrogenous compounds and nitrates, will serve as nutrients, particularly for algae and aquatic plants, and will cause eutrophication. This manifests itself in an initial excessive increase in phytoplankton, ie overproduction of oxygen, followed by high oxygen consumption as a result of decomposition. Eutrophication is also fostered when the water does not circulate. In extreme cases, if anoxic conditions occur, sulphate-reducing bacteria will proliferate and highly toxic hydrogen sulphide will be produced. Detergents have replaced ordinary soaps composed of fatty acids, which had the A advantage of being completely biodegradable. The first detergents were, hardly degradable at all and remained active in waste water|. About 20 years ago, they were replaced by 80% degradable linear alkyl benzene sulphonates. Yet the really polluting elements are still the polyphosphates, which are the major cause of eutrophication

This form of pollution added to a much older form, resulting from run-off of chemical and other fertilisers from cultivated land. Nitrates, nigrogenous compounds and phosphates already placed a', heavy burden on certain biotopes. Agricultural production has been increased by the use of chemical fertilisers which, while necessary to begin with, become a nuisance when not consumed by the growing plants and washed from the environment.

Halogenated hydrocarbons

Pesticides,.herbicides and fungicides are used in agriculture (though this is not their only use by man - cf public health). They all contain toxic substances. These products make men more efficient than ever before in protecting certain resources from destruction by rodents, insects and moulds, from attack by certain animal or plant species, and from certain diseases (by destroying their carriers) . Among these products, pesticides ensure the j> growth of useful species by destroying their predators, herbicides selects species by eradicating their competitors, while fungicides enhance keeping quality.

All these substances are beneficial to man. The danger arises when they are used on a vast scale or without due consideration§or when inadequate precautions are taken during storage and handling.

DDT, for instance, was discovered in 1939 and 100 million tons of it were used in about thirty years. It spread over the t entire surface of the earth and, by fallout and run-off, contaminated the sea - all of it. The same is true of all such substances. They are highly stable, non biodegradable, tend to accumulate and are found in every link of the food chain. Although DDT concentrations greater than 0,002 ppm are rarely found in sea water, marine organisms concentrate it in successive stages up to 10 and even 150 ppm. Concentrations of up to 3,000 ppm have been found in the' fat of certain seagulls. The pollution is thus widespread and its effects on man are uncertain although infants would be sensitive to it.

Even without inflow on an industrial scale, the level of pesticides such as the organochlorines is sometimes high'as a result of their use in the home and their presence in-'water and food. The major source of pollution is nevertheless considered to be agriculture rather than urban waste. .

The only effect so far revealed is that on birds, which experience egg-hatching problems after eating fish contaminated by pesticides. As far as fish are concerned, the species rich .in oily fractions most easily accumulate the lipophilic compounds, sjuch as PCB. Certain lipophilic substances are more resilient ill a marine environment and are also biologically accumulated iii the food chain. Harmful effects on man have been observed (skin rashes, paralysis, vomiting and death).

We must also not forget that manufacture of them raises serious problems. There have already been numerous serious accidents (Seveso was one of them). Manufacture and accidents cause releases on land, into water and into the atmosphere.

Hence substances designed to protect us and our food supplies become a real danger', both directly and indirectly.

j; Nor should we forget the use of defoliants for military purposes. Disposal of defoliant stocks also causes problems sooner or later.

Heavy metals

On the subject of heavy metals in the marine environment, the same names reappear regularly. While all metals should probably be mentioned, their toxicity is either unknown or in many cases little known. The main ones are mercury, lead, cadmium, arsenic and nickel. They have formed part of our environment from time immemorial, though sometimes only in low concentrations (0.001 parts per 1,000). They are present in living things, in water, soil and rocks, and in the air itself when released b^ erosion. However, man has begun to increase the levels substantially by extraction, by chemical conversion, and by combining or synthesising them to form new substances. In the last few decades their concentration has grown enormously, mainly owing to industry. Unlike organic pollution, heavy metals are non-degradable. Their atoms cannot be broken down, and so persist in the marine environment, which is where they are most likely to affect man after conversion to highly toxic substances.

| Their toxicity depends on their chemicial structure, and "their integration depends on various mechanisms and the way in wljiich they are absorbed by certain organisms. Their toxicity will be a function of that. It should be noted that even very low concentrations can be highly toxic. f ; Their chemical action has many pathogenic effects, causing

biological damage to enzymes, proteins, phosphate derivatives and cell membranes.

Heavy metals are discharged by pipelines, sewers, canals and rivers, diluted, absorbed,'settle out near the point of discharge, estuaries and river mouths, are slowly dispersed and often trapped at certain points at sea by large marine whirlpools gyres - to be redistributed by diffusion, eddies, turbulence, residual currents and major bottom currents. They also reach the sea through atmospheric fallout. In this way lead, for instance, has been diffused over the entire surface of the earth, through the use of tetraethyl lead as an anti-knock additive for petrol.

0 1 The intense phytoplanktonic competition makes absorption

of metals possible even when they are in minute concentrations. Certain aquatic plants contain up to 150 ppm of zinc while sea water contains scarcely 0.01 ppm. Clearly, there is an exogenous inflow.

The toxicity of a pollutant will vary not only according to the way it is converted in the marineenvironment but also according to the species. The unexpected conversion of mercury into methyl mercury by marine microorganisms, for example, has little effect on aquatic life yet the latter compound is highly toxic to mammals and humans. Following the Minamata tragedy in Japan, up to 40 ppm of it were found in fish and crustaceans. The inflow of very small quantities of metallic elements into sea water increases the concentration in the lower and intermediate trophic stages by a very high proportion within a week.

A. Jennen has confirmed that methyl mercury is virtually the only organic mercury compound found in the sea fish studied.

It should be noted that there are enormous differences in the methylation rate from one individual fish of a particular age to another and even from one year to another. Furthermore, a progressive rise has been observed in the methylation rate when the total mercury content remains constant or even decreases This trend is disturbing, to say the least, and should be monitored very closely.

The content also varies from one species to another and the accumulation process is not the same for all metals.

Three factors may influence the development of contamination levels: time, environment and selective accumulation processes.

Under identical conditions, some species react in a special way because of their specific characteristics. In other words, changes in environmental conditions and in certain processes will have differing effects from one species to another

Fish, for instance, fix mercury much less and lead hardly at all. Benthic invertebrates exhibit about the same fixation rate fo;r all elements. Algae (on breakwaters) fix cadmium in particular., zinc more than copper and lead, and mercury hardly at all.' Mussels (on breakwaters) behave similarly to algae except that the fixation rate for mercury is similar to that for copper, lead and zinc.

i Comparison of the various, elements fixed has shown that mercury must be -fixed by processes that are specific to it. Marine organisms also contain a higher proportion of the organo-metallic forms of this element (especially methyl mercury) than of any other element. Methyl mercury, which is particularly toxic, becomes fixed to the SH groups of the aminoacids more stably than the mineral forms.

The stability of the mercuric compounds with the sulphurated aminoacids means that they are retained in the proteins after fish is cooked. Although mercuric compounds are normally so vjblatile, there is no difference in the amount in fresh and cooked foods except due to variations in humidity.

The level of contamination also varies from one organ to another, as does the rate of elimation when the fish is returned to a pure environment. The brain remains contaminated for longest

Studies on the effect of direct mercury and cadmium cpntamination on certain marine teleosts or teleosts adaptable to life in sea water show that these animals too are capable of accumulating large quantities of these heavy metals at sublethal doses. The concentrations are high in the viscera and the elimination half-life is very long.

It should be pointed out that slightly contaminated fish ^ contain proportionately more methyl mercury than heavily contaminated ones and that there is apparently no maximum mercury concentration above which the fish cannot survive.

Eels contaminated at sublethal levels of intoxication accumulate quantities of mercury and become resistant to concentrations which would normally have been lethal. This effect can be associated with the formation of "methallothioein" type proteins in the various organs of the eel. These low. . molecular weight proteins contain numerous SH groups which have a great affinity for heavy metals. They are normally present in organs where they control the amount of essential metals (zinc, copper etc) in the cells. Synthesis of them is speeded up when the fish is exposed to water contaminated by heavy metals.

As a general rule, heavy metals can be accumulated from water and/or from food and at different rates. Moreover, additive or opposing effects can result when the various pollutants accumulate.

, All this goes to show the variability of accumulation but we can predict that since industrial waste is continuously increasing marine pollution, heavy metals will accumulate in fish, molluscs and crustaceans until sea food becomes unfit for human consumption.

Concentrations have been observed which represent twice • the normal level for zinc and chrome, 10 times the normal level for copper, 30 times the norm for lead and up to 1,000 times the norm for mercury.

While consumption of raw crustaceans contaminated by organic pollution involves the risk of bacterial and even viral contamination for man, where industrial waste is involved the water may contain concentrations of toxic pollutants dangerous to the crustaceans themselves, but in addition the crustaceans will be dangerous if consumed, even when cooked.. I think this form of pollution is by far the most dangerous because except in cases where the effects are spectacular, eg extremely high . mortality rates among fish, water birds and humans, as was the case at Minamata, it goes unnoticed. Since it is on the increase we may ask ourselves what its effects will be in the long term. It is constantly being introduced into the food chain and in increasing quantities too. How long will it be before nature's enormous ability to adapt reaches its limit? What barriers will the human body naturally erect to protect itself from, and adapt.to, this'invasion? If it is possible to limit pollution a little we can probably only limit the forms which are bound closely up with our technology and as they are so diversified the pollution is all the harder to mohitor. Indeed, it is often practically inevitable.

Through our technology, which has always been considered to represent Progress, a spectre appears whose skeleton is composed of heavy metals. By what magic shall we avoid the Apocalypse? To say that everything is the beginning of something new now seems like deception. Every year some species disappear. How many Others are not endangered? Is not the one in greatest danger man himself?

Thermal pollution .

The main source of thermal pollution is industry, and above all electric power stations which take in water at its normal temperature for use as a coolant and then discharge it at higher temperatures.

A 1,000 MW nuclear power station takes in 400 tons of cooling water per minute and discharges it again at least 10°C hotter. The water pumped out often reaches 40-45°C (Delvaux, 1975), while the temperature should never exceed 30°C and certainly not 35°, given that a temperature of 40°C is lethal for many organisms (Elskens, 1975).

Sometimes the water is pumped directly out into the sea and sometimes it is discharged into watercourses. It therefore reaches the sea at temperatures which may be higher than natural.

Simplistic reasoning and thoughts of pleasant summer bathing might suggest that an increase in the water temperature would be good for aquatic life. Although certain short term studies even suggest that a rise in temperature may stimulate metabolic, growth and productive processes, we cannot be satisfied with superficial analyses and macroscopic approaches and it is essential that we take into account the fact that an ecosystem is deeply rooted in the microscopic and submicroscopic levels. If we view the thermal effect in the normal context of, seasonal vacations, the life cycle,- the food cycle, thé transfer of matter, its synthesis and decomposition, it_is

o / o

° evaluating these consequences, we must take into account both the natural seasonal temperature fluctuations and the specific complexity of an ecosystem in which physical, chemical and biological factors continually interact to make it ALL into a harmonious system integrated with the ambient conditions. A rise in temperature of a few degrees can often cause fundamental changes in the aquatic ecosystem and the viability of the pisciculture even when temperatures directly harmful to fish are not reached

Temperature variations change the very characteristics of the water, affecting not only its density but also its composition. We have seen the importance of the dissolved oxygen content and it is here that a rise in temperature has its most harmful effect. At 0°C, water can contain 15 ppm of oxygen, while the figure drops to 13 ppm, 9 ppm and 7 ppm at 10°C, 20°C and 30°C respectively. Since the power to absorb oxygen decreases as the temperature rises, so will its self-cleansing power. At the same time, this rise in temperature will initially promote bacterial activity causing oxygen consumption to increase and will then diminish reaeration power. The bacteria in faecal matter, however, which require an environment rich in organic matter and with relatively low salinity, will disappear faster as the temperature rises. TJhe consequences of thermal pollution for the diversity of species within the ecosystem depend on the level of such pollution. At low levels, it seems to have no effect. When thermal pollution increases beyond the natural limits of the environment the diversity occasionally even tends to increase but when a certain level is exceeded there is almost always a reduction in diversity which may go as far as the total elimination of most living species. This is what happens to the majority of microorganisms in phytoplankton„ algae and aquatic plants.

Eutrophication is strongly influenced by temperature, and A rise of a few degrees - even a natural rise - can trigger it off.

An unnatural rise in the temperature of the aquatic environment will also upset the biological cycle of fish causing them to lay their eggs and the eggs to hatch before the natural food for the young fish appears.

Thermally polluted fresh water released into the sea, being less dense, will remain on the surface for longer, thereby affecting a larger proportion of the sea. v

On the whole, where non-thermal pollution is constant, a rise in temperature will cause an increase in the mortality rate of the aquatic biomass. j

It should also be noted that the effects of thermal pollution on the functioning of an aquatic ecosystem already receiving various pollutants cannot be studied in isolation as indirect and additive effects occur.

Radioactive pollution

The main source of radioactive discharges is nuclear power stations and the associated recycling industry. Whatever precautions may be taken, they will never completely eliminate the risk of pollution. In addition, there are dangers arising from the use of radioactive isotopes in medicine, science and industry,, from the shipping of radioactive substances and from the use of nuclear energy to power ships. This last risk is [further aggravated because the majority of nuclear powered ships /are warships, which are obviously not invulnerable in battle, y

! ' More serious still is the question of radioactive waste, principally radionuclides. These radionuclides produce internal contamination through radiation and are absorbed by the aquatic environment. External contamination will also be caused by the aquatic environment and by accumulation of radioactive substances in the sediments. The consequences of radioactive radiation do not seem to be proportional to the quantity ¡received (Elskens, 1975).

Sedimentary particles in suspension and sediments themselves fix the radionuclides present in sea water and, in higher 1 concentrations, in the fine sedimentary granules. This absorbency will depend less on the specific surface area of the particles than on the minerals they contain.

At sea level, natural radioactivity is about 130-150 millirems :a year, of which 50 come from the earth's crust, 50 from space and the rest from a variety of other sources.

To xthis figure we now have to add the fallout from nuclear explosions and the radioactive waste dumped in the sea. It was calculated in 1970 that these extra loads caused by man would mean a total increase of 1/1,000 of a curie. Goldberg was thus able to state that natural radiation had increased since man had started playing sorcerer's apprentice by manipulating radioactivity for humanitarian, commercial or still less ilaudable purposes. The result was a worldwide, and therefore 'also oceanwide, pollution problem.

We know what effect radioactivity has on man and animals: when the gonads are irradiated genetic and mutagenic effects may occur. The radioactive elements reaching man through the food chain are cumulative. Plankton and aquatic plants help to accumulate them. Bacterial mutation has been observed in the oceans with bacteria becoming pathogenic -by transformation of their hereditary potential. Tuna have had to be destroyed because it was noticed that they contained excessive amounts of radioactive elements.

It has emerged that dangerous radioactive elements such as strontium are rapidly transported to all corners of the earth by ocean currents and atmospheric movement. It is said that any radioactive substance released into the atmosphere reaches all parts of the globe, oceans included, in 25 days.

As the ocean constitutes one of the starting points of the general food chain, radioactivity therefore represents a grave danger for man there too.

Correlation between the North Sea, the Baltic and the Mediterranean 0

If the Baltic and the Mediterranean were the first seas to be covered by protection agreements, it was because it was rejklised how badly polluted they were. We must not wait until the same point is reached with the North Sea.

' Although the Mediterranean is not an entirely European sea over half of it forms part of the European heritage and that has furthermore not prevented agreements.

! With the exception of a few details, there is no reason why these three seas should be governed by three different agreements (even if the parties to them are different), the more so as certain countries have coasts adjoining two of them. Other countries include regions that form parts of hydrological basins draining into seas the countries do not adjoin.

We must therefore harmonise and supplement the regulations governing the Baltic and the Mediterreanean and extend them to cover other European seas (including the North Sea).

For the North Sea, all we have is the Bonn agreement of 9 June 196 9, providing for co-operation, assistance and exchange of information between 9 coastal states, the 1972 Paris agreement and the 19 71 Copenhagen agreement on prevention of marine pollution by oil.

This is a highly unsatisfactory state of affairs.

The vulnerability of coastal regions

| This subject was brought up at the European parliamentary kJLv.-; i n p a ris on 4 July 19 78, on oil pollution in coastal

To date, accidental spillage has invariably meant oil, but other types of pollution, ie caused by other types of cargo, are conceivable because almost everything that man extracts, manufactures, processes or uses is transported by sea. Any mass spillage of pollutants in a fishing, fish-farming or seaweed-harvesting area will of course have an immediate and disastrous effect: part of the stock will be destroyed in a more or less brief space of time, a further proportion will be unsaleable through soiling or impregnation, while yet another part may be contaminated with trace elements which are not immediately discernible and have varying effects on the species concerned or on man.. In addition to this potential form of pollution, there is chronic hydrocarbon pollution and all other types of pollution of municapal and industrial origin where waste is discharged or disposed of near coasts. It therefore happens that other pollutants become concentrated

in an environment in very varied proportions. Owing to the extremely wide variety of pollutants, it is not always possible to differentiate between them in terms of the effects observed, added to which synergistic phenomena must be taken into account.

Coastal zones in the Channel and near ports are particularly vulnerable as the density of shipping in such areas brings with it the risk of accidents.

All coastal zones are at a disadvantage as a mere onshore wind will drive pollution towards the coast and the shallower waters, thereby severely restricting natural dispersion. These zones, which are excellent spawning grounds, are unfortunately most often affected by pollution. Moreover, they are chronically affected even though they are not affected all the time.

Plankton, eggs, larvae and young fish are naturally most sensitive to the various effects of the various types of pollution. These effects may go as far as extinction of a species locally or even entirely if the area affected is the species' only habitat.

Even if edible species have been contaminated and after a time become apparently edible again it is almost certain that they will have retained some exogenic elements from the pollutant. In certain species (larvae, crustaceans and fish) there is an enzymatic system capable of breaking down hydrocarbons and, as is often the case in degradation, the metabolic chain produced may include molecules which are occasionally highly toxic. And while a study by GESAMP does not show that the presence of carcinogens in fish etc is a definite danger for man, the study does not rule it out.

When detergents (which have the harmful effects mentioned above) are used to clean up polluted coastal areas, the effects on the marine environment are sometimes even more harmful than those of the oil being combatted. The problems are not all 6 solved by the use of dispersants, précipitants, agglomérants or emulsifiers either. Moreover, none of these really eliminate the pollution: all they do is fix it temporarily, displace it, disperse it and break it up, which may perhaps make it even easier for certain species to absorb. While the effects of large-scale accidental pollution are immediate, the. ecological impact spreads insidiously in space and time.

The fishing industry will undergo a loss in production for quite a long time and the fouling will damage fishing equipment.

Accidental pollution on a large scale, and continuous less visible pollution,if the public is made aware of it, will have a fairly long term èffect on tourism in the affected area and even in the adjoining areas.

All the North Sea (Channel and Atlantic) coastlines are vulnerable because they are exposed. But in view of their important role in nature and for man, all the necessary protective measures must be taken as quickly as possible.

o / o

The need to protect the biomass and the balance of nature

Quite apart from its importance to shipping, the North Sea is of particular significance to all European countries as a source of food. If it did not exist, its contribution would have to be replaced by imports with the attendant economic consequences. Food from the sea furthermore affords a dietary variation which is always beneficial and even necessary to health.

The fishing industry deploys 40,000 boats in the North Sea, and if only 1,500 are over 100 tonnes gross, that is because the coastal regions are the main fisheries; overall they bring in nearly three million tonnes of fish for the European market, including 6% crustaceans and shellfish.

Fish is a delicate commodity, not only from the point of view of keeping, but also throughout its life. Like any other species, it occupies a niche in the biomass, where it reproduces, feeds, lives and dies. A whole series of conditions are necessary for its existence. Apart from adequate food at the right time, other ambient conditions are important: the limpidity of the water, the salinity, the temperature and the amount of oxygen dissolved in it are the most important ones.

Some forms of pollution are directly harmful to the species themselves, while other forms are harmful to certain elements in their biotope. With delicate species inhabiting a delicate biotope, the need for protective measures is obvious.

The North Sea is a relatively enclosed sea with tidal currents which are often considerable. They are the result of local and oceanic currents and become residual currents ending in gyres. The waters of the North Sea are only renewed slowly and most of the pollution remains trapped there. Through biosynthesis it enters the food chain and reaches man.

Like all the other seas, the North Sea depends on the physico-chemical process of oxygen/carbon dioxide exchange (0/C02) which takes place at the air/water interface. Although the surface plays an important and even major part, the exchange is the result of a whole series of processes that take place in the aquatic mass as a whole. Upsetting the natural and general balance guaranteed by this necessary exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide endangers the entire planet. (This problem

0 has already been covered.)

Large-scale oil pollution resulting from a shipping disaster has immediate and long-term consequences for the tourist trade and the resorts in the affected area and even the adjoining • areas. If it occurs in the tourist season it drives the clientele away, and if it occurs outside the tourist season it causes a reduction in bookings and even the. cancellation of existing bookings, as well as shaking the clientele's confidence for future seasons. This will mean financial loss for all those directly or indirectly dependent on the tourist trade. The tourists will be deprived of the beneficial effects of their holidays and are also likely to.suffer financial loss by cancelling reservations and making new arrangements late.

If any form of pollution is discovered causing, say, a drop in the quality of the water for swimming and recreational purposes (eg the discovery of certain bacterial indicators) and the public is made aware of it, the effect on tourism will be the same. (For the same reasons the fish trade may also be affected.)

The bacteria normally used as indicators of contamination are the E.coli, the streptococci faecalis and the coliform bacteria. The Belgian standards for swimming areas are:

pH between 7 and 8 a maximum of 150 ordinary germs per ml a maximum of 20 coliform bacteria per 100 mis

- no E. coli, streptococci or staghylococci in 100 ml. During bathing, the water can transmit intestinal, respiratory,

auricular and occular infections as well as other diseases such as meningitis and polio.

Remarks on particular forms of pollution

Pollution from discharges or refuse dumps

Any pollutant deliberately or accidentally deposited on land ultimately reaches the sea, via precipitation which flows, percolates and filters into sewers, canals and river basins. Only a tiny proportion is held back by the filtering medium. All along their course, such pollutants undergo biological and/or chemical change the result of which may not be to eliminate their harmful effects but even to aggravate them. An originally harmless substance may undergo changes which make it toxic. In addition, some substances which are initially held back in the filtration process change their structure and then continue tin their way towards the sea.

Any refuse dump, whether industrial or municipal, eventually releases the pollutant substances it contains. Europe's high population density and.level of industrialisation are necessarily conducive to this process.

Being aware of the problem as a whole, the European Community has allocated 2 4 million EUA for study of the recyling of municipal and industrial waste.

Pollution by atmospheric fallout

Atmospheric pollution affects the pollution of the sea through fallout. All pollutant particles discharged into the air are carried away by thermal currents and by the wind, finally falling back on the land and sea.

Every form of conversion of matter into energy by combustion pollutes the air, and ever since man has been using fossil fuels this problem has become steadily worse. The process is on the increase owing to industrial expansion and its heavy energy consumption and the increased and widespread use of internal combustion engines.

e / 9

Enormous quantities of carbon, sulphur and nitrogen compounds are poured into the air in this way, and added to by gas and vapour exhausts, bearing solid particles, from industry and human activity in general: there are sulphides, fluorides, chlorides and metals, all of them substances (many poisonous) which industry is unable to reclaim or convert. As long as they are in motion, there are decomposition, combination and synergistic processes the products of which are often highly toxic.

There are also the many production mishaps and leakages which release toxic substances into the air. They attract attention only if they occur on a massive scale and with rapidly evident consequences, as at Seveso.

The North Sea, being surrounded by densely populated and highly industrialised countries, receives a large share of such fallout.

At its 34th session in March-April 1979, the ECE adopted a draft convention on long-range transfrontier air pollution. There is undoubted need for action in this field: the amount of this fallout is estimated as equalling that of the waste carried down by the Rhine.

Municipal effluent

The need to purify municipal effluent before discharge is now universally recognised. This highly contaminated water may no longer be discharged untreated either into lakes or rivers or into the sea. But there still remain concentrated residues which are not degradable.

The pollutant content of effluent is measured in terms of three factors:

1. suspended solids 2. biological oxygen demand (organic origin) 3. chemical oxygen demand (chemical origin).

The first is elimated by flotation, sedimentation and filtration, the second by breaking down the organic content through aerobic bacteria whose development is stimulated by oxygenating the water, the third with chemical oxydising agents.

By eliminating suspended solids and 85% of the BOD, together with suitable disinfection, the resistance of most viruses is lowered to a minimum after sufficient contact time.

Chlorination and other disinfectants used to reduce the bacterial population are not always desirable as they impede biological self-purification and can be harmful to crustaceans and fish.

The average daily water consumption per person is 180 litres, and it is discharged with a pollution load estimated at:

90 gms of suspended matter 54 gms of substances with a BOD

135 gms of substances with a COD.

After the water is released in a relatively pure state, the residual sludge is of the order of 700 kg per person per year.

It is estimated that the European Community disposes of 300 million tonnes of waste water per year.

The sewerage network also serves to drain away rainwater. Heavy rainfall steps up pollution by washing down exposed surfaces and pipes, thus flushing away temporarily sedimented matter.

The residual sludge constitutes a danger to the environment, is expensive to dispose of.and contains a number of highly polluting elements, of which a large proportion contain highly toxic metals and other waste. Treatment and storage of them raises problems and discharging them into the sea cannot be the ultimate answer as it only shifts the problem (literally and metaphorically).

Waste water must therefore not only be treated before release into, the environment in general but especially before release into the sea. A solution must also be found to the problem of treating residual sludge.

The regions are. responsible for removal of the community's waste water, and industry must deal with its own waste. Standards must be established at community level for all such waste. The study of sludge treatment, recycling and storage already forms part of a multinational waste recycling research and development programme begun by the European Community which, having defined the main objectives for a programme of action for the period 1976.-81, has allocated 6 million EUA to this research.

The reutilisation of waste water and sludge for agriculture and urban parks and gardens is an interesting option.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Ever since the first important tanker accident in 1907, when the tanker "Thomas W. Lawson" was grounded near the Scilly Islands, spilling about 8,000 tons of crude oil into the sea (8), world opinion and concern about pollution of the sea has always been on the increase.

Twenty-one years before the world had seen the launching of the first tanker - the GLUCKAUF - powered by steam (9), but the word 'pollution' was not new.

As early as 1754, mention is already made to the pollution reaching the island Holy in the Caspian Sea. This was attributed to petroleum products leaking from the wooden 'transport ships of the time (10).

By 192 6 the situation must have deteriorated (by standards prevailing at the time) to such an extent that the need to formulate an international convention had already been felt (11)".

The days of coal and steam were fast receding into history and the wheels of industry were becoming more and more oil-thirsty. The gradual development of industry's ever increasing dependence on oil and oil products had started. By 1938 the main producers, USA, Russia, Venezuela and Iran/Iraq, were producing the bulk of the world's oil, then calculated at 272 million tons (12).

Most of the North American oil was shipped back to the East Coast and some to South America. Venezuela exported to the Americas, and across the Atlantic to Western Europe. Middle East oil as well as Russian oil also found its way mostly to Western Europe through the Mediterranean, the Gulf and the Suez Canal. A fair amount arrived by land and some was also shipped to South East Asia and Australia (13).

The World Oil Tanker Fle6t by 1939 was estimated at about 16,000,000 gross tonnage (14) and increasing at a fast rate. In 19 78 world oil production reached a staggering figure of 3,055 million tons (12) partly distributed by a world tanker fleet of 332.5 million gross tonnage (14).

Oil tanker routes have by now changed considerably. Middle East oil production accounts for the bulk of the. increase in world production, exporting through the Gulf, eastwards to South East Asia and round the Cape all the way up to South America and Europe. Some of the Middle East oil tankers reach Europe through the Mediterranean as does most of the North American oil (13).

Of relative significance is the recent development of the oilfields in the North Sea.

Of more recent importance is the conflict between Iran and Iraq with the resultant drop in oil production of both these "giant" oil exporters.

IMPORTANT MARITIME DISASTERS

As far as marine pollution from pipeline accidents is concerned, we are still lucky in not having had any reported so far in European waters.

In October 1967, an accident at a coastal installation (reservoir) in Port d'Anvers (Belgium) resulted in the spillage of 3,000 tons of heavy oil.

A layer oil spill (12,000 tons) ensued as a result of an accident on an off-shore drilling platform in April 1975. This happened in the North Sea, in Norwegian waters, on the Ekofisk field, when there was an eruption of an oil drilling hole under the platform "Bravo". It took eight days to stop the flow which later investigations showed to have been due to human error due to lack of trained personnel and long hours of work.

About 40% of the spill evaporated, whereas most of the spilled oil was sucked up. Dispersants were used sparingly and the movements of the oil slick were surveilled by the SLIKTRAK system. The American satellite NIMBUS 6 was also used to monitor the movement of buoys placed on the edge of the slick (16).

No coastal involvement ensued and the biological damage was very little.

Coastal involvement on the other hand is a feature of 40% of oil tanker accidents on the Atlantic coast of Europe. Of the total amount of oil spilled in accidents iri this area, well over 75% arrived at and polluted the coasts and the immédiate coastal waters. In the Mediterranean Sea only 7% of accidents ended up in coastal pollution and this was due to a small fraction (4%) of the total amount of oil spilled in such accidents (15).

The following list of tanker accidents producing oil spillages above 500 tons in European waters helps to convey an idea of the various causes of accidents, means of combatting the resultant pollution and the impact on coastal zones.

MARINE POLLUTION DUE TO TANKER ACCIDENTS PRODUCING SPILLAGES ABOVE 500 TONS IN EUROPEAN WATERS (1955-"79) '

ANNE MILDRES (20 February 1966)

Collision in fog in Elbe Estuary (Germany) and sinking after explosion and fire. Spilled 16,000 tons of Iranian crude. Dispersant used.Natural dispersion of oil slick before reaching coast. This accident led to the formation of the BONN AGREEMENT for the prevention of oil pollution in the North Sea.

TORREY CANYON (18 March 19 67)

Grounding on Scilly Isles spilling 121,200 tons of Kuwait crude. Human error, late assistance and late intervention by Royal Airforce to drown ship and set the cargo ablaze. Three thousand five hundred tons of 158 different dispersants used. All other means tried. Two hundred and fifty kilometres of' English and 100 km of French coasts suffered serious pollution. A full report of the Scientific Commission is in HMSO Publication.

SPYROS LEMNOS (8 November 1968)

Breaking near Cape Finisterre in Spain, spilling 15,000 tons of Venezuelan heavy crude. Atlantic coasts of France polluted two months later by tar balls.

POLY COMMANDER (5 June 197 0)

Grounding in Vigo Bay (Spain), spilling 15,000 tons of Arabian light crude. Due to pilotage error and ship and oil slick taking fire. Five kilometres of coast polluted by' 1,000 tons of petroleum. Little biological damage. Smoke and burnt particles fell on midland villages days later. Rescue operations helped by helicopter surveillance.

PACIFIC GLORY (23 October 1977)

Collision with ALLEGRO in heavy seas, six miles off the Isle of Wight, spilling 6,300 tons of Nigerian light crude. Navigational error, followed by explosion and fire. Stricken ship later towed to Rotterdam. Some pollution of Sussex coast. Very quick salvage operation avoided greater disaster. Many officers on both the ships did not have suitable qualifications.

SABINE (13 December 197-2)

Collision with ILICE in strong currents in the Strait of Messina, spilling 25,000 tons of crude oil. Twelve kilometres of coast polluted quickly due to strong winds and sea currents.

TSESIS (26 October 1977)

Grounding in arctic conditions in the archipelago of Stockholm, due to mistaken date on the chart showing depth of sea. Spillage of 1,100 tons of medium grade fuel oil. Serious pollution of coasts due to prevailing winds and currents as well as the cold water conditions.

AMOCO CADIZ (16 March 1978)

Grounding in very stormy seas near Portsall (Brittany -France). Spilling 228,000 tons of light Arab and Iranian crude. A breakdown in the rudder system, insufficient means to tow, and a mysterious twelve hour silence before sending a distress signal led to the disaster. The ship could not be flooded and it was decided not to set it ablaze. In spite of recuperating 30,000 tons at sea near the coasts and 15,000 from the shores _( 14,000 persons involved), grave pollution affected 400 km of coast. Bird life, fishes, oyster fields, crab and weeds as well as tourism were heavily hit.

As a consequence local authorities of maritime regions were given more powers, the Polmar plan was brought more up-to-date and new regulations governing shipping in the Channel were introduced.

ELENI - V (6 June 1978).

Collision in heavy fog in the North Sea while carrying heavy fuel. Five thousand tons of oil were spilled when the ship was split in two by the cargo ship R0SELINE. A change in wind direction brought about pollution of 35 km of coast near Great Yarmouth and inflatable booms were used to protect an estuary. Having been very critical (?) during the Amoco Cadiz accident and adopting exaggerated optimism, British authorities were eventually criticised for being unable to avoid pollution due to an inefficient anti-pollution plan, which failed in many aspects: inco-ordination of action, lack of dispersant for heavy oil and the absence of mechanical recuperators.

CHRISTOS BITAS (12 October 1978)

Grounding on the coast of Wales. Spilling 5,000 tons of crude Iranian. The ship threw 4,000 tons in the sea to float again, and signalled distress only after 12 hours. Coastal pollution was not disastrous. Britain asked for help from the seven countries signatories of the Bonn Convention.

ESSO BERNICIA (30 December 19 78)

Collided in SullomToe h a r b o u r Shetland Islands) in very cold weather with strong winds and snow, against a stationary structure, spilling 1,100 tons of Bunker oil. An assisting boat took fire. Five hundred and fifty tons oil polluted the shore in spite of the use of booms, and other means. Very high mortality in bird population. Stricter "in port'regulations taken eventually to avoid pollution by tankers using this terminal.

/

ANDROS PATRIA (31 December 1978)

Rupture in bad weather off Cape Finisterre (Spain), "P followed by explosion and fire. Ship abandoned by crew and

taken in tow by special tug boats. No port authority would accept the ship. Spillage of 47,000 tons of light Iranian crude caused two huge oil slicks, treated with dispersants by the Spanish Naval Authorities. Rest of cargo tránshipped to another tanker on the high sea.

BETEL GEVSE (8 January 1981) I

Exploded while unloading in Bantry Bay (Ireland) after . offloading heavy crude Arabian, but while still containing light crude Arabian. Breaking in three parts and spilling 27,000 tons it caused considerable damage to the terminal and 51 people lost their lives - heavy pollution resulted. ANTONIO GRAMSKI (28 February 1979)

-v Grounding in the Baltic Sea (Russian waters) spilling

500 tons of crude oil. Coastal pollution averted because of ice along the coast, however, the oil slick extended down

„ to the Stockholm archipelago where there was no ice, and polluted 25 small islands and 100 km of coast. Movements of

^ the oil slick kept under aerial observation by radar equipment on plans used by Swedish coastguards.

ENERGY CONCENTRATION (22 June 1980)

Panamese tanker broke in the midships when unloading a cargo of crude oil in Europort (Rotterdam), spilling approximately 1,400 tons of crude oil.

TAN10 (July 1980)

/"*"\v Carrying 26,000 tons of heavy fuel oi 1, encountered heavy seas, I troke in two amid ships and spilled several thousand tons of

heavy oil about 35 miles off Brittany. Fore section, containing 6,000 tons of oil sank to a depth of 90 meters. This was eventually

. pumped up, 11 months after the grounding.

Total cost for cleaning-up the beach and pumping up the •remaining oil : 400 million French Francs.

SOURCE Banque de données-Institut Français du Pétrole.

/

SHIPPING ACCIDENTS IN THE MEDITERREAN

(Regional Oil Combating Centre News Bullettin).

Oil Spills in the Mediterranean : No of Accidents: 1977 - 6, 1978 - II,' 1979 - 10

Causes : Collisions - 2 Grounding - 6 Damage or wrong manoevre - 9 Degassing - Unidentified - 8

Oil spillage was reported in 17 of the 27 accidents. = 10,000 tons I

5 .000 - 10,000 tons 4 1 .000 - 5.000 tons 3

500 - 1.000 tons 2 50 - . 500 tons 3

= 50 tons 4

'Damage to shore reported in 4 cases only.

IRENES SERENADE (April 1980): - Fire brokeout off Pylos in Navarino Bay. (Greece), after an explosion. Tanker was carrying 100.000 tons light Iragi Crude oil from Turkey to Trieste. Spilled oil burnt for 13 hours, before tanker Tank-Fire reached east coastline of Sfaktivia Island damaging the piper of the bunker station and igniting the vegetation. Quick intervention: by the Hellenic Marine Consortium, IMCO and the ROCC minimized the damage that could have to'the environment.

VERA BERLINGIERI - EMANUEL DELMAS ,(26.6.1979) Collidid 35 km. west of Fiumicino; resulting in an explosion. 5.200 tons of gasoline and gas oil were spilled and burut in the sea. No coastal pollution resulted.,

INDIPENDENTIA - EVRIALY (15.11.1979) Collided at mouth of Bosphorus while carrying Libyan crude oil. Fire and explosions resulted with the grounding of the tanker. About 50 members of the crew were missing and in Kadikoy district of Istanbul many windows were broken. Burning of the oil lasted 29 days and caused major pollution of the sea and the air, as well as heavy ecological damage.

MESSINIAKI FRONTIS: (2.3.1979) Grounding on a small rocky island near the bunkering station of Kali Limenes on South coast of Crete. 6.000 tons of Libyan crude oil were spilled on the first day. Greek national contingency plan put into action. .Eventually vessel floated and anchored further away at sea. Large areas of sea and coast were cleaned by chemical dispersants. About 12.000 tons had spilled into the sea.

IMPORTANT MILESTONES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST POLLUTION

Concern about the problem of pollution of the seas, particularly by hydrocarbons has been at the root of measures and initiatives taken by many international organisations. Particularly active in this field were-

The Pârlimentary Assembly and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe;

The European Parliament;

• . The Commission and the Council of Ministers of the European Community;

The Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation . (IMCO);

The Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of the EEC (CPMR);

.. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) ;

The Union of Mediterranean Towns (UMT)?

„ . The United Towns of the Wést European Coast;

The Union of Dutch Towns;

Of extreme importance is the work done in this field by organisations like IOC, UNESCO, OECD, WHO, FAO and even NATO and the ILO.

PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY AND COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS 19 54

In Doc. 310 it was proposed that the question of the discharge of waste oil should be included on the Assembly's agenda.

Recommendation 68 of the same year and Resolution (54) 20 asked the Committee of Ministers to encourage ratification or acceptance of the Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil.

1961:

In Doc. 1342 the Parliamentary Assembly questioned the Committee of Ministers on the intergovernmental conference concerning marine pollution proposed for March 1962 in London.

In Doc. 1405 the Committee of Ministers expressed its doubts as to how practical it was then to envisage a date after which discharge of oil in the sea would be wholly prohibited.

1967-

The "Torrey Canyon" disaster prompted the Assembly to adopt Recommendation 494.

1969:

The Committee of Ministers adopted a resolution (69) 37 calling on member states to intensify research on the damage caused by marine pollution, to consider protective measures, to study means of combatting disasters rapidly to adopt preventive measures, and to work in full co-operation with IMCO.

1970:

Recommendation 585 of the Assembly proposed that more action should be taken and that member states should start taking effective measures to combat pollution and polluting ships.

In Doc. 2795 the Committee of Ministers advised taking things slowly and the adoption of a "wait and see" attitude. It was of the opinion that most of the matters referred to in the Parliamentary Assembly's recommendation were already being studied elsewhere.

1971:

Doc. 2896 asking Committee of Ministers to consider report on the legal aspects of marine pollution prepared by Legal Affairs Committee's Sub-Committee on Marine Resources and Sea Pollution.

1972:

Committee of Ministers announced that two draft resolutions on the protection of marine fauna and flora would be prepared. It suggested having further study in these fields to other organisations.

t

1973:

October: In Doc. 3363 a motion for a recommendation on "pollution of the sea due to oil drilling and transporting (in the Mediterranean and the North Sea) and consequent dangers to fishing".

1975:

Recommendation 770 on European Shipping policy dealing with flags of convenience and pollution caused by ships operating under such flags. Parliamentary Assembly recommended that Committee of Ministers should .convene a European Conference of Ministers responsible for Shipping.

1977 :

January: Committee of Ministers expresses itself against such a conference as these matters were the permanent concern of various organisations (eg IMCO).

i September: Committee of Ministers adopts same attitude

as regards Recommendation 798 on the Conservation of Living Resources of the Sea. The Ministers were reluctant to take effective action as this was tantamount to trespassing on the territory of other organisations.

The "Bravo" drilling rig incident, led to a motion for a resolution (Doc. 3977) and later to a written declaration on oil leakage problems of the North Sea (Doc.3979).

The "Amoco Cadiz" disaster in March 1978 led to the organisation of a Parliamentary hearing on all aspects of pollution of coastal zones, which was held in Paris in July 1978. This hearing attended by a vast number of experts served to highlight the problem of marine pollution and the contribution both written and in the course of discussion touched every aspect of this problem (17) (18)

Following this hearing the Parliamentary Assembly adopted Recommendation 847 stressing amongst other things ' the ratification of international agreements, the control of various sources of pollution and the co-ordination and co-operation at European level possibly by the establishment of an international agency for the protection of European maritime and coastal areas.

1979:

May: Committee of Ministers rejects the proposal to study the possibility of establishing an international agency.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL MARITIME CONSULTATIVE ORGANISATION (IMCO)

This orgnisation has 107 participating states. Its activities cover safety at sea, protection of the marine environment, legal and related matters connected with shipping facilitation of international maritime traffic, execution of technical assistance programmes, drafting of conventions, agreements and other instruments.

IMCO has already concluded 21 conventions of which ten concern the control and prevention of marine pollution, and 11 deal with maritime safety. It performs depository secretariat functions for 29 committees dealing with ship design, construction, equipment, navigation, communication and cargo handling.

The rules and standards adopted by IMCO represent the balanced views of those involved in maritime transport as well as of those interested in the protection of the marine environment (19).

- O f , -

In conjunction with other organisations (Viz: FAO, UNESCO, WHO, WMO, IAEA, UN and UNEP) IMCO acts as a sponsoring agency of the joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP).

Following the "Amoco Cadiz" disaster, IMCO showed a new spurt of activity through its various committees.

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (UNEP)

! This UN agency is initiating activities which contribute to the better general knowledge of-eco systems (eg islands, coasts, inland seas etc) with a view to their integrated management.

In Europe, working in conjunction with UNESCO, IUCN ¡and the governments of the countries concerned, UNEP's work on coastal eco-systerns has been limited to the Mediterranean.

Of this co-operation was born the Barcelona Convention wherein the coastal- states commit themselves to take all appropriate measures to prevent, abate and combat pollution, and to protect and enhance the marine environment. This objective is provided for by three protocols - one on dumping, another on co-operation between states and the latest one on land-based pollution (20).

As part of this plan a regional oil combatting centre was established in Malta, with the objective of facilitating co-operation among the Mediterranean states in the event of a massive oil spillage and to help contracting states to develop their own anti-pollution capabilities.

Moreover, UNEP is sponsoring two pilot monitoring projects in the Mediterranean. One concerns caseline studies and monitoring of oil and petroleum hydrocarbons in marine waters, including oil slicks, tar on beaches, floating tar balls and dissolved dispersed hydrocarbons. The second project deals ; with the problems raised by the coastal transport of pollutants.

OECD

Though mostly concerned on environment in general, OECD has given an appreciable contribution to marine pollution

; prevention.

In 1977 the OECD Council adopted a recommendation on sub standard ships (C (77) 177) urging member countries to exert their right of inspection on ships entering their ports.

Subsequent to this eight North Sea coastal countries agreed on a joint procedure for supervision and the exchange of information, including the preparation of a black list.

OECD also initiated studies related to measures against, oil pollution, and created an 'ad hoc' working party to study measures concerning oil carriers.

CONFERENCE OF PERIPHERAL .MARITIME REGIONS

Concern about the protection of the European coasts and surrounding seas has featured prominently in both international seminars held on the coastal environment (Saint Malo 1973, Inverness 1977) (21) (22) (23) (24). It should also be noted that the CPMR has adopted in 1981 a most important document on coastal problems, ie the "European Coastal

/Charter" THE COMMISSION AND THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF THE EUR° P E A NCQ n n u N-r Tw

1978 was the "Amoco Cadiz" disaster year and in, this year the European Parliament was particularly active in the field of pollution.

In Doc. 121/7 8 and 147/78, among other things, a European coastguard service was proposed.

In Doc. 162/78 the Committee on Regional Policy, Regional Planning and Transport expressed its views conerning the ratification of conventions on safety in shipping.

In June 1978, the Council adopted a resolution which initiated the setting up of an action programme on the control, and reduction of pollution caused by hydrocarbons discharged at sea (OJ No. C162/1).

This programme covered many fields and included the processing of existing data about anti pollution measures, data on tankers liable to pollute the waters, efficiency and co-operative capacity of emergency teams, the design and development of clean up vessels, the legal rules on insurance against the risks of accidental pollution and the establishment of a research programme on chemical and mechanical means of fighting pollution due to hydrocarbons discharged at sea.

OTHER ORGANISATIONS .

Many other organisations both governmental and- non-governmental have shown active concern about the problem of maritime pollution. It is beyond the scope of this report to go into further detail.

A more comprehensive review of these activities can be found in two documents:

i. Council of Europe Doc. CPL/Env (13) 23 entitled: "Activities of International Organisations for the Prevention and Control of Oil Pollution and Some Examples of National Legislation in this Field", and

ii. Secretariat Memorandum prepared by the Directorate of Environment and Local Authorities (MEN-4-HF 2) dated 12 February 1980 for the first meeting of Senior Officials of the European Ministerial Conference on the Environment.

Of extreme importance also though of a regional nature, is the work done in this field by the Conference of Mediterranean Towns under the Auspices of the United Towns Organisation. •

• / •

In September 1977, it held a Round Table in Calvi on "The fight against pollution in the sea" and in June 1980 held a conference on "Means of preventing marine pollution in Rimini" (25).

The Conference on "Beach Pollution" organised by the Union of Dutch Towns (November 197 8) (26) and the Intermunicipal Baltic Sea Protection Conference (Helsinki, May 1979) (27) have also contributed in no small way towards the general awareness of our concern to protect our coasts and above all towards our collective responsibility.

IMPORTANT CONVENTIONS AND AGREEMENTS

Legislation concerning maritime pollution is anything but scarce.As a matter of fact there is too much of it. There is too much repetition and overlapping especially in international conventions.

The one big problem in the legislative field is the fact that national governments take too long to sign or ratify a convention or agreement, and then take too long to put it. in action. In other words the problem is the non adherence to existing legislation which is more than abundant.

It was the UK which in 1922 first legislated against sea pollution. The Oil in Navigable waters Act. The first US legislation came in 1924. Since 1930 the American Petroleum Institute has issued manuals relating to the disposal of refinery waste.

The Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation of UK in 1953 set up a special committee to study this subject and produce a report.. Following this in April 1954, on the invitation of HM Government an international conference drew up the "International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil (London)".

Classification of subsequent legislation to date is difficult. Most conventions are international in the sense that they are intended for universal application. Others have more of a regional character (eg Bonn Convention), whereas in recent years one notes the appearance of more agreements between two or three countries concerning adjacent shores, an intervening waterway or a common sea or part of it.

The ultimate aim of all this legislation is prevention of pollution. However accidents have happened and will go on happening.

So there is also quite a lot of legislation intended to regulate and control measures that have to be taken when an" accident has happened', and consequently also a fair amount of legislation covering measures to be taken once the accident has happened»

Overlapping is common and though some legislation is intended to cover one aspect of maritime pollution ; (e.g prevention) other legislation may cover more than one aspect.

1. Concerning measures to be taken before the accident leading to maritime pollution happens:.

Under this category falls all legislation, conventions, agreements and regulations dealing with all that contributes towards avoiding accidents at sea and thus the subsequent pollution. This includes the highly technical problems of, ship design and navigational equipment both on board and on the shore. Manning of ships and equipement brings to the fore the problem of crew qualifications and operational capabilities.

The' control of shipping movements by the establishment of "traffic separation schemes", shipping laws, and systems that monitor the observance, (or otherwise) of the rules all contribute minerisly to dicteas the number of accidents in the ever increasing traffic«.

Another problem covered, by existing legislation is the labelling of the cargo - be it canisters or barrels carrying dangerous chemicals, or tagging in some way or other of the oil being carried, in such a way as- to make identification of an oil slick possible.

Examples of legislation covering the above include :

i. International Convention for the prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil (London 1954) and its amendments of 1962, 1969, and 1971.

ii. Nordic Agreement concerning cooperation in taking measures against pollution of the sea by oil (Copenhagen 1971)„

iii. Convention for the prevention of marime pollution by dumping from ships and aircraft (Oslo 1972).

iv. Convention on the prevention of marine pollution by Dumping of Wastes (London 19.72) „

v. International Convention for the prevention of pollution from Ships.(MARPOL) ant its 1978 amendment (London ' 1973).

• / ©

vi. International Convention for the prevention of marine pollution from ships (London 1973).

vii. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (1960 revised 1974), modified by the protocol of 1978.

viii. Convention for the protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea (Helsinki 1974).

ix. Convention for the prevention of Marine Pollution from Land Based Sources (Paris 1974).

x. Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution (Barcelona 1976).

xi. Protocol for the prevention of Pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by dumping from ships and Aircraft (Barcelona 1976)„

xii. Agreement concerning the protection of water of the Mediterranean Shores (Monaco 1976).

xiii. ILO Convention N° 147 on minimum standards for merchant ships (Geneva 1976).

xiv. Draft Convention on Standards and Qualifications of Seafers. (IMCO 1-978).

xv. IMCO Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention Conference Recommendations (1978).

xvi. Draft Directive concerning minimum conditions required from certain tankers entering and having the seaports of the Community OJEC C 284/5.

2. Concerning measures to be taken once the accident has happened

These measures concentrate mostly on the existence of contingency plans and action plans that one expects to go immediately into action once disaster strikes„ These plans are mostly on a reciprocal basis, meaning that each region has its own "disaster plan" (to deal with small accidents) which is part of and fits in a more comprehensive national plan (eg Polmar of France). •

Under the heading fall all agreements intended to control the stock piling of anti-pollution equipment as well as the establishment of regional centres responsible for co-ordinating the execution of the anti pollution plans once an emergency presents itself.

The legal problems concerning towage agreements of distressed ships, and the other problem o.f the state, jurisdiction on the distressed ship, also fall under legislation in this category.

i. Agreement for co-operation in dealing with pollution of the North Sea by oil (Bonn, 1969);

ii. International convention relating to intervention on the high seas in.cases of oil pollution casualties (Brussels 1969);

iii. Protocol concerning co-operation in combatting pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency (Barcelona 1976).

3. Concerning measures to be taken after the emergency has passed

Once the accident has happened and the damage is done, the main concern is to clean up the mess as quickly as possible, avoid any further damage to eco-systems, fauna, flora and amenities, and finally to sum up the costs of the damage and the clean up operations, and settle the bills with the polluter or whoever was responsible.

In this category falls legislation which deals with voluntary compensation agreements, civil liabilities and the smooth running of clean up operations.

Examples of such legislation are the following:

i. International convention relating to the limitation of the liability of owners of sea-going ships (Brussels 1957);

ii. International convention on civil liability for oil pollution damage (Brussels 1969);

iii. International convention on the establishment of an international fund for compensation for oil pollution damage (Brussels 1971);

iv. International convention on civil 'liability for oil pollution damage resulting from the exploration for, or exploration of submarine resources (London 1977) ;

v. Voluntary compensation schemes like TOVALOP (by ship owners) and CRISTAL (by oil companies).

Besides these international and regional agreements and conventions, mention must also be made of a number of sub-regional agreements between countries.

i. Agreement between Italy and Yugoslavia concerning the protection of Adria and its shores (14 Feburary 1974);

ii. Agreement between Sweden and Denmark concerning the protection of the Sound from pollution (Copenhagen 15 April 1974);

iii. The Baltic Marine Environment Protection <«, Commission (1974) ; -

iv. Joint Franco-British Emergency Plan, known as the Manche Plan (15 May 1978);

v. Agreement between Norway and the UK on the control of oil slicks;

vi. Surveillance agreement between Germany and the countries bordering the Baltic for the control of oil slicks (29 April 1975);

vii. Franco-Spain pollution monitoring agreement;

viii.France- Italy - Monaco coastal pollution monitoring agreement.

Of undoubted international importance and already looked upon as a unique piece of legislation will be the much awaited. , law of the sea,, which after years of discussions will sbon ! -be ready for implementation. Thé bearing of this now will definitely affect all coastal states and give a sense of unification to all existing legislation dealing with maritime problems, excluding, of course, these dealing with pollution.

The unification of standards in pollution matters is the theme of a paper presented at the Aachen congress by Prof. M Bothe (28). He concludes that "Necessary and useful unification is still lacking to a large extent. Even in the European Community, where there is a regulatory agency having the necessary papers, the process of unification is slow and cumbersome". He goes on to say "we will have to come to some kind of harmonisation agreement between Eastern and Western European countries". To this remark I add that similar "harmonisation agreements" will have to be achieved also with North African countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea.

Agreements and extensions of this nature will be fulfilling the words of the Secretary General Mr Franz Karasek, when he addressed the 14th Session of the CLRAE in October 1979 (29).

Prof. Bothe further remarks "All this is not for the legal expert to solve by inventing ingenious regulatory schemes. It is a question of the political will of those involved in the decision-making process at all levels".

The idea of harmonisation of existing legislation is also behind the study of Prof. A C Kiss (30) and his contribution: to the European Parliamentary hearing on coastal pollution by hydrocarbons. He proposes the setting up of a European Agency for the protection of the marine environment. I disagree with this idea because there are enough international agencies already. The activities of such an agency would duplicate, and overlap with a large number of those already existing or planned. It would enter into direct conflict with the Action Plan for the Mediterranean, especially with the activities being performed by the Regional Oil Combatting Centre for the Mediterranean Sea. Practically all the other activities (ie those not concerned with pollution emergencies) would either conflict with those carried out by various international organisations, or, are, in some cases, completely impracticable.

The whole proposal takes absolutely no account of existing institutional action, and instead of recommending the filling up of gaps by appropriate action at European level, preferably through regional centres, aims at the creation of a new and completely unnecessary institutional structure, which because of its magnitude will undoubtedly be unwieldy.

In the resolution on Maritime Pollution Problems (Resolution I'll) presented to the Conference by the Environment and Town Planning Committee, it was proposed that: "as an alternative to such an agency better co-operation and co-ordination between, on the one hand, the riparian states and on the other hand, the local and regional coastal authorities of the same maritime basin" (31) would be more desirable.

The threat of pollution from oil transportation and from offshore oil prospecting and exploitation, possibly from extra-territorial waters is the subject of a study by OECD (32). Other interesting studies by this same organisation through its Environment Directorate are those dealing with compensation ceilings in the event of marine oil pollution (33), the estimation of the cost involved in dealing with oil slicks (34) and the sharing of the costs of the cleaning up operation (35).

A chart showing the signatures and ratifications, by Council of Europe member states of multilateral conventions relating to oil pollution of the seas is to be found as Appendix I to this report.

The need for legislation

a Marine pollution having already been observed, surveyed and assessed, the descriptive part of this report hardly does more than recapitulate and reiterate. But the facts are now established, and action must be taken. There would indeed be little point in further discussion of the percentages or rfates at which pollution is more or less acceptable or harmful.

For action to be possible, the first requirement is to enact suitable, sufficient, co-ordinated and universally applicable legislation.

I draw the same conclusion as in 1976: "The legislator must be informed, and kept informed, of the results of work done by environmental toxicologists and which, when related to mankind, must lead to the definition of tolerance levels and monitoring systems at local, national and international level, as the indispensable basis for management of the marine ecosystem".

o

Systems of legislation

Local regulations

Some ports and coastal areas are owned or controlled by municipalities or private and public undertakings. These have laid down a variety of regulations, some of which concern environmental protection. Useful though they may be, there is no point in dealing with them in this report: our aim is to secure legislation and action at a higher level.

National legislation

All European countries have a range of legislation to safeguard and protect the environment in general and laws concerning land, water and air pollution in particular. Countries bordering the sea also have laws dealing with marine pollution. While all pursue similar aims, there are two distinct kinds:

National laws resulting from the ratification of international agreements, and thus of uniform validity. Often, however, they are.evidently not widely enforced or observed because the states ratifying the agreements lack the means to monitor their application.

National, unilateral laws which vary from one country to another, as do the standards they embody, are poorly enforced for the above-mentioned reasons; offenders have little or no knowledge of them, and they are often discriminatory.

International legislation

Legislation which comes into force following a sufficient number of ratifications, and therefore automatically applies to all the Parties, similarly lacks means of surveillance as a general rule.

Legislation that is applicable in the countries which have already ratified the agreement but does not yet have international validity for lack of sufficient ratifications, has only a national effect, and for this reason is intentionally or unintentionally ignored by those who infringe it.

Finally, there are some international agreements which are not yet applicable for lack of ratifications. This is a regrettable state of affairs, as it causes some countries unilaterally to enact laws which go beyond the intentions of the international provisions and are therefore discriminatory in many cases. The need to ratify international agreements in this field is among the conclusions drawn by Professor KISS in his report and by almost all the European Parliament rapporteurs in 1980 on the subject of pollution.

Ratification of international agreements

This is a necessity, as these agreements are devised in accordance with national interests and for the welfare of mankind. Postponing their enforcement means mortgaging our t

o / o

future. Differences between national systems of legislation make it hard to apply and to be conversant with them. We need to harmonise them and rid them of the influence they have on conflicting interests, to achieve the universal effect they need to have. To ensure the protection and conservation of our common assets, especially the North Sea, community legislation is absolutely essential.

CONCERN ABOUT POLLUTION AND EFFECTS OF POLLUTION AT LOCAL LEVEL

Enough has been said about the awareness of all coastal regions to the ever present fear of an oil pollution disaster. As statistics show, the number of accidents showed a relative improvement when compared with the ever increasing amount of oil being shipped, transported, piped, exploited, etc. However, there has been a small increase in accidents and a:mount of oil spilled if one talks in absolute figures.

The.communications media with.their extensive coverage of such accidents, literally bring the drama home "on our television screens". This, coupled with ever-growing concern for the preservation of our coastal regions, both as a source of food (fishing) and also as an economic asset (tourism) has driven us to a state of quasi-panic.

People living on the coast and earning a living there see the problem from a different angle than those living in inland regions. By analogy the members of.regional assemblies or local authorities of maritime regions, who have first hand experience of these dangers of oil pollution are more aware of the problem than members of a central government.

This does not in anyway imply that central governments are not doing all in their power to deal with this problem.

However, luckily, not all oil pollution accidents are large ones. This means that not all are of such magnitude as to stir a national conscience or reaction. It is large disasters that hit the headlines with the biggest bang and have not only national but possibly international effects on the powers that be and on public opinion.

The more frequent minor spills and the chronic pollution witnessed only by the inhabitants of maritime regions having direct contact with the sea pass unnoticed by others, but are of major concern to whoever is affected.

It is this experience of the maritime regipns that concerns us most as representatives of local and regional authorities. When it was decided to have this report done it was agreed that a set of questions be sent to the regional authorities with the aim of collecting as much first hand information as possible about marine polllution in the seas and oceans bathing the shores of European maritime regions.

It was intended to collect information and data straight from the authorities concerned rather than from the impersonal and cold files of a central government agency, thus conveying material which would help build a more human and personal map of European maritime regions.

O / o

We wanted to know more about what was our prime concern in this matter. How hard hit are certain regions? Are they worse off than others? If so, why? And what can be done about it? We wanted to know how much this fear of pollution was affecting us psychologically and how much was it affecting our livelihood. Was it disturbing our economy or our social life (tourism and beaches)? Was it affecting our fishing industry? What are the effects on the flora and fauna of our shores and beaches?.

Then comes to mind the preventive aspects of the problem. How efficient is the equipment available to fight pollution at regional level, as well as at national level? Are our contingency plans effective, if we have any? If not, what are we doing about it? Do we have enough legislation and is it working properly.

These queries were conveyed to authorities of maritime regions by means of a questionnaire which is found as Appendix II of this report

The number of replies received was 63. This does not include the reports sent out by the UK Association of District Councils, the UK Association of County Councils, and the UK Nature Conservancy Council. A full list of the regions, countries or associations that replied is to be found in Appendix III of this report.

Of these replies, 37 came from the UK, whereas 23 came from the other European countries.

Iceland, Israel, Cyprus, Malta and Turkey each sent in one reply to cover the whole country.

The replies from the UK covered almost the whole of the coast of England, the only exception being Essex and West Sussex. The Scottish coast on the North East was well reported upon by four reports, with very notable contributions from the Orkney Islands and the Shetland Islands. In contrast nothing was received concerning the East coast.

From Iceland only one reply from the South East region was forthcoming.

In contract to this "massive" response from the UK, the replies from other European countries was not encouraging at all.

No replies were received from Greece, whereas there was only one reply from Italy (Veneto), one from Spain (Cataluna) and two from Portuguese provinces (Azores and Madeira).

The Pays de la Loire, Haute Normandie, and the Nord-Pays de Calais regions were the only French regions that replied.

Belgium sent in one reply covering the whole North Sea coast. The Netherlands contributed three replies. Denmark's replies were by Roskilde county and county of North Jutland.

Three Swedish regions sent in their replies; Gòteland, Ostergotland and'the way up north province of Nflrrbotten. There was only one reply from Norway (Vestfold) and unfortunately no replies at all from Germany.

Apart from the replies very interesting and instructive material was received. Amongst this one must mention: 1. UK Association of District Councils report with excerpts

the 1976 Department of the Environment report "Accidental Oil Pollution of the Sea";

2. Report by the UK Association of County Councils including a copy of the "Memorandum of Evidence for Submission to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution";

3. . Survey of oil pollution around the coasts of the UK and Ireland 1978 by an Advisory Committee on oil pollution of the sea:

4.. Shetland Island Anti Oil Pollution Scheme;

5. Sullon Tol Harbour Oil Spill Plan;

6. Summary of representations, to the Under Secretary of State for the Environment by the Isle of Wight County Council on "Hazardous Chemicals Washed Ashore";

7. Cumbria Coastal Engineering Scheme;

8. Oil pollution manual from the Nature Conservancy Council and the Conclusions of the International Meeting on Wildlife and Oil Pollution in the North Sea (October 1977 -London);

9. Proceedings of the International Seminar on "Aménagement de' la zone littorale Pas de Calais et Mer du Nord (January 197 8 Dunkerque-Boulogne);

10. Summary of relevant legislation, acts and agreements regarding oil pollution as- far as Cataluna (Spain) is concerned;

11. Oil pollution control and contingency planning in Malta, September 1978 (UNER)IMCO Workshop on Oil Pollution Contingency Planning in the Mediterranean.

From the replies sent in, one could reap the following information:

BELGIUM (West Flanders)

The coast bathed by the North Sea has two big commercial ports (Zeebrugge and Ostende) and some less important ones. Tourism and fishing are important. Industrial complexes also exist. Thè ports have no anti pollution equipment and the whole coast and the ports are controlled by naval forces using their equipment.

No tank cleaning farms exist, though one is being built at Zeebrugge. No major oil slicks or pollution exists but minor pollution affecting coastal waters and beaches is present. This does have some effect on the tourist industry and on fishing by affecting the inter tidal regions.

An action plan and anti pollution equipment at national level are available. Pilotage of large vessels in territorial waters is obligatory.

Belgium participates actively in co-operation between other countries of the North Sea.

The "Law of Sea Water Pollution through Hydrocarbons" (NB 26 July 1962) required navigatory vessels to have special equipment to prevent discharge of untreated hydrocarbons into sea waters. It also requires that a log be kept of all hydrocarbons on board. An implementing decree of 29 November 1967 (NB 4 January 1968) requires that within 24 hours of arrival in a port, a ship's captain must report any discharge of waste containing hydrocarbons.

It has been suggested that there should be better co-ordination of regulations at European level, especially in the enforcement of preventive and repressive measures. Another suggestion was the establishment of an international distress signal signifying need for assistance.

CYPRUS

Island in the eastern Mediterranean whose economy is based mostly on tourism and fishing. There are six major ports and many tourist resorts along the coast with numerous coastal villages.

Oil loading depots exist in Noni, Shekilia and in Larnaca where there is also an oil refinery. There are no tank cleaning farms and there are no oil spill combatting equipment, not even in the ports. There are no trained personnel, no equipment and no local action plan.

Cyprus participates in the work of the Regional Oil Combatting Centre of the Mediterranean in Malta.

No major pollution disasters have happened but the amount and frequency of oil slicks (which is frequent) vary from year to year. This type of pollution at times threatens the tourist industry and affects fishing. The south east coastal waters of the island are one of the.areas monitored for oil and petroleum and where the coastal transport of pollutants is studied as part of the MED POL UNEP pilot project (36).

The setting up of an international organisation with executive powers has been suggested.

The relevant local legislation is covered by the Merchant Shipping Law, the Fisheries Law and the Foreshore Protection Law

DENMARK

The island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea. has two large ports and fifteen harbours. Fishing is very important, and there are also several large tourist resorts.

Both ports have anti pollution equipment and there is a regional receiving station for waste oil. No major pollution from oil is present but minor oil slicks occur.

An action plan exists, co-ordinated by the Naval Operative Command and in conjunction with the Directorate of Environment Protection and the National Civil Defense; a division of which is trained and equipped to deal with marine oil

| pollution.

Roskilde County is mainly tourist country, having two harbours ("Roskilde Fjord opening on the Kattegat and Isefjord opening on the Sound). No major oil pollution is present but

1 minor spills reach the shore regularly killing many birds.

It is suggested that a better international control of ships dumping their waste oil in the oceans is very necessary.

The North Jutland region is bathed by the Kattegat, Shagerratz and the North Sea, and with its four major ports, three harbours and several marinas is predominantly a fishing county, though freighters and ferries use its ports. Many tourist resorts are present on the coast.

No tank cleaning farms exist and there is one jet fuel unloading depot. Though oil pollution is not considered a problem, neither to fishing nor to tourism, equipment for dealing with minor spills exists. A branch of the local fire fighting services are trained for such work.

While the national action plan exists, the local authorities are responsible for pollution of the main shore area. The Ministry of Environmental Protection was created in 1971.

FRANCE

The Region Nord/Pas de Calais bordering the south east side of the English Channel has three large ports. Dunkirk, the third largest commercial port in France, including a large shipbuilding yard and an oil refinery besides oil depots; the port of Calais and Boulogne which is the major fishing port of France.

Constant surveillance is kept over the quality of the coastal waters, and as a result the waters bathing this region are of a better quality than the average for the French coasts. Although no major spills occur, a very large number of dead fish and birds are still to be found on the coast. The prevalent south west to north east water currents help keep the littoral waters clean in spite of thev^heavy sea traffic (37).

Haute Normandie: This region includes the huge ports of Le Havre, Rouen, Dieppe, Fécarap and Le Treport. The number of ship movements in these ports are immense. The first three have also ship-repairing complexes, whereas important oil loading and unloading stations are to be found in Le Havre and Antifer. Fisning activities are concentrated in the ports of Dieppe, Fécamp and Le Havre.

Both mechanical and chemical means of combatting pollution are found in all ports and private enterprises have also got their equipment. There is a tank cleaning farm in Le Havre.

No major oil spill of any marked significance has occurred except in August 1977 when an oil slick from an unknown source approached the coast at Dieppe. Oil slicks are common but they do not have any lasting effect on the coast.

Another incident in December 1974 followed the collision of two tankers away from Le Havre, spilling 1,600 tons of oil and necessitating the putting into action of the Plan Polmar. This plan spells out the drill to be followed in an emergency.

The fire fighting services include personnel who are trained and responsible for combatting oil pollution emergencies A "Fonds Départemental d1 intervention pour la lutte contre les pollutions du littoral par les hydrocarbures" was set up in 1978. It has an equipment for about 300 persons and specialised material for cleaning and pumping.

Pays de la Loire with its coast on the North East Atlantic has many small harbours and inlets, used mainly for fishing, oyster culture and tourist purposes. While no anti pollution equipment is present in the small ports, it is available for dealing with minor spills in the large port of Nantes and Saint Nazaire. In this last port,Nthere is also a degassing station and an oil-water separator complex capable of processing 3,000 m3 per hour.

Three oil loading and unloading depots handle about 13 million tons a year, and anti pollution equipment is available on site.

The large ship building - ship repairing complexes at Altsholm (St Nazaire) Dubigeon (Nantes) and about nine other small complexes, employing about 13,000 persons,, all have anti pollution equipment available in the complexes.

Major oil pollution of the coast is not a problem and has no effect on the fishing or the tourist industry. Small oil slicks are frequent but cleaning is no major problem. It is taken care of by the municipalities.

The region co-operates with the "Centre de documentation de recherches et 11expérimentation sur les pollutions accidentales des eaux (CEDRE)" situated in Brest, and with the "Centre regional opérationnel de Surveillance et de Sauvetage pour le secteur Atlantique" based in Etel.

With its coast butting on the English Channel, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean, France has always shown concern with maritime pollution. Pollution control in France is governed by a few basic laws to establish general policies and programme. Specific requirements usually are established by decree, issued by interministerial committees, subject to notification of the Ministry for the Protection of Nature and the Environment which created in February 1971, is the principal body for developing programmes and coordinating anti pollution activities carried out by the other ministries.

In France the prefecture is'the principal administrative body for carrying out national pollution control laws, decrees and orders, which are developed namely on the ministerial level, except for fundamental laws which are enacted by Parliament.

The Ministry for the Environment has no enforcement power, which rests with the Ministry or interministerial body granted authority under a law for carrying out a particular programme. In many instances, primary enforcement responsibility rests in the Prefectures.

The basic law controlling pollution of maritime or coastal waters, particularly from oil spills is law No. 64-1331, effective 26 December 1964 (38). This law holds the master of any ship under the French flag liable for violation of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil. Foreign vessels violating the convention within French territorial waters are also liable to money fines, and also to imprisonment for repeated violation.

The overall plan of action governing the measures to be taken in dealing with oil pollution in France is the Plan Polmar, which following the Amoco Cadiz disaster, was revised and a new version of which was published on 12 October 1978 (39).

France- is a signatory to many international conventions, agreements and protocols (see Appendix I), amongst which are the MARPOL and SOLAS Conventions and the Barcelona Convention. By means of the latter, France co-operates with the ROCC of the Mediterranean.

In addition, it has numerous laws and 'décrets' regulating seamen qualifications, the avoidance of collisions at sea, pilotage in territorial waters, qualifications of pilots, exploration of the continental shelf etc. Of great importance is the decree of 9 March 19 7 8 which gives large powers to maritime prefectures.

GERMANY

No replies.

GREECE

No replies.

ICELAND

Situated way up in the North Atlantic, it has its coast dotted with numerous small ports serving primarily the fishing fleet, but some harbours also accommodate freighters and small tankers.

Today there is growing interest in installing in many of the harbours (at least in the bigger ones) some facilities for combatting minor oil spills. At present only two ports have such facilities at their disposal, besides a set of equipment to combat oil pollution at sea is owned by the government.

There are five unloading and loading depots on the coast. These do not have any anti pollution equipment but are located within a short distance from the governmental store of combatting facilities.

' No tank cleaning farms exist but oil companies have on occasions collected residual oil and by simple heating and sedimentation have made it fit for using as fuel in conventional boilers.

Noanti pollution equipment exists in the few ship building/ repairing firms on the coastline, but in the case of spills, they receive assistance from the governmental agency in charge of oil pollution prevention.

Most of the oil pollution incidents that do occur are small spills associated with collisions or fuelling operations in harbours. Cleaning is done to ensure normal functioning of the harbour itself. No major spills have ever occurred and the small spills do not have any effect on the fishing industry or the coast itself.

No action plan exists but a number of personnel have been trained for combatting oil pollution. There is no central machinery to co-ordinate environmental policy. In addition to the Health Ministry, the Ministries of Fisheries, Communication, Industries and Social Affairs also are responsible for specific aspects of pollution control.

Act No. 20 of 21 April 1972 prohibits the discharge of hazardous substances into the sea,and Rule 184 of 16 August 1966 prohibits the discharge of oil polluted liquids by shore-based oil installations.

Iceland is a party to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, the London Dumping Convention and the Oslo Convention.

It has been suggested that there should be more efficient exchanges of information on pollution accidents and of the names of violators of regulations through an international agency like the Council of Europe. Such information would lead to the setting up of a "black list" of vessels which would eventually incur on these vessels severe operative restrictions in various coastal regions.

ISRAEL

On its Mediterranean coast. Israel has three major ports: Haifa (mostly freighters - some tankers), Ashod (freighter) and Ashkelon (tanker). Ports of Ackan and Tel Aviv-Jaffa are small fishing ports. There are many tourist resorts.

Two oil terminals exist in Ashkelon and Haifa. There are not tank cleaning farms and pollution control is cared for by tug boats equipped with dispersing equipment.

^ No major oil pollution disaster has occurred to date but; minor oil spills occur. They do not affect the fishing or tourist

j industry. t

Both mechanical and chemical anti pollution equipment is available but a national action plan is under review. Close

I contact is kept with ROCC (Malta). Responsibilities for clean up operations does not rest

with the local authorities but with the central government.

Israel is a party to the Barcelona Convention and its co-operation protocol,, and to the Convention for Prevention- of Pollution of the Sea by Oil and its amendments.

ITALY

Veneto: This region in the northern Adriatic Sea has the large city of Venice and its industrial complexes, and the port of Chioggia with its fishing and allied industries. Important tourist.centres and beaches also abound. Another important harbour is Carole.

The port of Venice is well equipped for oil pollution (three equipped vessels with chemical and mechanical equipment). A private degassing station exists and a public one is in the planning stage.

1 A shipyard at Breda is also equipped for fighting pollution accidents. There is an oil refinery in the Venice region and seven oil depots.

Pollution incidents have been few and of little importance with no effect on fishing and little if any on tourism. A number

j of specially trained personnel exist.

An action programme under the auspices of the maritime authorities is activated in case of accidents in the laguna of Venice or in territorial waters.

The Veneto has no interregional agreements as such, however the region participates, through CNR and IPALMO in the action programme for the study of pollution in the Adriatic. It is too early to assess its efficiency.

o / o

fio

Italy adheres to mainly international conventions concerning pollution (see Appendix I) amongst which are the Geneva, the London and the Barcelona Conventions.

The basic laws concerning pollution in Italy are Law No. 171 (16 April 1973), No. 319 (10 May 1976) and No. 650 (24 December 1979) (40) (41) with all the national 'and regional regulations derived thereof.

The Veneto region is one of the areas where the coastal transport of pollutants is studied as part of the" MED POL UNEP pilot project, the Adriatic being considered as the second most polluted region of the Mediterranean (42).

IRELAND

| South east region: This region bordering on the Irish Sea and the north east Atlantic has many small harbours and tourist resorts. The fishing industry is very important.. There are no tank cleaning farms and there is one ship repairing complex. Facilities exist in this complex for dealing with minor oil. spills. Oil combatting facilities also exist at the three oil loading and unloading depots on the coast.

Pollution due to oil in this region is minimal. It does not affect the fishing or tourism industry as no major disasters ever occurred. Trained personnel and oil combatting equipment are available. Minor spillages are provided for at regional level. Greater ones would be dealt with at national level according to an action plan.

Information and co-ordination centres exist at both regional and national levels.

Regulatory functions are exercised by the Minister of Local Government and Local Autorities under.his control. County and city councils may regulate pollution in their own 'areas.

I The Foreshore Act of 1933 controls dumping of solids and liquids in coastal areas, and the Oil Pollution of the Sea Acts of 1956 and 1965 regulate oil discharges from ships in .Irish territorial waters, inland waters and from land. They •are administered by the Minister of Transport and Power. •Mention should also be made of the Act Against Oil Spillage of 30 October 1974.

Ireland is of course a signatory to the major anti pollution conventions.

The suggestion was made that there should be more rigid control of tankers and their movements at international level. It was also suggested that more international resources should be available to combat oil pollution.

MALTA

Situated in the central Mediterranean, Malta has three main harbours. Grand Harbour caters mostly for cargo vessels, and tankers (coming in mainly for repairs at Malta's drydocks), Marsamxett harbour for private yachts, and Marsaxlokh Bay (where the fishing industry is mainly concentrated) for tankers delivering oil to Malta.

Facilities for combatting minor and medium oil spills are centralised at Marsamxett harbour. The control of oil pollution at sea is the responsibility of the Task Force (armed forces of Malta). Due to the small size of the Maltese Islands, all areas in and around Malta and the sister island of Gozo are easily accessible, except in very rough weather. Available facilities consist of patrol boats equipped with ; Warren Sprungs dispersant applicators, both for concentrate and conventional dispersants. The purchase of other equipment is currently under consideration.

A modern tank cleaning farm exists at Ricassoli, in Grand Harbour. This is for cleaning of oil tankers. So far, no reception area exists for the reception of other chemical wastes. A major ship repairing complex, Malta drydocks, employing 5,500 and constituting one of Malta's major industries exists in Grand Harbour. A smaller ship building yard, recently formed, also operates in Grand Harbour. Facilities and personnel exist for combatting minor oil spills occurring during ship repair.

An oil unloading depot exists in Marsaxlokh Bay, handling about 300,000 tons annually. Oil combatting measures are available within reach.

All coastal areas are subject to regular oil and tarball pollution to varying extents. This pollution is generally minor and the main source is tanker ballast discharge outside territorial waters. So far this has not affected the fishing industry. Tourism has not been affected as the Armed Forces of Malta continuously apply dispersants to neutralise oil spills at sea, and the National Tourist Organisation undertakes a regular beach cleaning programme in all recreational areas.

Malta has never suffered a major oil pollution disaster, though there have been some very close escapes in the recent' past. It is relevant to point out that even a medium sized spill by international standards would constitute a major disaster for Malta.

Malta has hosted a number of conferences and meetings, either specifically on marine pollution or including marine pollution, during the last ten years. These conferences include UNEP and IMCO expert meetings, IOC Working Committee Sessions, Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Symposia and "Pacem in Maribus" convocations.

To combat marine pollution from shipping Malta currently possesses a number of personnel trained in various aspects of oil pollution control, and both fixed and mobile spraying equipment. A national oil pollution contingency plan, which is currently in the process of finalisation, provides for immediate national action in case of an emergency (58).

The UNEP/IMCO Regional Oil Combatting Centre for the Mediterranean Sea, which was set up by a resolution of the Conference of Plenipotentiaries of Mediterranean Coastal States on the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea from Pollution in 1976, is located in Malta. The International Ocean Institute, a non-governmental organisation, which is an information and training centre on marine affairs in general (including pollution) has been located in Malta since 1972.

Malta's main legislation governing the control of marine pollution in the Marine Pollution (Prevention and Control) Act of 1977. This act gives the Ministers of Shipping wide powers to issue regulations in connection with any aspect of marine pollution control. No amendments to the current law have been made to date, but additional regulations to cover aspects not dealt with in the main act are under consideration.

Malta is party to the 19 54 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil including the 1962 amendments, and to the 197 6 Convention on the Protection of the Mediterranean S.ea against Pollution as well as to the Protocols on dumping and on pollution, as well as to emergencies related to the latter convention.

National action to avoid coastal pollution consists in the usual administrative measures to ensure compliance. In the case of pollution of the sea from maritime sources, constant patrols by sea and by air, are carried out by the Armed Forces of Malta 'to ensure that no ship discharges oil or other waste in territorial waters'. Port authorities are similarly responsible for ensuring that no similar incidents occur within harbours. Dumping of industrial waste at sea is controlled by the Ministry of Health and Environment.

As regards international co-operation, the experience of the UNEP-sponsored action plan for the Mediterranean, which was adopted in 1975, and in which Malta participates actively, is that such action plans, operation on a regional basis, can provide very positive results.

NETHERLANDS

Friesland: bathed by the North Sea and the Wadden Sea has only one major port. On the coast, there are eleven small shipbuilding complexes. No facilities for oil pollution combatting exist in the port or any of these complexes.

Though oil pollution of the coast is not a problem and no major disasters have ever affected this part of the country, an action plan exists co-ordinating the whole coast.

Participation at national level is not very effective and a better national plan is recommended.

Zeeland coasts are bathed by the North Sea ; it is a region dedicated mostly to fishing, sea farming and yachting. Two important harbours (Breskens and Vlissingen) and the naval ship-.building yard of 'de Schilde1 employing 3,000 people are the main features of the coast. No oil spill combatting facilities exist in harbours or in the yard.

There are no tank cleaning farms and no oil loading or unloading depots.

i Small oil spills occur regularly and have minimal effect . Jon the tourist industry. In April 1966, 17 kilometres of beach were polluted by oil from an unknown source. No trained .personnel and no equipment for fighting oil pollution are 'available. An action plan is being studied and discussions have started on co-ordinating efforts in case of oil spills or other environmental disasters affecting the coast.

Intensification of bi- and multi-lateral contacts is »suggested to improve our chances of effectively combatting pollution of the shores.

The rest of the coast of the Netherlands has many tourist resorts and fishing centres. The major ports are the huge complexes of Rotterdam and Amsterdam, besides other minor ports and yacht marinas. Various shipbuilding complexes employing about 4,500 persons are also to be found on the coast.

The major oil port is Rotterdam, handling about 70 million tons of oil a year. Tank cleaning farms and oil residue receiving areas exist both at Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Facilities for combatting oil spills in the port of Rotterdam are looked after by an organisation comprising the cleaning services of the municipality of Rotterdam in close co-operation with the government authorities and interested industries.

Government owns five anti pollution vessels and can call on another two private ships equipped with anti pollution equipment. All ships are equipped with chemical equipment while one or two are specially equipped to carry mechanical equipment. Sprayer aircraft can also be called in to deal with oil pollution.

Small oil spills which are not infrequent and which affect the fishing and the tourist industry to a minor extent, are dealth with by the local authorities. The North Sea Directorate of the Rijkswaterstaat, a division of the Ministry of Transport and Waterways, is responsible for co-ordination of the contingency plan which has been drawn up for action should the coastline be threatened.

The acts regarding seawater pollution(19 75) and another regarding seawater pollution by oil (1966) are enabling laws which give the authorities the power to make regulations.

Besides being a party to many conventions, the Netherlands is mostly active in the Bonn Agreement. At the third meeting of the Contracting Parties, an ad hoc Working Group of Operational Technical and Scientific Questions (OTSOPA) was established in order to exchange information in the field of pollution of the North Sea by oil and other harmful substances.

/

NORWAY

Vestfold on the west bank of the Oslo fjord has five major harbours and about 90 yacht marinas. In Slagentangen, one of the ports where an oil refinery also exists, and a tank cleaning farm is present, there are facilities for combatting even major oil spills which may affect the south of Norway.

Slagen is one of the busiest Norwegian ports (with Oslo, Sola and Nongstad) and in spite of oil depots on the coast, the anti pollution measures are so effective that the effect of pollution on the shores is negligible.

All major coastal towns have trained personnel, and the nearest equipment depot is at Horten. Action plans exist in all coastal districts and the County Governor co-ordinates the local preparedness for combatting oil pollution of all types.

Both chemical and mechanical equipment is available. Four ships are available to deal with oil pollution by chemical means.

The basic law "Oil Pollution Prevention Act" of 6 March 1970 lays down that a report on the capacity and utilisation of anti pollution facilities must be submitted to the Norwegian parliament every year.

The administrative responsibility of this bill was transferred from the Ministry of Fisheries to the Ministry of the Environment on 1 January 1975. In May of the same year this ministry proposed measures for reinforcement of oil pollution contingency planning (43) and this resulted in the creation of ? six state-owned equipment depots along the coast, for providing assistance to the municipality contingency operations in emergency situations.

In Parliamentary Bill No. 182 (1975-76) (44) government proposed further reinforcement measures concerning the national oil pollution contingency planning, as experience had indicated that the existing arrangements were not satisfactory, even with respect to small accidents.

A new and comprehensive pollution control act will shortly be submitted to parliament incorporating and superseding previous relevant legislation. The Ministry of the Environment's responsibility is restricted to the control of harmful effects of oil pollution. Measures to prevent the occurrence of spills are taken care of by other ministries.

The oil pollution control emergency services have been strengthened considerably in recent years, in particular since the blow out from the Bravo platform in 1977. The main goal has been to build up to an acceptable level the emergency services including oil pollution control equipment of the state, of the localxcommunities and of the oil companies operating on the shelf.

Norwegian oil pollution control emergency services are based mostly on mechanical pick up equipment and not on the use of chemical dispersants. A broadly based research and development programme for combatting oil pollution has now also been approved by parliament. This is partially financed by the oil companies operating on the continental shelf (45).

PORTUGAL

Madeira: Situated in the open Atlantic Ocean, this archipelago has an economy based on agriculture, fishing and tourism.

Pollution of the beaches from oil is not infrequent and has a negative effect on the fishing and tourist industry. The decrease in the number of certain species of coastal fish has been attributed to this pollution. This pollution comes from both territorial and extra-territorial water, and though on most occasions the culprit is not identified, one can say it results from tank cleaning and ballast operations in the open sea.

In spite of the frequency of these oil spills, no anti pollution equipment is available locally.

Azores: This archipelago also situated in the Atlantic,, has much the same problems as Madeira. Tourism is not so important and more emphasis is made on fishing.

On the coast there is only one oil loading and unloading depot, but no tank cleaning farms. No major oil pollution disaster has ever happened but the large number of tankers passing by are responsible for frequent oil slicks arriving from extra-territorial waters and affecting the tourist amenities, mostly on the south coast of Sao Miguel and at Praia de Vitoria.

No anti pollution equipment is available, no action plan and no specially trained personnel.

Portugal is a party to the Oslo and Paris Conventions and their amendments. It has been suggested that the regional government should let the Azores participate in a European Island Group to study these problems. The peripheral regions of Europe should set up an inter-insular committee against marine pollution, made up of legal and technical experts to help exchange information.

SPAIN

Cataluna: This part of the south of Spain meets the Mediterranean in a region of this sea which is regarded as the most heavily polluted. This whole area of the Mediterranean Sea all the way west to the straits of Gibraltar has been earmarked for study of the coastal transport of pollutants, as part of the MED POL UNEP pilot project.

Fifty per cent of the coast of Cataluña is made up of beaches. There are three large port cities, Barcelona, Tarregona and Badalona, besides numerable small ports for fishing craft and pleasure crafts.

In Barcelona alone there are five dockyards and an oil unloading depot. This port is more for general cargo. Reception of crude oil is done mostly in Barcelona. The port of Tarragona is also intended mostly for general cargo but there is also an oil refinery as well as tank cleaning facilities and an oil unloading depot. Pollution from the refinery at Tarragona and from unloading procedures has affected the beaches and to a lesser extent also the fishing.

No major pollution disaster has ever happened as yet. All three major ports have minor anti pollution equipment, mostly in the form of booms. Smaller ports have no equipment at all.

In spite of all this and the fact that there are no less than 11 oil rigs in territorial waters (four in production and seven prospecting) no hard and fast action plan exists. There is some sort of set up but not enough.

Trained personnel are controlled by the Under Secretary of the Merchant Navy together with the Direction Generale de Navigation, Direction Générale de Pêche and the Inspector General of Ships and Naval Construction. When an accident happens one calls in the Jefatura de Cortes and the comandancia de la marina. Use is made of equipment placed at Galice and Cartagena to help fight against pollution.

The regional government of Cataluña is responsible amongst other things for management of the territory and the ports, the protection of the environment and pollution of the territorial waters off the coast of Cataluña.

Spain is an active participant in the Mediterranean Action Plan and together with all riparian states co-operates with the Regional Oil Combatting Centre in Malta

Appendix I shows the conventions and protocols to which Spain has agreed and ratified.

Legislation aimed directly at protecting the sea from pollution by oil is abundant and one of the earliest in the circular of the Ministerio de Marina of 27 July 1925. This legislation was amplified in March 1933 and speaks directly of "imposing the maximum sanctions on those who, break this law"

Order of 13 June 1962 created the National Commission to study the problem of maritime pollution by hydrocarbons and to recommend ways of dealing with it. In June 1963 another order talks about the obligation of installing tank cleaning farms and also talks of ship design to include tanks for receiving bilge cleanings.

Order of 24 September 1963 lays the norms against discharging oil at sea, while an earlier decree deals with the control of quality and'commensability of coastal molluscs and shellfish that.can be eaten raw. In this decree, the coast is divided into "healthy", '"temporarily healthy" and "not healthy zones".

Further orders deal with ways of preventing contamination of the coastal waters by accidents happening at oil loading and unloading depots, and also with the necessity of stock piling of anti pollution material and devices near such installations (21 August 1967). Oil-water separators that should be made so as to function automatically were the subject of an order on 27 January 1968 whereas two further orders of May 1971 and November 1974 dealt with regulations concerning oil slicks at sea (46).

SWEDEN

Götland: A thinly populated island in the Baltic Sea which has facilities for treating minor oil spills, usually occurring from the oil loading depot, or from territorial waters.

No major pollution has ever occurred but minor spills have affected the fishing industry slightly.

Almost opposite this island on the mainland is the province of östergotland. The coastline includes many small islands, and one major harbour. Norrköping which being an oil port incorporates a tank cleaning farm and an oil unloading depot.

This harbour has oil combatting facilities. So have all three communes in this region which are near the coast. Minor oil spills which occur on and off with no lasting effect, and which are mostly due to oil unloading station accidents and accidents at sea, are dealt with by the personnel of — the fire brigades of each commune, personnel of the local health authorities, of the military forces stationed in the region and also by the coastguards. Equipment includes boats,, pumps and chemicals.

The local authorities as well as the county administration have action plans at their disposal. This region also has" a marine police.

The principal responsibility for combatting pollution by oil rests upon the central government authorities, (ie Shipping Board and the Customs) and its local and regional agencies. These authorities control marine pollution and dumpings.

Norrbotten is the most northern Swedish region on the Baltic Sea. It has mostly steel and paper industries, with tanker and freighter traffic in four large harbours. There are oil loading and unloading facilities in the ports of Rulea, Pitea and Karlsborg. No tank cleaning farms are present but authorities have at their disposal booms, pumps and absorbent material.

No major pollution disaster-has ever affected this region as yet.

In this region the county administrative board has the responsibility for planning of preparations for combatting pollution. The local authorities have the responsibility for planning and preparedness to combat oil in harbours and on the shores. The local fire brigades have also rescue duties, and the coastguards take care of oil in the sea.

In Sweden there are about 550 coastguards equipped with oil booms, pumps and absorbing material, plus aerial and satellite reconnaissance facilities in large scale pollution. The coastguards have central as well as regional co-ordinating centres but in case of major disasters the county administrative board takes charge of the action.

Action plans exist, but are continuously being revised. The harbour of Rulea is building a plant to handle ballast water and other oil polluted waters. At the same time anti pollution facilities are presently being expanded according to plans established on proposals made in a government report. (Ren Tur Son 1979:44). The local and regional authorities have already given their views on the proposals in this report regarding organisation and financing, while supporting most of the proposals.

There are also at present proposals bythe Swedish Government to alter Swedish laws in accordance with the requirements of the MARPOL Convention, which Sweden is about to ratify.

Swedish legislation concerning environmental protection and water pollution by oil goes back to 19 56. The Act concerning Measures against Water Pollution from Vessels (1956:86) and its ordinance of implementation (1958:191) prohibit the discharge of oil and refuse from vessels in Swedish territorial waters.

The Continental Shelf Act of 1966 (314) was followed in 1969 by the Environment Protection Act (1969:387) according to which the National Environment Protection Board was responsible for the central supervision, co-ordination of supervisory activity of the county administrations, and if necessary in giving assistance in this activity. The county administration has the responsibility of continuously exercising supervision within the county.

The Maritime Dumping Prohibition Act of December 1971 -(1154) amended in 1972 forbids the discharge "from ship, aircraft or other means of transport" of any type of waste (including oil) in or outside Swedish territorial waters. This is an enabling act giving powers of boarding ships, searching, supervising and prosecuting.

Act 275 of June 1972 concerns measures to prevent the pollution of water by vessels, inside and outside the Baltic Sea. It was strengthened by Royal Order of June 1972 also (278) and amended in December 1973. This act also dealt with tanker specifications and the keeping of an "oil diary".

Two further acts of December 1973 deal with liability for oil damage at sea (1198) and compensation from the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund (1199).

More recent acts implemented the Convention on the Protection of the Environment between Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden (May 1974), and the Helsinki Convention on measures concerning the prevention of water pollution caused, by ships in the Baltic (1975, 1976).

Further conventions and agreements which Sweden has signed or ratified can be seen in Appendix I.

TURKEY

. l£el: This region borders the Mediterranean Sea, across a strait facing Cyprus. It thrives on fishing, fruit growing and tourism. It has one major port Mersin which caters for cargo vessels and tankers. In spite of there being an oil refinery and an oil loading and unloading depot in this port, no anti pollution equipment is available on site. There is however a degassing station and minor facilities for tank cleaning.

In this region no major oil pollution disasters have ever occurred and oil pollution is not a problem. Neither fishing nor tourism are affected.

For ships going in and out of port, pilotage is mandatory. It is worth noting that when recruiting sailors for cargo vessels and tankers, these need not have any seagoing experience or training at all. Captains, engineers and officers must however be in possession of certificates or diplomas from the nautical schools.

Not less than 25% of the coasts of Turkey are beaches. There are important ports all along the coast, the largest being Istanbul, Izmir, Meren, Antalya and Iskendrum. Three of these (Istanbul, Izmir and Iskendrum) are equipped with modern technical facilities to prevent the spreading of oil spills. Barrier booms and dispersants are also available.

On the coast there are three oil refineries with facilities for ballast water disposal and about six ship repairing years all equipped to deal with major and minor oil spills. One also finds various oil loading and unloading depots along the coastline as well as two offshore oil drilling units.

Because of its geographical position, Turkey suffers . from oil pollution on its shores. This affects both the fishing industry and tourism.

A major oil pollution disaster occurred in November 1979 when a Roumanian oil tanker "INDEPENDENTIA" collided at the mouth of the Bosphorous spilling about 95,000 tons of crude oil, and causing a series of explosions. Fifty crew members were missing and the burning of the oil lasted 29 days causing major pollution of sea and air, with heavy ecological damage.

In 1969 Turkey had signed the International Agreement "Concerning Rules to Prevent Collisions at Sea".

With the co-ordination of the State Planning Department both central and regional action plans have been implemented. There is also regular training courses for personnel. The Ministry of Transport is the responsible organ for the implementation of the various legislations and being the national co-ordinating centre keeps regular contact with the ROCC in Malta.

This Ministry together with the General Directorate of Fisheries is responsible for the protection of the coasts and for controlling the pollution from ships. Teams of guards have been created for more effective control. Laboratories have been established for the assessment of pollution, and training of research personnel undertaken.

In this respect, the National Action Plan of 1977-78 included studies of the Mediterranean Coast and the Bay of Izmir•

Existing legislation (Law of Harbours 618, Law of Water Production 1380, and Law of Protection of General Health 1953) and proposed amendments contemplate an increase in fines for polluters and more powers and responsibilities to the local and regional authorities.

In Turkey, the State Planning Department, as a co-ordinating and advisory organ under the Prime Minister, provides the accordance and balance between the national and . local/regional planning and implementation. Besides the national legislation, municipalities and provincial councils have some local powers and responsibilities. These, together with their unions and national associations have an important influence on public opinion and parliament. The unions of Turkish municipalities propose many law projects to the government, concerning many subjects, including marine pollution.

(The above was the situation obtaining in the tiountry before the army take over in 1980.)

In Turkey, environmental problems have been taken up at government level since 1972.

In the fourth Five Year Programme of Action (1979-83) (Article 7 - Environmental Issues), it is stated that "an inventory of environmental pollution in Turkey will be undertaken ..... The regions and the sectors which have environmental problems will be determined. The project on the areas, sea shores, lakes, water courses and underground waters will be finalised". The protection of the Mediterranean Sea against pollution is in exact conformity with the national policies and principles.

The Environment Organisation is the co-ordinator for all the general activities for the implementation of the Barcelona Convention and the Mediterranean Action Plan (47).

It is suggested from this country that there be better established information and documentation centres, more . exchange of trained personnel and of experience, as well as the establishment of more uniformity in international legislation.

UNITED KINGDOM

The British Isles because of their geographical position in the north east Atlantic, separated from the European mainland by the English Channel (through which one gains access to the North Sea and the Baltic Sea and hence to north western and northern Europe) are particularly prone to oil pollution of their coasts, on account of the heavy traffic of oil criss-crossing the seas around them.

In 1978 the Advisory Committee on Oil Pollution of the Sea (ACOPS) who carried an annual survey of oil pollution around the coasts of Great Britain reported receiving about 500 reports of spills. These together with four major incidents,(Elenir, Christos Bitas, Litiopa and Esso Bernica) made 1978 the year in which the quantity of oil discharged through accidental pollution of the sea was greater than in any previous year. Claim of costs, by local authorities came to nearly one million pounds sterling.

Fifty per cent of report spills were from unknown sources, especially those outside ports.

In 1979, the overall picture i m p r o v e d and clean up costs declined to about 0.8 million pounds, whereas the number of spills reported increased slightly, to about 550. There was only one incident involving a spill of more than one thousand tons of oil (Skopelos Sky on the north coast of Cornwall).

The whole east coast of England, down to Suffolk, in 1978 suffered greatly increased oil pollution; the situation improved in 1979. In the same year, pollution on the south east coast and the south coast of England decreased, as it did also in Devon and Cornwall. Pollution reports from western Scotland decreased while those from eastern Scotland, the Orkney Islands, the Shetland Islands and the North Sea offshore fields increased.

In 1979, in these latter four regions mentioned, the number of incidents and the cost of clean up operations increased. Cumbria and.western Scotland remained relatively pollution free.

This picture is obviously the result of the ever increasing development of the North Sea oil resources and associated offshore activities. Of particular concern are the increasing spillages associated with trans-shipment of the oil at the offshore terminals and the discharge of tank washings or dirty ballast by tankers en route.

I Fuel oil or bunker oil continued to account for a very !

large proportion of the spillages. Tankers and other types of vessel continued to contribute almost equally to the number of accidents. The number of spills which caused . damage declined: only three cases were reported as having damaged marine and seashore plants or animals compared with 15 in 1978. The number of incidents causing bird deaths declined from 60 to 33, but the proportion involving large numbers of birds increased sharply (48).

Besides being a major centre for extracting oil, the v. North Sea is also acknowledged as one of the world's risk centres of wildlife. Following the Torrey Canyon disaster, and its negative impact on wildlife, attention was focussed on improving measures for the protection of wildlife in future incidents.

The Nature Conservancy Council, established under an Act of 1973, besides its many activities,, has published a manual containing guidelines for use by nature, conservation and animal welfare organisations during a pollution incident (49). This Council also organised an informal technical meeting in London in October 1977 with the aim of exploring the current state of knowledge of wildlife of the North Sea and to work out how best to co-ordinate research and to reduce the risk to wildlife in the event of oil pollution incidents. The conclusions by the representatives of eight countries bordering the North Sea are before the respective governments for consideration (50) (51). v

In the UK, county and district councils, supported by water and harbour authorities in appropriate circumstances, have a significant role in conjunction with the Department of a Trade, and the Department of the Environment in preventing oil from coming ashore, and failing this, in carrying out clean up operations.

Local authorities are responsible for dealing with beach pollution on the foreshore or within about one mile off the foreshore. There is, however, no statutory obligation for them to act. The Local Government Act 1972, provides local authorities with general powers in respect of emergencies and disasters.

Local authorities have co-operated to a very marked degree in the preparation of contingency plans, or action plans, which define the procedure to.be adopted in dealing with oil pollution. Such plans were called for in Government Circular 34/68, and another 123/74 issued by the Department of the Environment. This department in 1976 issued a more detailed report in which the division of responsibility between central and local government is spelled out more clearly (52).

When the Torrey Canyon disaster occurred in March 1967, and its tremendous disasterous impact on the environment (53) suddenly jolted the authorities into the sad realisation that the country was without a detailed plan or organisation, capable of responding quickly and efficiently to a pollution disaster, then things started moving really fast into the direction of forming an organisation and marshalling all available resources.

Within government the responsibility for dealing with oil at sea rests with the Department of Trade. This department was given the responsibility of looking after oil pollution in 1969. The Department's contingency plans which have been developed since then are essentially regional. Nine marine survey districts cover the UK with main offices in Aberdeen, Newcastle, Hull, London, Southampton, Cardiff, Liverpool, Glasgow and Belfast.

A typical plan should give in detail all one needs to know in an emergency in conjunction with communications network for reporting of spills, weather forecasts information, a directory of important contacts, extent and location of stocks of dispersants and spraying equipment, as well as means of communication among those involved. To test the adequacy of such plans the Department of Trade conducts exercises to deal with simulated pollution incidents in various districts.

Each marine survey district is equipped with sufficient dispersant to allow 4 8 hours operation during which time replenishment from other sources is sought. All UK ships and aircraft a£e bound to report any incident likely to cause oil pollution to HM Coastguards. These domestic agreements are complemented by international ones agreed among the coastal states of N W Europe under the Bonn Agreement

Under the Prevention of Oil Pollution Act 1971, the Secretary of State can give directions with respect to a ship and its cargo involved in an accident which may cause oil pollution, in order to forestall or reduce the threat of pollution at its source.

When oil spills at sea approach the coast, responsibility for dealing with it shift from the Department of Trade to the coastal local authorities. In most cases, the initial . responsibility for dealing with oil pollution and the actual process of clearance rests with the district councils, calling when necessary on the larger resources of the county councils, by way of organisation, manpower supplies and equipment. ; In England and Wales, district councils were associated with the preparation of schemes from the outset and have in fact been asked to appoint oil pollution officers of their own.

Copies of action plans or schemes are sent to the Department of the Environment for advice and guidance and for assembling a central record.

i»«. . ,

f If te * « S f * J S . -art ^ ^ •£*>< SB ^SPl i H

Th« compensation arrangements ana tKte reimbursement Qf sums- spent lean rtW''0|)erat ions remain a very-hot •-. tpojLBt of debate between central said local government., as to who should pay for "what and to what extent::^- -

X . f -Hiuas Vi titJ i i-gSfi A.f-1 Port authorities have no statutory .

oil spills m their area, but the gener usually sufficient to enable them to t cases a harbour or port has teamed up w county councils involved, regional wa dockyards, oil companies w.ith: local' IT} interested bodies, to-.. ag®|§g|B. .action 1 whole complex. ,.4.. 1 rpr*

.;Ôil companies also have' developed contingency plans E ver §%eBrtipàny mà'in t ai ns c 1 ear anc e equipment at its installations. All/maj.etr;; producer s operating in the North Sea have reviewed and revised :Sheir arrangements and proposed new contingency plans; to d£al with spillages in ancTground rigs and platforms.

The United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association (UKOOA), is a member of the North Sea Operators Clean Seas Qoromittee (NSOCSC), whose members, representing national organisations from seven countries bordering the North^Sea >have1 established a contingency plan for the provision of ^ssistajjcè individual operating company. ( < ^

At present, in the UK, there is a Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, and the Department of the Environment is considering a contingency plan for major oil pollution of.the coastline, including the establishment of a Coastal.: Pollution Co-ordinating Centre.

North eastern England' (North Sea) Northumberland: important parts of Berwick upon Tweed

and B W h . Coastline includes beaches at Holy Island and the important bird sanctuary of the Farne Islands Minor oil unloading operations at Blyth where oil booms and stirrup pump sprays are held. Pipeline from the North Sea oilfields of the Ekofish complex terminates at Teeside, to the south of the county.

There is a history of pollution - mostly on the beaches in the north of the country and in the early part of the year. SS attributable source. Many oiled seabirds came ashore. No major oil spills.

This county council in co-operation with Tyne and Wear, Cleveland and Durham County Council have Reaional Aspects of arrangements for Beach and. Oil;,Pollution TelsTres which was submitted to the government in September 1979

The setting up of a regional anti pollution centre, preferably in the north east,was suggested.

.. . •••• V V ./.

- lot -

Durham: No major towns or ports on the coastline. Major occupations are mineral extraction. No oil depots or tank cleaning farms. No specialised oil pollution equipment is held as oil pollution is not a big problem. More pollution comes from the dumping of coal spoil.

Cleveland: The coast includes the Tees Estuary, Hartlepool Docks and Teesport Docks. There is one oil refinery and many oil loading and unloading depots on wharfs. Oil combatting measures available.

Prevalent sea traffic is tanker. A voluntary collective scheme involving major oil and chemical users, Cleveland County Council and the port authority exists to deal with oil spills. Various private firms exist to deal with dry residue. Otherwise the owner of the tank is held responsible for cleaning and disposal of waste through commerical sites.

Occasional minor spills occur from bunkering and oil discharge or loading operations. Anti oil pollution equipment in the River Tees includes a Rotank Seavenger work boat, a Foy boat converted for spraying booms, dispersants, physical devices, pumps, etc.

Small numbers of oiled birds are occasionally washed ashore, and only one spillage of moderate dimension has been recorded recently.

North Yorkshire: Fishing industry is very important, carried out from the ports of Whitby and Scarborough which lie on the North Yorkshire and Cleveland Heritage Coast. There is very little oil pollution and only isolated incidents have occurred to date.

Humberside: The coast includes the Humber Estuary and the eighth and tenth UK ports in order of importance: Hull and Birmingham respectively. This last port caters mostly for tankers, where oil loading and unloading depots handle about 16 million tonnes of oil. Facilities and equipment for dealing with oil spills are available.

In spite of only minor oil spill accidents having been reported, a working party is currently reviewing the existing contingency plans for coastal estuary and river pollution.

On the coast of north east England, oil from unknown sources continue to cause concern. Fuel or bunker oil accounted for half of the incidents in which the type of oil was known. In clean up operations, dispersant was the principal method used.

Eastern England (North Sea)

Lincolnshire: Major ports are Tetney and Wisbich. The former is mostly for oil tankers, and though there are no tank cleaning farms, as a rule a fully equipped spraying vessel is always in attendance when a tanker is discharging at the oil loading or unloading stations in this port and in Wisbich. Six permanently equipped tugs (with spray gear and dispersants) are available.

. • * , . . , . • : , . . i i ./.

There is very minor pollution throughout the year. An offshore collision in June 1973 resulted in 24 kilometres of contaminated shore and was dealt with by spraying.

Norfolk: Fishing is fairly important and the coast has many holiday resorts and two ports mainly for freighters: King's Lynn and Great Yarmouth. Oil loading and unloading depots in both ports where minor oil combatting equipment is available. Oil pollution is almost negligible and has no.effect either on fishing or tourism. The region has trained personnel and offshore spraying equipment booms, absorbent material and dispersants.

Suffolk : Lowestoft Docks, Southwold Harbour and Felixstowe Docks cater mostly for coastal freighters and fishing craft, small tankers and passenger ferries. Harbours have anti pollution equipment but no tank cleaning farms. Oil loading depots at Felixstowe. Pollution mostly from extra-territorial waters affects fishing and tourism (eg 1978 Eleni V oil spillage). Small quantities of oil deposited on beaches each year. Adequately trained personnel and equipment are available.

Most pollution incidents reported from eastern England were in the open sea. While cleaning up oil spills, local authorities reported finding difficulty of access to the beaches and in finding suitable sites for the disposal of. oil contaminated beach material. Poor communications and lack of relevant information.

Chronic pollution is common on parts of the East Anglian coastline, but the situation is improving.

Essex and Kent (North Sea, Thames Estuary and English Channel)

Kent: Important ports of Gravesend, Margate, Ramsgate, Dover and Folkestone. Most tankers berth on the Isle of Grain (in thè Thames Estuary) on which is a BP oil refinery and an oil unloading depot. Oil combatting facilities available on the spot organised by BP, River Medway-and Sheerness authorities, Medway Port Authority, Port of London Authorities and Chatham RN Dockyard.

Chronic minor pollution occurs particularly along English Channel coast. To fight oil pollution both sea going and beach cleaning crews are available. Equipment includes spraying kits, beach vehicles, dispersants and surface wetting agents. Apart from the oil pollution operational plan, the county also has an operational scheme for hazardous substances washed ashore.

This region has suffered pollution from incidents at all unloading depots (Petros Hajikyriakos 1977) and from ,„... collisions at sea (Pacific Glory - Allegro 1970, Herlur - Guarani 1971, Olympic Alliance - Achilles 1975, Eleni V - Roseline 1978).

A very high proportion of the spills occurred mainly in the Medway Ports and in the Port of London. About half of the spills were fuel or bunker oil, and dispersants continued to be the most frequently used treatment.

Sussex (English Channel)

East Sussex: Main occupations are tourism, light industry, agriculture and fishing. Major ports are Brighton, Newhaven and Rye. No oil loading and unloading depots and .harbours have minor oil combatting equipment. In cases of large emergencies, one relies on county council aid. The region has 650 trained personnel and lots of equipment but the total facilities are inadequate to deal with major pollution.

Though about 110,000 ships pass the English Channel off the coast of East Sussex, very few occasions have arisen when really heavy oil pollution has affected the shore line. At times oil slicks contaminate nets, and fish disappear from areas where sprayed detergents lie dormant on the seabed. This contamination does not affect the tourist trade. As most of the Sussex coast line is shingle, the difficulty and cost of cleaning, oil pollution increase. Manual or mechanical collection is preferred to spraying of detergents. Access to some foreshores is also difficult.

Most spills recorded were in the open sea. Fuel or bunker oil was a more common contaminant than crude oil.

Observance of the traffic separation scheme in the Dover Strait is obligatory and the Department of Trade (through HM Coastguards who have posts at Dover, Solent and Shoreham) has improved the surveillance measures in the eastern part of the English Channel and the Dover Strait,

Southern England (English Channel)

Hampshire: On the Solent there are two major ports; Southampton (commercial) and Portsmouth (commercial and naval). Tanker traffic is mostly to Esso refinery at Fawley and to the oil terminal at Hamble. Oil combatting measures available at both sites. Commercial firms operating in the area deal with the disposal of oil residue. There are three large shipbuilding complexes on the coast and oil loading and unloading depots at Fawley, Hythe and Hamble.

There is continual minor pollution of the coastline from unknown sources, with occasional larger incidents. This has no effect on fishing and is of little concern to the tourist trade. The collision between Tarpenbeck and Sir Geraint in June 1980 could have resulted in a larger scale disaster.

Dorset: There are many tourist resorts on the coast. Major ports (Portland, Wemouth and Poole) besides shipping, also have ship repairing complexes and oil fuelling centres. The oil depot at Poole is equipped for combatting oil pollution. There are no tank cleaning facilities.

The coastal waters suffer from chronic pollution from tanker washings damped at sea, the frequency depending on the state of the wind. This results in contamination of fish stock. No major disasters have ever happened except for a large spill from extra territorial water in February 1981, resulting in the most expensive clean up for Bournemouth and Poole.

Besides the county action plans for oil pollution, the onshore oil production wells at Wytch Farm and Kimmeridge also have oil field emergency plans.

Isle of Wight: Mainly tourist and holiday centre. No oil loading or unloading depots (considering its situation it is fortunate that to date, this isle has not experienced anything other than relatively minor incidents. Oil pollution occurs on and around this isle at regular intervals probably from tank washings of passing tankers, especially with a south west wind blowing. It is very vulnerable to a major oil pollution disaster and for this reason there are available three vessels equipped with dispersant spraying gear, kept on stand by duty, trained personnel and enough mechanical and chemical equipment.

This region has had to deal with repeated incidents arising from substances washed ashore, many of which proved to be of a hazardous nature (eg Aeolian Sky - November 1979) (54). Between November 1979 and February 1980, no less than seven drums and about 1050 containers of various sizes containing chemicals of variable toxicity were washed ashore (55).

Apart from the usual suggestions, the Isle of Wight County Council suggests that one should ensure greater durability of markings on containers used for chemicals and, secondly that the "pollution pays" principle should be enacted into existing legislation governing carriage of hazardous chemicals by sea.

Of all spills reported in this region about two-thirds were unattributable. In half of the spillages no clean up action was required. Equal use was made of mechanical collection of oil and dispersants.

Devon (English Channel and Bristol Channel)

Important trades are fishing, tourism, agriculture and shipbuilding. Coast includes major nature conservation areas and important fishing grounds. Main ports are Exmouth,

- Dartmouth and Plymouth which caters for large cargo vessels and naval vessels, and has limited tank cleaning facilities besides a major naval shipbuilding and repairing dockyard employing about 12,000.

All large ports have varying quantities of oil pollution equipment. At Plymouth and Torbay there are offshore and onshore equipment, spraying craft, booms, etc. On the north coast vessels for spraying are also available» Trained personnel can be deployed anywhere at short notice. Lyme Bay is used for lightening VLCCs.

Fishing is of prime importance and this industry together with tourism has_ been affected by oil pollution, which up to. date is occasional but not of major proportions. A number of minor incidents with light pollution of the shores occur and these have minor effects on bird and fish life. Most spillages occur at oil unloading depots. The region also suffers from "pollution* by dangerous chemicals carried in canisters as deck cargo, which are washed ashore.

Over these last years, the coasts of Devon have experienced a decline in the number of oil spillages reported. Most of the spills were in the open sea, beyond the territorial limit, and of unknown origin.

Cornwall and Scilly islands (Atlantic Ocean, English Channel and Bristol Channel) Many ports and harbours and yacht marinas on the coast.

At Par and.Falmouth, where oil loading and unloading occurs, facilities for combatting oil pollution exist, but there are no tank cleaning facilities. At Falmouth, besides other mechanical and chemical equipment, there ar.e also two tugs -St. Eral and St Mawes - fully equipped for offshore spraying. Trained personnel are also available.

Oil slicks are common, mostly from unknown sources, probably from tank washings, lost deck cargo (hazardous chemicals) or wrecked vessels. No appreciable effect on fishing and tourism.

This region in 1967 saw the largest oil pollution disaster e'ver - the Torrey Canyon - in which 117,000 tons of oil polluted the coast.

In this region most of the oil pollution affecting the coast is caused by lumps or tar balls which continue to come ashore throughout the year - a nuisance to residents and holiday makers and a financial burden on the authorities who have to collect and dispose of them.

Bristol Channel and South Wales (Bristol Channel, River Severn, St George's Channel)

Somerset: Numerous beaches and tourist resorts with two small ports for small freighters and small tankers. No special facilities for tankers exist, though there is a small oil loading depot at Dum Ball. Oil pollution is not a problem from any source. No special trained personnel exist.

Avon County: The numerous docks on the coast (Portshead, Royal Portbury, City, Royal Edward and Avonmouth) cater mostly for freighters. Oil loading and unloading takes place at Portshead, Royal Edward and Avonmouth. No tank cleaning farms exist but dispersant and limited spraying equipment are available for "in dock" spills. Two sea-going tugs equipped with dispersant spraying equipment, booms, etc, are also available.

Pollution form oil spills does not occur to any significant amount. In April 1977, a spill of 80 tonnes from a storage tank into a dock compound occurred.

Gloucestershire: Major ports are Gloucester and Sharpness; mainly for freighters. Minor oil depot on Gloucester-Sharpness Canal. Ports have minor oil pollution equipment but no tank cleaning farms. The high tidal range (40 feet) minimises the problem from oil spillage. v

There exist good contacts and co-ordination with adjoining counties who are in the wider reaches of the Severn Estuary and hold major oil pollution combatting equipment.

Monmouthshire: Main ports are Newport and Chipstow. Shipping is not heavy and tankers use mostly Newport where a tank cleaning farm exists, and there is also an oil loading and unloading depot. Dispersants available on site. ' There is a major dockyard, also equipped to combat minor spills.

Oil pollution with no consequences occurs but to a minor extent. Anti pollution equipment is. limited to a small stock of dispersant. Reliance on specialist contacts in private industry and on help from other neighbour counties.

Glamorgan: The coast which includes seven miles of heritage zone in Mid-Glamorgan has the important parts of V J Cardiff, Barry, Port Talbot and Swansea, all catering mostly for tanker traffic. Minor oil combatting facilities (spraying equipment for detergents) in all ports. One tank cleaning farm at Cardiff Dock. Oil loading and unloading depots at Cardiff, Barry Docks and Swansea. vAnti pollution equipment in all three depots. Minor ship repairing complexes also -.found on the West and South Glamorgan coast.

Oil spill is no problem in South Glamorgan though it is slightly worse in Mid-Glamorgan through oil and debris from the sea. West Glamorgan reports minor incidents at

„.regular intervals. Spills are not of any consequence.

Besides equipment held in the ports, the Welsh Water Authority, the fire service and the county and district councils have enough chemical and mechanical equipment. Marine pollution control is on a regional participating system based at west Wales (Haver Fordwest oil terminal) and north Wales (Anglesey).

Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire: Large part of the coast is National Park area. Milford Haven is the main port for tankers. Inspite of there being five terminals for oil loading and unloading in Milford Haven (four have associated refineries) no tank cleaning farms exist but there are oil water separation facilities. A small ship repairing complex also exists.

Milford Haven has a comprehensive anti pollution Port Authority Plan,in conjunction with HM Conservancy Board and five major oil companies. Adequate anti pollution equipment is held. Legislation is enforced to the letter. Anti pollution measures are effective and there is a_ high degree of success.

Pollution is minor and occasional, coming, mostly from the sea, possibly from passing traffic. In October 1978 the Christos Bitas incident resulted in pollution of the Dyfed Coast (75 miles).

Small spills in ports and harbours, mostly in Milford Haven, account for the majority of spillage reports. The situation is improving and no reports of damage to wildlife or fisheries were received. Small land weathered lumps of oil appear on beaches facing St George's channel regularly throughout the year. Dispersant was the most frequently used method of oil clearance in spills. For tarry lumps manual or mechanical collection was preferred.

Lancashire and western districts (Irish Sea)

Caernarvon: One major port and one swing buoy mooring (SBM) capable of catering for vessels in excess of 500,000 tons. Mainly tanker traffic. There are two oil unloading depots at Amlych Port. Two boats fitted with spraying equipment are available. Pollution from oil is noticeable and affects the fishing and the tourist industry. In October 1978, a leakage from the pipework of the SBM resulted in pollution of amenity beaches. In previous years heavy beach pollution by oil from unknown sources had' occurred. Trained personnel and adequate equipment are available.

In June 1978 the Gwynedd County Council sent a report to the County Council Association entitled "Requirements to minimise the possibility of shipping tragedies and their effects around the UK - North European Coastline".

Flint: Main port is the River Dee Estuary (MOSTYN DOCKS) for small freighter traffic. No oil unloading depots.

Pollution is not a regular feature. The major threat to this stretch of coast would come from any spillages at the Anglesey oil terminal or from the Liverpool Docks, or Merseyside and its associated traffic.

The fire service personnel have at their disposal adequate mechanical and chemical equipment.

Lancashire: Coastal districts flourish on tourism and fishing industry. Fleetwood is the largest UK west coast fishing port. Other ports, Heysham, Preston and Glasson, are predominantly freighter ports. Oil is not handled in these ports.

Oil pollution is not a problem at all, but trained personnel and equipment are available.

Cumbria: Main ports, Barrow in Furness, Workington and Whitehaven, are mostly for freighters but oil loading and unloading takes place in the first two. Facilities exist in these ports for combatting oil spills, and there are also oil residue receiving areas. An important major shipbuilding complex is situated in Barrown in Furness, employing 16,000.

Major pollution from oil is rare, but occasionally » chemical containers are washed ashore. Raw sewage and chemical effluents from inland cause greater local pollution. Oil combatting measures are available at several strategic points along the Cumbria coastline.

Pollution occurs mostly in the River Mersey area. Spills are small and easily dealt with. The north Wales coast is often affected by oil pollution in the form of hard and soft tarry lumps.

Marine, pollution damage to wildlife was slight, mainly in the form of oiled birds.

Scotland (Atlantic Ocean, North Sea)

The west coast of Scotland continues to remain relatively free from oil pollution. The situation is always improving and the few incidents reported were caused by spillages of fuel, bunker oil or other refined products. Weathered lumps of oil are occasionally washed ashore, and the Clyde area remains reasonably free of oil pollution.

Highland region: Major port is Inverness. Traffic is mostly tankers and freighters, plus oil rig service craft operating at Wick, Scrabster, Invergordon, Ardusier and Inverness itself. Stocks of dispersant and spray equipment are available in Cromarty Firth and at strategic locations within the region for deployment at short notice. For dealing with major spills there is the central government stock pile.

There are no tank cleaning farms and oil loading and unloading takes place at five points on the coast. Adequate, oil combatting measures are found in Inverness and Invergordon. Frequent small oil spills from oil handling at depots are reported as well as occasional spills from tankers throwing ballast water while at sea. These, together with a few minor spills from oil drilling platforms on the Beatrice Field, have at times affected beaches.

All regional oil pollution contingency plans are exchangeable on common borders.

Grampian region: This region.faces the P^per, Forties, Montrose and Claymore oil fields of the North Sea, Harbours of Aberdeen and Peterhead, besides fishing, also cater for the oil related and service industry. Oil combatting measures are incorporated in the harbour authorities contingency plans for Aberdeen and Peterhead.

There are seven oil loading and unloading depots on the coast and one tank cleaning farm in Aberdeen. Two gas pipelines from the Frigg Field and one oil pipeline from the forties Field reach the shore in the region of Peterhead.

The region suffers pollution from minor spillages and the council authorities are very much aware of this threat. A detailed schedule of treatment areas with instructions on recommended treatment and protection measures exists.

Fife region: Many harbours and ports including the Forth and Tay Estuaries. Fishing industry is extremely important. Four shipbuilding complexes employ 7,800. No oil loading or unloading depots, but extensive oil tanker movements on the River Forth on the way to Grangemouth oil refineries.

Occasional minor nuisance spills, and residue oil in the form of blobs of tarry oil are reported. These do not affect fishing or tourism. Anti pollution equipment is available and action plans include Clearwater Forth Scheme, Tay Estuary Scheme and Fife Regional Scheme.

Lothian: Major port of Leith takes both tankers and freighters. The Forth Port Authority has an anti pollution scheme with equipment to handle 1,000 tons of crude North Sea oil. At Dalmeny, the Hound Point Oil Terminal takes 40,000 tons of oily ballast. This terminal handles 20 million tonnes of oil annually. On the spot oil combatting measures are available.

Pollution of the beaches occurs only in minor amounts. The Forth Ports Authority has trained personnel, tugs, booms, spinners, dispersants, etc.

Spillages reported on this eastern coast of Scotland were mostly in the open sea, in coastal waters and in harbour areas. Spills were almost always small and caused little damage. About half of the spillages were of fuel or bunker oil and other refined products. A number of oiled seabirds were found.

If not constantly supervised, the situation is bound to deteriorate in view of activities in the North Sea oilfields and the increasing associated sea traffic.

A number of spills have also been reported from offshore platforms or distilling rigs in the North Sea. These crude oil spills were dealt with by spraying of dispersants. The amount spilled should be considered small in relation to the enormous production of crude oil and natural gas. In 19 78, 21 fields were under development and the 12 fields on production had produced over 53 million tons of oil and 38.5 billion cubic metres of natural gas.

Orkney Islands (Atlantic Ocean, North Sea)

Major ports of Scapa Flow, Kirkwall and Stromness cater for tanker traffic. All are well equipped with dispersant booms and mechanical skimmers. Ten launches are fitted with spray booms and three fully equipped sea going tugs are also available. All residue receiving areas present at Flotbo (occidental terminal).

Pollution form extra territorial waters was no cause for serious preoccupation and did not affect fishing or tourism. Minor incidents at tanker loading depots are unfortunately on the increase. An oil pipeline from the Piper and Claymore fields comes to shore on the Orkneys.

Shetland Islands (Atlantic Ocean, North Sea) 0

The important harbour of Sullon Toe catering mostly ' for tankers has ballast oil reception depots and oil loading depots that handle 100 million tons yearly. Oil pipelines reach this harbour from the Cormorant and Nimian oilfields.

There are specially trained personnel and the Sullon Toe Harbour Oil Spill Plan, and the Shetland Islands Anti Oil Pollution Scheme control the fight against pollution. This region suffers from heavy pollution, especially from extraterritorial waters in the form of tar balls, tank washings, emulsified crude and medium blend fuel oil. This pollution affects the fishing industry and is the cause of heavy wildlife mortality.

Apart from the usual suggestions, mention has been made of the possibility of aerial surveillance of tanker routes and contractual agreements with industry to prevent pollution.

Major disaster was that of Esso Bernica in December 1978 (see above), following which a number of defects in the ' Sullon Toe oil pollution contingency plan were pointed out.

Oil pollution in the Orkney and Shetland islands is unfortunately on the increase due to a number of vessels washing their tanks, dumping waste oil fuel or discharging dirty ballast while en route to Sullon Toe. This might lead to a state of chronic pollution. Damage to seabird population in this area has now become so great (accounting for about 70% of all known oiled seabird deaths around the coast of Britain) as to arouse national and international concern about the environmental effects of the Sullon Toe terminal and its operations.

The Advisory Committee on Oil Pollution of the Sea publishes an annual report on oil pollution around the coasts of the UK and goes into great detail about classification of oil spills, type of oil involved, damage caused, cost of clean up operations and methods used in the clean up of oil spills, besides other relevant data,(48).

The suggestions and recommendations sent in by the different county councils in reply to the questionnaire, on ways and means to be adopted to improve the overall picture of marine pollution, are neatly included in a "Memorandum of Evidence for Submission to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution" by the Association of County Councils^

The suggestions are of two types. There are suggestions of a general international nature, which will be dealt with in the last section of this report on maritime causes of marine pollution, and those of a more "local or national" nature specific to the UK. Amongst the latter one should point out the following:

i. Extension of the territorial sea limit to 12 miles;

ii. The consideration that Bristol as the central stock pile of anti pollution equipment for England and Wales is ill-chosen as not being close enough to the coasts; |

iii. That the level of response capability of a local \ authority is to be governed by the estimated degree of risk and the resources available;

iv.- That more help and quick expert advice be available to local authorities when dealing with extensive oil spillages in coastal waters. This will be partly met by the proposed setting up of coastal pollution co-ordination centres;

v. The provision of short training courses in dealing with oil pollution, by the Department of the Environment for the local authorities most likely to be affected;

vi. The completion of the contingency plan for major oil pollution of the coastline currently under consideration by the Department of the Environment;

vii. Clearer definition of central government responsibility vis A vis compensation and sharing in clean up costs, and prosecution proceedings (central government is being asked to take upon itself a greater part of the financial implications);

viii.Support of the French measures whereby a master of a 5vessel is to report the arrival of a tanker in national waters, its proposed course and abide by instructions for a general control of his movements;

ix. Compulsory pilotage in the English and Bristol Channel;

x. Better enforcement of national legislation;

xi. That large high powered tugs should be used for policing and towage duties and placed in strategic areas around the coast including the western approaches, French coast, English Channel, Land's End, Bristol Channel, Anglesey, North Channel, Forth, Humber and Thames areas. These tugs should render whatever assistance is required without any previous negotiations about conditions or payments.

The first legislation against sea pollution in the UK was enacted in 1922 as "The Oil in Navigable Waters Act". Since then the UK has been a promoter of and a participant in international conventions and agreements having to do with oil pollution and related matters (Appendix I). In 1953 a special committee set up by the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation published a report on the subject of 0

oil pollution. April of next year saw the convening of an international conference which finally drew up the "International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil". A New Oil in Navigable Waters Act (1955) was enacted forbidding the discharge of persistent oil or oily residue within certain sea areas. The effluent was not to contain more than 100 p.p. million. Where necessary the fitting of approved oil-water separators was obligatory (56)

This act was further amended in 1963, following the 1962 amendment to the international convention and again in 1971, when it was eventually repealed in favour of the Prevention of Oil Pollution Act of 1971. This act (amended by the Petroleum and Submarines Pipeline Act 1975) is the principal enabling act controlling oil pollution by UK ships anywhere, and by all ships in UK waters. It prohibits the discharge of oil from offshore installations and pipelines around the coast. It makes provisions for the fitting of UK ships with certain equipment designed to reduce the risk of oil pollution, and requires the keeping of detailed records of the operations involving loading, unloading or'transfer of oil carried on board.

This act further deals with thè setting up of "oil reception facilities", puts restrictions on transfer of oil at night, and imposes the duty of reporting discharges of oil or oily water, and also of shipping casualties. Other provisions in this act empower the Secretary of State with powers of inspection and power to intervene in certain circumstances, in the event of a shipping casualty which threatens large scale pollution of the coasts.

The other principal act in UK legislation concerning oil pollution is the Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution) Act. 1971, amended by the Merchant Shipping Act 1974 and again in 1979.

This act which serves to enact the provisions of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, which in turn came about as a result of the Torrey Canyon disaster, when it became apparent that the limits of liability then in force, were inadequate to deal with the cost of clearing up the results of major oil pollution incidents holds the owner of an oil carrying vessle strictly liable for any damage in the area of the UK and for the cost of clean up measures undertaken. All ships carrying more than 2,000 tons of persistent oil as cargo, entering or leaving UK ports, or UK oil terminals, are required to carry a certificate showing that they have sufficient insurance to cover their maximum liability under the above convention.

Merchant Shipping Act of 19 7 4 provides for oil importers to contribute to an international fund, and for this fund to be liable for pollution damages in member states, where persons suffering damage have been unable to obtain full compensation under the 1971 Act. In the meantime the voluntary agreements CRISTAL and TOvALOP will continue in operation.

The Dumping at Sea Act 197 4 prohibits dumping in British waters or dumping by UK registered vessels in any water without a licence. The licensing authority is expected to have regard to the need to protect the marine environment and the flora and fauna which it supports.

Because of this act, local authorities require licences for the use of dispersants to treat oil pollution and have to abide by the conditions of the licence. 0

Another act extending the protection of water from pollution to virtually all inland and coastal waters, and introducing new provisions to protect water against the risk of accidental pollution is the Control of Pollution Act 1974. The general prohibitions on polluting water, which previously applied generally only to non tidal inland waters, will by this act, be extended to all coastal waters within three nautical miles from any point on the coast, and any other tidal waters.

Besides the above major enabling laws, there are numerous other regulations and orders (57). Worth mentioning is the Offshore Installations (Emergency Procedures) Regulations 1976, which requires an "emergency procedure manual" to be provided in respect of every offshore installation which is normally manned, specifying action to be taken in the event of an emergency.

Local authorities in the UK are continuously urged to keep their oil pollution contingency schemes under review and up to date by a number of circulars from the Department of the Environment.

GENERAL COMMENTS ON REPLIES TO QUESTIONNAIRE O

The number of replies received though less than what one had expected, was representative. The replies came from different regions, and thus acted as specimen replies for the region concerned.

Excluding the numerous replies from the UK, which gave a very good picture of what things really look like in that country, the other replies managed to give an idea of conditions prevailing all over Europe, from Iceland to Cyprus, and from Sweden to Malta.

Looking at the map one will quickly realise that replies came from those coastal regions mostly affected by. oil pollution; regions that are exposed to this threat because of their geographical position, and for their state of industrial development. The regions bordering the English Channel, ^ which is regarded as the "bottleneck" to north European traffic and a place where tanker accidents are most prone to take take place, have almost all replied.

Representative of the North Sea were the replies from the Orkney Islands, Shetland Islands, east coast of Scotland, Netherlands and Denmark. The Baltic Sea situation was given by the islands of Bornholm and Jutland. Another group of islands in the north east Atlantic (Azores and Madeira) painted the picture for this region.

The Mediterranean, unfortunately, was not adequately represented, though a very good overall picture of what the situation is like can be obtained from the report on the Mediterranean included in this report. The scarcity of information for this region, in reply to the questionniare, can be explained by the fact that countries bordering this sea are already answering many questionnaires in connection with their participation in the Blue Plan. All relevant data and information can be obtained from the UNEP/IMCO Regional Oil Combatting Centre in Malta, which has published data about available equipment, and experts in the Mediterranean region as well as a list of ROCCs official focal points in all the coastal states bordering this sea (59).

It is a pity that certain important regions, where shipping disasters have happened, and where it is known that oil pollution is a constant threat, did not find the time to send in a reply. Regions that come to mind in this context are Stockholm, the Bremen, Hamburg, Schleswig«Holstein region, Brittany, Galicia and north Portugal, Andalucia, Provence- Alpes Cóte d'Azur , Liguria and Reggio Calabria.

The participation of these regions in our report would have made for a fuller picture of Europe, and one that would have been more representative. It would be very instructive to know the reason why such regions did not answer.

Knowing what a problem oil pollution is for these regions, one can definitely rule out "lack of interest in this problem" as an excuse» So one has to figure out another reason.

Is it just not seeing the aim of another questionnaire? Or is it lack of faith in the Council of Europe's capacity to do something about this situation? Could it be just because they are participating in another interregional, international, or multinational organisation? Or is it because they cannot better their efforts? Other less motivated reasons could be the reason.

Whatever it is, it would have been interesting to know. A 'negative' reply could under certain circumstances be more informative than any number of 'positive' replies.

A general impression left after going through all the replies was that all countries, have to a variable extent, realised that pollution from oil, and its deleterious effects on amenity beaches, fishing, seabirds, 6tlC o 0 o XS a reality. No country feeIs absolutely safe from the possibility, if not probability of having its coasts polluted by hydrocarbons.

Because of this all countries have adopted preventive measures, and worked out detailed plans to be put into action when disaster strikes. Not all the plans are equally detailed. Not all are equally elaborate. Most have until now only existed on paper. Luckily they have not been put to the test, but in cases where existing plans have been used in emergencies, such occasions served to point out the weak points of such plans and new ones formulated on the acquired experience.

Almost all replies affirmed the fact that there is enough existing legislation. Many regretted the fact however that most legislation (especially at the international level) is inoperative, due to procrastination, or dragging out of legal considerations before actually signing conventions or agreements, and putting them into practice.

This situation is worrying many coastal regions for the simple reason that according to the replies, the larger part of oil pollution comes from extra territorial waters. It is there that unscrupulous captains dump their ballast water, oil residue sludge, bilge washings, etc. It is evident that the coastal regions themselves have no control whatsoever on such actions on the high seas and such control can come only through co-ordinated action at international level, based on international agreements and conventions.

To make matters worse, the coastal regions have to carry the financial burden of patrolling their territorial waters to spot slicks as early as possible and also provide facilities to clean up polluted shores at great financial expense. Training personnel, maintaining equipment and the cost of constant

o / o

alone are already enough. Agreements exist between local authorities and the central government in some countries as to what share of the expense each should shoulder.

Co-operation between neighbouring regions is not lacking, both where this has been agreed upon beforehand, and also where this was not the case.

Another impression taken from the replies was that tank cleaning facilities are relatively scarce around the coasts of Europe. This obviously does not justify the malpractice of cleaning tanks at sea but definitely does not help in eradicating this practice either. Tank cleaning farms and oil residue disposal facilities as well as facilities for dealing with washings and residue of tanks conveying other chemicals, should develop pari passu with the increase in tanker traffic and at places dictated by the development of oil loading and unloading facilities.

This problem is linked with the other problem of disposal of oil polluted sand, shingle or other material following clean up operations.

Coastal regions replying to the questionnaire give the impression that pollution of the coasts by oil is not as big a problem as many alarmist reports would have us believe. It is true that certain regions reported chronic pollution of a mild degree but most reports answered that pollution from oil was not a problem. This does not mean that the coasts of these regions do not receive their quota of weathered oil shingle or tar balls. It does not mean that a certain number of oiled birds are not found regularly on certain beaches. It means that pollution from oil by present standards is nothing to get alarmed about. It is not negligible enough to give way to complacency but on the other hand it is not tragic enough to drive us to panic. |

The situation is contained and were competent authorities to observe the letter of the law, the situation might even get better. However a certain amount of pollution will have to remain.

Only one or two regions admitted the deleterious effects of oil pollution in their region on fishing. Same has to be said for amenity beaches. The only instances where the tourist industry feels the effects of oil pollution is after some major oil pollution disaster.

On the whole, most regions are more worried by pollution of a mixed general nature than by oil pollution as such. They are more alarmed by the threat of pollution rather than by pollution itself, as far as oil is concerned. The state of readiness of all regions is confirmed by the fact that anti pollution equipment, both chemical and mechanical, as well as expertise, is available both at regional as well as at national level. Inter regional co-operation is not lacking.

The picture certifies that anti pollution measures are in fact effective and operative. Adequate surveillance and prompt action before oil slicks reach the shore are the mainstays of pollution prevention.

The situation,as far as oil pollution from the sea is concerned,/ seems to be under control. A certain amount will always have to remain. The problem arises as to how feasible it is economically to spend enormous amounts of human effort and money in order to decrease by a small percentage the minimal amount of oil pollution which exists at the moment.

It is true that further enforcement of existing legislation, better detection techniques, and more effective clean up methods, together with other measures, as will be mentioned in the next chapter.of this report, will definitely help to minimise oil pollution further. However, it is futile and utopic to dream about a state of absolute "no pollution from oil".

When major disasters strike, the forces of nature play a major role, with all the goodwill in the world, with all the support international agreements might give, and with the employment of all the anti pollution techniques one can master, it has to be accepted that man is not always victorious over nature - the reverse, unfortunately, is often true.

""̂"APPENDIX-*J. Chart showing signal urea and ratifications, by Council of Europe member state», of multilateral conventions

•• - - - • - relating to ofl pottotton of seas •

Key :

+ State having signed the convention

• State having ratified the convention

* Government having accepted the amendments <

<

I 1

£ e e 1 D

enm

ark'

Dan

emar

k

I 3

•s t J I * •3-

2

•g

•V 'ï \ 'I 1 5

2 z

t ? z c î ills III] j. a: ^ a :

* 4 f

Date of adoption

l'adoption.

International Convention for the prevention of + + + + + + + + + 12.5.1954 pollution of the sea by oil • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Amendments of 1962 * « * • * * « 11.4.1962

Amendments of 1969 • 21.10.1969

Amendments of 1971 (Tanks) * « * • « • * ' 1 S. 10.1971

International Convention relating to the limitation + + + + . Ì . + + + + + + "ïtf:iÎKl957 of the liability of owtiersof sea-gsing ships.- • • • • • e • • • ? • •

Agreement for co-operation in dealing with + + + + + + + + 9.6.1 Ä 9 pollution of the North Sea by oil • • ° • • • •

International Convention on civil liability for oil + + + + + + + + + + + + 29.11.1969 pollution damage « • • • • - • * * •

International Convention relating to intervention + + + + + + + . + + + + + + + 29.11.1969 'on the high seas in cases of oil pollution casualties • • • V • • • • •

Nordic Agreement concerning co-operation in + + + 16.9.1971 taking measures against pollution of the sea by oil • • •

International Convention on the establishment of + + + + + + + + + 18.12.1971 an international fund for compensation for oil • • • » pollution damage'

Convention for the prevention of marine pollution'-' + + + + + + + + + + + + 15.2.1972 by dumping from ships and aircraft a • • • • • • « • • •

Convention on the prevention of marine pollution + + + + + + + + T + + + + + + + 29.12.1972 by dumping of wastes 8 - - * •

international Convention for the prevention of 1973 pollution from ships (Marpol) (Amended in 1978)

international Convention for the prevention of + + + + + + -f 2.11.1973 marine pollution from ships

International Convention for the safety of life at • • 1960 sea (Solas) (Amended in 1978) revision

o ' - 1974

Convention on the protection of the marine + + 22.3.1974 environment of the Baltic Sea • Convention for the prevention of marine pollution + + -r 4- + + + 4- + + + 4.6.1974 from ¡lntf:&ase<i: sources • • • • » • Convention^ fòr-'the protection of the Mediter- + + + + + + + 6.2.1976 ranean Sea against pollution • •

Protocol concerning co-operation in combating , + + 1- + Ï- a. + 6.2.1976 pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by oil and • • other harmful substances in casés of emergency "

Protocol for the prevention of pollution of the + 4- + + + -f + 6.2.1976 Mediterranean Sea by dumping from ships and • aircraft

•Agreement concerning the protection of water of + T 10.5.1976 the Mediterranean shores , . . •

ILO'Convention No. H 7 on minimum standards 1976 for merchant ships

International Convention on civil liability for oil + + *+ + -r + 1.S. 1977 pollution damage resulting from thè exploration for. or exploitation of. submarine resources

A N N E X E

Etat des sîgnatnres et ratifications, par les pays membres du Conseil de l'Europe, des conventions multilatérales relativesàla pollution des mers .

Race of adoption

x l i e u , d e l'adoption

Date of entry into

force t Date de . , l'entrée en

vigueur

Dépositaire

Date of validity of

information Date de .

validité des informations

Signes utilisés :

+ Etat signataire de !a Convention

• Etat ayant ratifié la Convention

* Gouvernement ayant accepte' fcs amendements

London Londres London London

' London Brussels

'Bruxelles

Brussels Bruxelles

Brussels Bruxelles

Copenhagen Copenhague

Brussels Bruxelles

London -Washington •

Mexico • Moscow London Londres

London Londres

Paris

Barcelona Barcelone Barcelona Barcelone

Barcelona Barcelone

Geneva Genève London Londres

26.7.1958'

18.5.1967

20.1.1978

31.5.1968

9.8.1969

19.6.1975

6.5.1978

12.2.1978

Î 2.2.1978

1MCO

1MCO IMCO IMCO

Belgium Belgique

F.R.G. RFA

IMCO

IMCO

Denmark Danemark

Norway Norvège

IMCO

IMCO

IMCO

Finland Finlande France

Spain Espagne

Spain Espagne

Spain Espagne

ILO OïT

U.K. R.-U.

17.3.1978

17.3.1978 17.3.1978 17.3.1978 May 1977 ma» 1977

April 1978 avril 1978

22.6.1977

May 1978 mai. 1978

2.5.1978

17.3.1978

2.5.1978

25.5.

24.5.

17.2.

17.2.

1977

1978

1978

1978

17.2.1978

22.5

2.5.

5.6.

.1978 1973

1978

Convention Internationale pour la prévention de la pollution des eaux de la mer par les hydrocarbures

Amendements de 1962

Amendements de 1969

Amendements de 1971 (soutes) •

Convention Internationale1 sur la limitatloo de (a responsabilité des propriétaires de navires de' mer

Accord concernant la coopération en matière de lutte contre la pollution des eaux de la mer du Nord par les hydrocarbures

Convention Internationale sur la responsabilité civile pour les dommages dus à la pollution par les hydrocarbures

Convention Internationale sur l'intervention en haute mer en cas d'accident entraînant ou pouvant entraîner une pollution par les hydrocarbures Accord se rapportant à la coopération concernant les mesures prises contre (a pollution des eaux de mer par les hydrocarbures Convention Internationale portant création d'un fonds international d'indemnisation pour les dom-mages dus à la pollution par les hydrocarbures Convention pour la prévention de la pollution marine par les opérations d'immersion effectuées par les navires et aéronefs Convention sur la prévention de la pollution des mers résultant de l'immersion de déchets

Convention Internationale pour la prévention de la pollution en provenance des navires (Marpol) (Amendée en 1978)

Convention Internationale pour la prévention de la pollution par les navires

Convention Internationale pour la sécurité de la vie sur la mer (Solas) (Amendée en 1978)

Convention sur la protection de l'environnement marin dans la mer Baltique Convention pour la prévention de la pollution marine d'origine tellurique Convention pour la protection de la mer Méditer-ranée contre la pollution Protocole relatif à la coopération en matière de lutte contre la pollution de la mer Méditerranée par les hydrocarbures et d'autres substances nuisibles en cas de situation critique Protocole relatif à la prévention de la pollution de la mer Méditerranée par les opérations d'immer-sion effectuées par les navires et aéronefs Accord relatif à la protection des eaux du littoral méditerranéen

Convention'N0 147 de l'OIT sur les normes minima à observer sur les navires marchands Convention sur la responsabilité pour les dommages de pollution par les hydrocarbures, résultant dé la recherche et de l'exploitation des ressources minérales du sous-sol marin

A P P E N D I X I I QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Country.

2. Region.

« 3. Which sea or ocean bathes your shores?

4. Approximate length of coast, including any islands forming part of your region.

5. Type of coast (sandy, rocky, beaches, any tourist resorts, any major cities, any villages, giving

; population and major occupations).

? 6. Any rivers of any importance opening into the sea in your region.

7. Any ports, harbours, or yacht marinas on your coast.

i. What is the prevalent type of shipping in these harbours. (tanker or freighter)

ii. Approximate number of ship movements per year.

iii. Do any facilities for combatting minor/major oil spills occurring in these ports exist? Describe if any.

iv. Any tank cleaning farms or oil residue receiving areas.

8. Any shipbuilding/ship repairing/ship breaking complexes 1 on your coastline.

1 i. Give details as to number of employees and importance of this complex or complexes to your region in particular and to your country in general.

ii. Do any facilities and personnel for combatting minor/major oil spills occurring in these complexes exist? Describe if any.

iii. In case of shipbuilding, are you aware of any ' changes in shipbuilding design and construction in

your yards intended to make shipping safer? (Othér than the 1978 basic requirements spelled out in the IMCO Tanker Safety and Pollution Prevention Protocol.)

9. Any oil loading or unloading depot on your coastline.

i. Amount of oil loaded or unloaded daily or yearly.

ii. Are any oil combatting measures available on the spot?

; • / .

Appendix II 10. Any offshore oil drilling units in your territorial

waters. Please amplify on number and importance.

11. Importance of fishing industry in your regions. Please give some details as to the number employed, the type of fishing or sea farming, and importance to the economy of the region or country.

12. Does your region suffer from pollution from oil spills, or any other type of pollutant originating from the sea, eg hydrocarbon trafficking industry, oil slicks from extra territorial waters, or any other type of dumping at sea? Is so, to what extent":

i. Does it affect the fishing industry?

ii. Does it affect the tourist industry?

13. Has your region ever suffered a major oil pollution disaster:

i. From oil rig blow-outs? Please give details such as date, extent of damage, efficiency and promptness of measures taken, lessons learnt and remedial measures taken;

ii. From accidents at oil loading/unloading depots? Please give details as in (i) above;

iii. From tanker collisions or groundings? Please give details as in (i) above;

iv. From unknown sources, possibly from extra territorial waters? Please give details as in (i) above.

14. Has your region or country ever hosted any conference, scientific meeting, or symposia on sea pollution, by shipping or by an other means, in the last ten years?

15. What facilities does your region dispose of to combat marine pollution from shipping:

i. Trained personnel;

ii. Equipment;

iii. Action Plans (eg POLMAR plan of France);

iv. Information or co-ordinating centres, be they regional, natiqnal or international; (eg Regional Oil Combatting Centre in Malta under the auspices of UNEP, IMCO and the Government of Malta).

16. What is the number of tankers and gross tonnage flying your country's flag?

17. What are your country's laws regarding tanker specifications, crew qualifications, and training, observance of international navigation regulations, pilotage of tankers in and out of ports, or through busy international or internal waterways, etc..

Appendix II

18. Which is your country's main legislation governing the control of marine pollution by shipping or dumping?

19. What amendments have been added to'date? (

20. What responsibilities does this legislation atribute to the regional or local authorities of your maritime region? Please, amplify.

21. What international agreements, plans, protocols, conventions, etc, has your country entered into, ratified or signed?

22. Any interregional agreements or conventions entered into by your region. Is your region participating in any particular action plan? How effective is this participation?

23. Is there any particular local legislation in your region?

24.. How does this fit in with the central government's legislation?

25. How does your local legislation co-ordinate with legislation in neighbour maritime regions?

26. What is actually being done to satisfy both the national and the regional legislation (if any) in your region?

27. Have your local or regional authorities recommended any change in législation, or have they in the light of regional experience, any suggestions they intend to include in your legislation? Have they any suggestions they would like to make or put forward for the purposes of this survey?

28. What ways and means would you suggest for improving international co-operation in the field of protection of the marine environment, and in particular, as regards co-operation between local and regional authorities?

o

o o

A P P E N D I X III

LIST OF REGIONS, COUNTRIES AND ASSOCIATIONS REPLYING TO

THE QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Belgium - West Flanders

2. Cyprus - (whole country)

3. Denmark - Bornholm, Roskilde County, North Jutland

4. France - Région Nord/Pas de Calais, Haute Normandie,'

Pays de la Loire

5. Iceland - (whole country)

6. Israel - Union of Local Authorities in Israel

7. Italy - Veneto

8. Ireland - South East Region

9. Malta - (whole country)

10. Netherlands - Friesland, Zeeland; (whole country)

11. Norway - Vestfold

12. Portugal - Madeira, Azores

13. Spain - Cataluna 14. Sweden - Norrbotten, Östergötland, Götland

15. Turkey - I eel, (whole country)

16. United Kingdom - Shetland Islands, Orkney Islands, Higland Region (Scotland), Grampian Region, Fife, Lothian, Northumberland, Durham, Cleveland, North Yorkshire, Humberside, Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Kent, East Sussex, Isle of Wight, Hampshire, Dorset, Devon, Cornwall, Somerset, Avon, Gloucestershire, Monmouthsire, Glamorgan, Dyfed, Caernarvon, Flint, Lancashire, Cumbria. Association of District Councils, Association of County Councils, Nature Conservancy Council.

CPL/Env/Pol1 (15) 2

A P P E N D I X IV

BASIC REGULATIONS OF THE TANKER SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION PROTOCOL- 'IMCO 1978,

New Tankers : -Crude Oil Tankers Product. Tankers ex

Implementation Date

6/79 Contract 1/80 Keél Laying 6/82 Delivery

Requirement

S BT/PL. and COW - . -and IGS (20,000 dwt.)

Existing Tankers : -

(i) CBT or SBT or COW (40.000 dwt)

(ii.) SBT or COW (70 ¿000 dwt) (40.000 dwt)

(iii) IGS (70.000 dwt) (20.000 dwt)

H = Date of Comming into force of Protocols, PL = Protectively Located. — CBT - Clean Ballast Tanks

H"

H + 2 years H + 4 years

H + 2 years H + 4 years

Requirement

SBT/PL (30,000 dwt.) IGS (20,000 dwt.)

CBT or SBT (40.000 dwt)

IGS (70.000 dwt) (20.000 dwt)

Implementation Date 6/79 Contract 1/80 Keel Laying 6/82 Delivery

H

H + 2 years H + 4 years

Origin : "THE NAVAL ARCHITECT" March 19 79,

REFERENCES

(1) Le transport maritime. Etude et Statistiques 1976. Comité Central des Armateurs de France.

(2) Mr Walder CA (Oil Companies International Marine Forum) European Parliamentary hearing (Paris).

(3) Saliba L J "Protecting the Mediterranean" Business Press 1978, p. 171.

(4) Nonon P (INEXO) European Parliamentary hearing (Paris).

(5) Ibid

(6) Cowell M E (BP Co Ltd) European Parliamentary hearing (Paris).

(7). Annex (III) Protocol for the prevention of pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by dumping from ships and aircraft é (Barcelona Convention).

(8) Environment November 1969, P 1 1 .

(9) Rostert N. Les super tankers. Menace sur les océans, Ed. Robert Laffont, Paris 1974.

(10) Lee J E Oil Pollution of Marine Waters. Rapport CSFTI No. PB 182-426 November 1967.

(11) Bertrand A R V "Le droit international applicable aux pollutions chimiques de la mer" Revue de l'Institut Français du Pétrole, November/December 1973

(12) Statistiques Pétroliers et Energétiques, Comité Professionnel du Pétrole.

(13) Bertrand A R V "Revue de l'Institut Français du Pétrole, mai-juin 1979, Vol XXXIV, No. 3 "Evolution of oil tanker Y * Traffic Currents"(Chart).

(14) Pétrole 77. Eléments statistiques, Comité Professionnèl du Pétrole 1978.

(15) Banque de Données. Institut Français du Pétrole. i

(16) Conclusions of Norwegian Commission of Enquiry, (10 October 1977).

(17) Doc. 4199 - Parliamentary Assembly report on European • Action to Prevent Oil Pollution of Waters and Coasts (Mr Bagier).

(18) European Parliamentary hearing (4 July 1978) "The Pollution of Coastal Zones by Hydrocarbons".

(19) Sasanura M Y (IMCO) European Parliamentary hearing (Paris 1978).

(20) Mediterranean Action Plan, UNEP New York 1978.

(21) CPRM Resolutions and Rules of Procedure (1977).

(22) Resolutions adopted by the Permanent Committee of CPMR, Council of Europe, Doc. CPL/P (14) 15, 13 December 1979.

(2 3) Communication from CPMR, Council of Europe Doc. CPL/Env (13) 24, 6 March 1979.

(24) Project de Charte Européenne du Littoral (CPMR) Council of Europe Doc. CPL/Env (15) 10, 15 October 19 80.

(25) Proceedings of 3rd Conference of Mediterranean Towns (Rimini, Italy, June 1978).

(26) Council of Europe Doc. CPL/Env (13) 14, 12 December 1^78.

(27) Council of Europe Doc. AS/Loc (31) 3, 6 June 1979.

(28) The trends in both national and international policies for achieving a unification of standards in pollution matters. Prof. M Bothe. Aachen Congress 3-5 April 1979.

(29) Official report of debates. 14th Ordinary Session of the CLRAE, pp 16-17.

(30) "Towards a European agency for the protection of the marine environment" Prof. A.Kiss, Council of Europe Doc. CPL/Env/Poll (13) 2.

(31) "Maritime Pollution Problems" 14th Session CLRAE, CPL (14) 4.

(32) Protection by coastal states of the marine environment outside their territorial waters. OECD Env/TFP79.20.

(33) Marine oil pollution compensation ceilings, OECD Env/TFP/79.11.

(34) Classifying the cost of oil slicks. OECD Room Document 6(16)

(35) Sharing of clean up costs. OECD Env/TFP/79.5.

(36) "Oil pollution in the Mediterranean Sea" P LeLourd, Ambio, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp 319.320.

(37) Seminate International "Aménagement de la zone littorale Pas de Calais et Mer du Nord (Dunkerque-Boulogne) 26-27 January 1978.

(38) Journal Officiel de la République Française/ 29 December 1964, pp 11791 et seq.

(39) Journal Officiel de la République Française, 14 October 1978, pp 3570-3576.

(40) Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana N. 141 29 May 1976, pp 4125-4139.

/.

(41) Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, N. 2 63, 25 September 1979, pp 7915-6.

(42) Le Matin de Paris, 13 August 1980 "Mediterranée: la carte des pollutions".

(43) Norwegian Parliamentary Bill No. 173 (1974-75).

(44) Norwegian Parliamentary Bill No. 182 (1975-76), "Extraordinary appropriations for reinforcement of the anti pollution contingency planning".

(45) Environmental approaches in Norway. Ministry of the Environment, Oslo, December 1979.

(46) Medio Ambiente en España:: Informe Général. Legislación, pp 928-935, 879-894.

(47) Report - T Kiliqer - Secretary of State for Environment Turkey. Central Governor, Ministry of Interior, Ankara, 28 August 1980.

(48) Survey of oil pollution around the coasts of the UK and Ireland 1978. 1979 Advisory Committee on Oil Pollution of the Sea (ACOPS).

(49) Nature Conservancy Council - Oil Pollution Manual 1977.

(50) International Meeting on Wildlife and Oil Pollution in the North Sea. London 11-13 October 1977. Nature Conservancy Council publication.

(51) Important concentrations of seabirds requiring protection from oil pollution. Nature Conservancy Council map, Second Edition 19 80.

(52) "Accidental Oil Pollution of the Sea", Department of the Environment- Report 1976. Chapter 3, 3.1-3.36 \ < "Present organisation for dealing with oil spills".

(53) The Torrey Canyon. HMSO Publication 63-190 - 1 9 6 7.

(54) "Hazardous chemicals washed ashore - The case for government action", Isle of Wight County Council, February 1980.

4

(55) Summary of hazardous chemicals washed ahore, November 1979 - 16 February 1980.

I (56) Shakleton L R B, Douglas E, Walsh T, "Pollution of the

Sea by Oil" The Institute of Marine Engineers Transactions, November 1960, Vol LXXII No. 11.

(57) HMSO Publication on UK Laws Concerning Marine Pollution