WASHINGTON – If other nations agree to a U.S. proposal for stricter international regulation on air pollution from ocean-going vessels, the continued increase in Santa Barbara County’s levels of nitrogen oxide -- the main ingredient in smog -- drifting to shore from cargo ships could level off by 2012 and start dropping.
 
With more than 7,000 trips a year by cargo ships through the Santa Barbara Channel annually and the frequency expected to almost double by 2020, a growing share of the county's nitrogen oxide pollution has been traced to the ships’ emissions, which a United Nations regulatory agency has been slow to regulate as global trade has expanded.

As traffic along an international shipping corridor from Asia to the south coast ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach has risen, the federal government has been under pressure from environmentalists and California's delegation in Washington to take the lead in addressing merchant ship emissions.
 
The U.S. proposal to the United Nations' International Maritime Organization, announced last month, would phase in strict emissions standards for nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide from the merchant vessels. It comes less than three months after the Environmental Protection Agency postponed -- for the second time in four years – setting limits on emissions from cargo ships in U.S. waters, saying the most effective way to pursue limits is through international standards.
 
“We are really encouraged by the fact that the logjam appears to be broken,” said Terry Dressler, Santa Barbara County’s air pollution control officer. "We believe that more could be done, but this is a very solid (U.S.) proposal."
 
The International Maritime Organization will consider the U.S. plan along with other suggestions for tougher fuel standards and engine emissions for the world's shipping fleet at a four-day committee meeting in London this week.
 
Standards could be amended as soon as next year and over time reduce a significant source of nitrogen oxide and particulate-forming sulfur oxide in California.
 
Nitrogen oxide reacts with sunlight to form smog, also known as ground-level ozone, which can cause children and people with lung diseases to suffer from infections and tissue damage, and has been linked to premature death and heart disease.

With 90 percent of goods traded globally moved by ship and more international trade than ever, nitrogen oxide from cargo vessels is an increasing problem in regions of the world with extensive coastlines, near shipping corridors.

Cargo ships contribute about 50 percent of nitrogen oxide pollution in Santa Barbara, amounting to about 15,000 tons annually. Reductions in emissions from land-based sources, including automobiles, trains and buildings, have been offset by pollution from an increasing number of voyages through the channel, Dressler said 
 
Under the U.S. proposal, Dressler estimates that in 2012 nitrogen oxide from cargo ships would peak at about 18,000 tons in Santa Barbara County, then drop back to about 15,000 tons a year by 2020.

Performance standards for ships would be phased in under the U.S. proposal. To achieve lower limits for nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide, shipping companies would have options.

One such choice to control sulfur oxide pollution: use low-sulfur distillate fuels or install engine exhaust scrubbing technology.

Sulfur oxide emissions contribute to the formation of harmful air particles, which heavily affect commercial ports in cities such as Los Angeles, Long Beach and New Orleans.

Though much of the pollution from cargo ships comes from use of high-sulfur content "bunker fuel," a complete ban on its use would jeopardize support from countries that produce large amounts of the low-grade fuel, such as Singapore.
 
"The U.S. proposal is well crafted and stands a legitimate chance of sustaining sufficient political support," said Drew Kodjak, executive director of the nonpartisan International Council on Clean Transportation in Washington, whose members include researchers and regulators.
 
Amending the current standards requires a simple majority of countries that have adopted them, according to an IMO spokesman.
 
But, Kodjak cautioned, "The IMO is a very difficult place to get things done."

Two other countries, Japan and Norway, have offered competing plans to address nitrogen oxide. “The laggard in the group in Norway,” Kodjak said.
 
The current international standards, finalized in 1997, took eight years to ratify because of insufficient support from countries with a large share of registered vessels. Ratification required adoption by at least 15 nations representing at least 50 percent of the world's shipping tonnage.
 
The U.S., where about 7 percent of the world’s cargo ships are registered, has not adopted the 1997 protocol. Now, the U.S. must adopt the standards so that it can vote for the amendments it has proposed.

Environmentalists, port authorities and California politicians have been pressuring the shipping industry and the federal government to more strictly regulate  cargo ship emissions.
 
A California Senate bill vetoed last year by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger but re-introduced this year would place an excise tax on cargo ships coming into California ports. Half the collected money would go toward reducing environmental pollution near ports.  
 
“All the (affected) communities are up in arms," said Larry Allen, San Luis Obispo County air pollution control officer. "It’s created tremendous political pressure.”
 
That pressure followed an EPA decision in April to postpone until 2009 setting emissions limits on cargo ships in U.S waters. In response, bills were introduced in Congress by the California delegation that would require the EPA to take action by the end of 2008, and an environmental law group, Earthjustice, has threatened to sue the agency over the delay.
 
In 2000 environmentalists sued the EPA after it refused to adopt the 1997 international standards, which it called "voluntary," or set its own cargo ship emission standards.

The agency settled out of court, agreeing to issue standards by January 2003. In February 2003 the agency announced a delay, promising standards "on or before April 27, 2007." But it then announced a delay until 2009.