13 June 2012 GeoMaritime, London 1

Illegal oil discharges from vessels in the Mediterranean Sea What is changed in these last 10 years?

Guido Ferraro (EC-JRC) Olaf Trieschmann (EMSA)

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 2

What is changed in these last 10 years*? 1. What is changed from a legal point of view? 2. What is changed in surveillance? 3. What is changed from an operational point of view? 4. What’s next? * 1st meeting of the European Group of Experts on remote sensing Monitoring of marine Pollution (22-24 March 2004)

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 3

No Major changes in the international legal regime. MARPOL/UNCLOS lay down the extent of enforcement powers of the Flag State, Coastal State, and Port State. In order to meet the aims of these two Conventions, they must be implemented in national law through appropriate legislation.

Jurisdiction on ships - 2 possibilities:

1. Nationality of the ship: - Principle of jurisdiction of the Flag State 2. Geographical position of the ship: - Principle of jurisdiction of the Coastal State (State where the ship is sailing) - Principle of jurisdiction of the Port State (Port where the ship is in )

EU legislation

Directive 2000/59 on port reception facilitiesDirective 2005/35 on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements

1. What is changed from a legal point of view?

Ferraro, G., Pavliha, M., 2010. The international legal framework on monitoring and response to oil pollution. Journal for Environmental Monitoring, 2010, vol. 12, pp. 574–580.

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 4

Since 2004… creeping jurisdiction of the coastal states…

1. What is changed from a legal point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 5

From research to the operational use of satellite imagery to detect oil pollution

2. What is changed in surveillance?

Visible or detectable oil discharges from ships, observed in a MARPOL special area, are illegal.

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 6

Analysis from archives (no real-time)

Yearly coverage and possible oil slicks detected over the whole Mediterranean basin in the period 1999-2004.

Ferraro, G., Meyer-Roux, S., Muellenhoff, O., Pavliha, M., Svetak, J., Tarchi, D., and Topouzelis, K., 2009. Long term monitoring of oil spills in European Seas. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2009, vol. 30 (3), pp. 627 – 645.

2. What is changed in surveillance?

Year   Coverage  in    square  degrees  

Coverage  in    mio  square  km    

Possible  oil  spills   Spills  per    mio  square  km  

1999   1382   13.26   1638   123.54  2000   3642   34.94   2297   65.74  2001   2495   23.94   1641   68.55  2002   1840   17.65   1401   79.36  2003   2289   21.96   897   40.85  2004   3885   37.27   1425   38.23  Total   15533   149.02   9299      

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 7

Analysis from archives (no real-time)

2. What is changed in surveillance?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 8

2. What is changed in surveillance?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 9

2. What is changed in surveillance?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 10

2. What is changed in surveillance?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 11

2. What is changed in surveillance?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 12

2. What is changed in surveillance?

Analysis from real-time CleanSeaNet data Yearly coverage and possible oil slicks detected over the whole Mediterranean basin in the period April 07- Dec 10.

Year   Coverage  in    

mio  square  km  Possible  oil  spills   Spills  per    

mio  square  km  Spills  per    

mio  square  km  

    Mediterranean   Mediterranean   Mediterranean   Europe  

2007   40.55   787   19.41  2008   82.32   1586   19.27   10.77  2009   56.59   847   14.97   7.61  2010   64.97   825   12.70   5.68  Total   244.43   4045          

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 13

Combining satellite images with AIS

Ferraro, G., Bernardini, A., Matej, D., Meyer-Roux S., Muellenhoff, O., Perkovic, M., Tarchi, D., Topouzelis, K., 2007. Towards an operational use of space imagery for oil pollution monitoring in the Mediterranean basin: A demonstration in the Adriatic Sea, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2007, vol. 54 (4), pp. 403-422.

3. What is changed from an operational point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 14

•  Criteria related to SAR image quality

•  SAR derived oil spill probability •  Related to image processing, information about errors in the processing chain, image quality,

features related to image analysis (like geometry of slick, structural aspects, appearance of the edge, grey level values and contrast to surroundings), and detection constraints like sea state conditions.

•  Criteria related to the context

•  Additional information (e.g., metoceanic and contextual) •  Contextual information can improve the probability of detecting oil spills as well as reducing the

number of false positives. Indeed, human contextual criteria like traffic lines, secondary routes, oil spill archives, oil rigs and other human installations likely to release oil slicks are essential.

•  Impact Factor •  This addresses the need for additional information on the drift of the detected slick (oil drift trend),

the area possibly concerned and its environmental sensitivity. The competent national authority needs detailed information to decide on follow up measures to oil spill detection.

•  Culprit identification Capabilities-AIS •  The vicinity of ships has usually been considered as further confirmation of the oil-spill detection

probability. On the other hand, the probable spill, and the navigation route of a potential culprit should be taken into account in order to increase the alert level of the detection, since this could lead to further verification.

Attention to the users: From Confidence Levels to an Alert System

3. What is changed from an operational point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 15

Alert System combining different data

Additional Information

(e.g. metoceanic,contextual)

InferenceEngine

SAR Derived Oil Spill Probability

Impact (e.g. Environmental

Consequences)

Culprit Identification Capabilities - AIS

Follow-up decision

Ferraro, G., Baschek, B., de Montpellier, G., Njoten, O., Perkovic, M., Vespe, M., 2010. On the SAR derived alert in the detection of oil spills according to the analysis of the EGEMP, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2010, vol. 60 (1), pp. 91-102. Ferraro, G., Perkovic, M., Trieschmann, O., Tarchi, D., 2012. Confidence Levels in the Detection of Oil Spills from Satellite Imagery: From Research to the Operational Use, Proceedings of SPIE Remote, Edinburgh, 24 - 27 September.

3. What is changed from an operational point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 16

Matrix alert regimes

A A A AB B B BA A A AB B B BA A A AB B B B

Medium

Low

Culprit

Impactn/a from Coastal

StateHigh Medium Low

High

A: most likely oil and B: pattern observed which i.a. could be oil

3. What is changed from an operational point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 17

3. What is changed from an operational point of view?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 18

Implementation: How new areas of jurisdiction will be implemented?

Sustainability: Are satellite costs sustainable? Quality: Is data quality, integrity and traceability ensured?

Validation: Verification of detected spills in satellite images...

5. Questions?

21 November 2012 ARGOMARINE Final Conference 19

www.jrc.ec.europa.eu guido.ferraro@jrc.ec.europa.eu

Serving society Stimulating innovation Supporting legislation

Joint Research Centre (JRC)

Thank you  

www.emsa.europa.eu Olaf.trieschmann@emsa.europa.eu

Satellite services CleanSeaNet

European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)