Comment
01 Apr 2003
The compromise deal to delay the implementation of the emissions amendments in return for an extra 3dB on multiple installations and the dropping of the in-use compliance requirement in favour of an assessment of its potential benefits seems a step in the right direction.
Certainly Nik Parker, technical director of the British Marine Federation (BMF) sees it thus.
But a few calls round the industry brought forth merely a collective Gallic shrug.
While the Volvo Pentas of this world may hang on every word emanating from Brussels - and throw another million or two at any problem - the smaller, less wealthy companies take a more pragmatic view.
They are just waiting to see what happens. They wonder how everything will really affect them.
How do they prove compliance, they ask? Simple - it's back to a Mk 1 bit of paper with the magic words on it.
After that, it's down to the local Trading Standards Office to deal with any complaints.
The SMEs knew in-use compliance testing was never going to be a runner. When the marine world has no means of tracking an engine, how on earth is Brussels ever going to insist it goes through in-use compliance testing?
Who sets up the test centres? Who pays for the test?
And don't forget that noise testing is still a thing of the future, with the SoundBoat project attempting to come up with a system that a) works, and b) can be afforded, or c) can be self-certified.
What will happen when it's all finalised, they ask? Forget the Big Boys, who have all been involved at every stage. What about the small companies?
Will UK SMEs jump through hoops and ensure compliance, only to see their European neighbours accept the regulations, then turn a blind eye and carry on regardless?
It's happened before.






