Shipping’s Net Zero Ambitions Hit a Crossroads

Shipping’s net zero ambitions are facing a critical test as the International Maritime Organization’s Intersessional Working Group on greenhouse gas emissions begins its latest session. The delegates gathered face a stark reality where climate disasters are accelerating, and finding a path to decarbonization has become urgent. Recent climate events, including catastrophic flooding across Europe and the collapse of a glacier in the Himalayas, have intensified the pressure on the industry to act.

Last year’s attempt to finalize a Net Zero Framework (NZF) at an Extraordinary Session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee was stalled by political disagreements. The US and other nations used procedural tactics to block the vote, pushing the decision back to November of this year. Simon Bergulf, VP of environment and climate at the World Shipping Council, says the tone has shifted.

Related: COSCO SPENDS $3BN ON NEW SHIPS

According to Bergulf, the United States has softened its stance and shown a willingness to engage constructively. Federal Maritime Commission chair Laura DiBella recently stated that alternative fuels must satisfy measures of affordability, global availability, and scalability. She believes that liquefied natural gas and bio-LNG could realistically supply over 60% of the global maritime fuel market by 2050.

To an outsider this would seem to be shipping’s ‘drink bleach to cure covid’ moment, advocating the use of a more potent GHG to solve a crisis that is caused by such emissions. Even so Bergulf argues that the US has softened its approach and shown “a willingness to engage”. “They have some red lines, but I would say it’s much more constructive to come and say, here are the red lines that we have, we need to make this work,” Bergulf told Seatrade Maritime News.

As the US is set to become the global leader in bio-LNG, DiBella has demanded American produced bio-LNG “Must be recognized as a qualifying fuel”. Others believe that the NZF should be implemented as approved at the April 2025 MEPC83 and should not look to dilute the regulation. Sapphire Ross, policy officer at NGO Opportunity Green, said: “Shipping cannot claim to be on a credible net-zero pathway while continuing to rely on solutions that don’t meaningfully cut emissions.”

Related: Ewaste Expo Comes to United States

That is view that Bergulf and the WSC agree with, though it appears to contradict its view on the US position. “We need something that’s actually sending a very strong signal to the production and fuel offtake agreements, and that signal needs to be aligned with the 2023 strategy,” said Bergulf. WSC, while trying to remain fuel agnostic are walking a slender tightrope, with Bergulf adding: “That doesn’t mean that the proposal from Liberia and Panama can’t be used it just means it needs some elements from other proposals thrown in.”

Proposals for the NZF modification, as led by Liberia would exclude alternative fuels that cost more than 15% above standard fuel oil. Effectively, GHG targets would change based on whether clean fuels are available and affordable. Moreover, the Liberian proposals would cut the net zero fund, a move that the US was also aligned with, describing the carbon charges as, “An unnecessary charge on American shippers and vessels operating in international waters.”