News / Greener shipping – 'further work needed', but all still to play for

© Andrei Dzemidzenka |

Last week’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) ISWG-GHG 18 meeting left little decided and much still to be discussed at the 83rd edition of the marine environment protection committee (MEPC) in April.

Some 66% of MARPOL Annex VI signatories backed a flat-rate greenhouse gas (GHG) levy, including developing countries and small island developing states (SIDS), Dr Annika Frosch, research fellow of UCL Energy Institute, said.

A UCL colleague, PhD student Marie Fricaudet, said that there was still a way to go, noting that “significant decisions remain on the economic measures.”

Though many are agreed a levy was necessary, opinion is divided as to how it should be spent. Some believe a decarbonisation research and development fund should be established; but this has been criticised by developing countries as an attempted cash-grab, by countries which not only benefit disproportionately from shipping’s revenues, but whose development historically was responsible for man-made climate change in the first place.

Instead, it is now suggested that the money raised should fund the low-income countries disproportionately affected by climate change, such as SIDS.

Guy Platten, secretary general of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), which has been pushing for a GHG levy, said the group was “broadly satisfied” with the progress made, “despite divergence on many issues”.

“It is encouraging that negotiations continue in a positive and cooperative spirit,” he added.

Reflecting what UCL described as a “predictable number of key decisions and further work needed,” Blánaid Sheeran, policy officer at Opportunity Green, told The Loadstar today that certainties were in short supply. 

“All the key details were left to be determined, likely running into MEPC 83,” she said. “So just in terms of the timeline, I think my key takeaway was that we’ve got a lot to get agreed at the two-day ISWG 19 and then the MEPC.”

However, Ms Sheeran identified “progress” in terms of active involvement by member states. She said: “It was a GHG price on all of shipping submissions. So it was great to see more countries come to the floor, and speak their position in favour of that… [but] I think there is still a risk that that measure is not adopted.”

Early last week, some shipping lines came together to demand greater clarity on the matter of biofuels, which can reduce or increase carbon emissions, depending on which are adopted. In Ms Sheeran’s analysis, the origins of biofuel are being examined with a more critical eye, this time.

“I think we were really hearing critical information, taking into account a broad perspective on biofuels,” she explained.

“This is really critical if we want to see a transition that is not limiting us to options that, in the long term, are just not viable.”