IMO Environmental Session: Mixed Results for Maritime Climate Negotiations

This article was originally published in our "Décryptage Mobilité" newsletter. To receive future articles by email as soon as they are published, Subscribe now. By Rodrigo Baranna - Consultant

In April 2018, theInternational Maritime Organization (IMO) had voted in favor of adopting an “initial strategy” to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the maritime sector ^[1], establishing two levels of ambition:

• Carbon intensity : a 40% reduction by 2030 and a 70% reduction by 2050 compared to 2008
• Absolute Emissions : a 50% reduction by 2050 compared to 2008

To achieve these goals, the United Nations will need to define concrete actions to promote the decarbonization of the sector, which will serve as a basis for the various stakeholders to develop their own strategies. This initial strategy is to be reviewed in 2023 based on the results of a data collection campaign on fuel consumption by ships larger than 5,000 gross metric tons, as well as the 4th IMO Study^[2] regarding the calculation of emissions from international maritime transport for the period 2012–2018, the development of prospective emissions scenarios in the sector and the calculation of its current carbon footprint^[3]. At its 73rd session in November 2018, the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC, under the auspices of the IMO) issued a call for proposals for concrete measures. Short-term measures (through 2023) were to be presented at the 74th MEPC, and medium- (2023–2030) and long-term (from 2030 onward) measures were to be presented at the 74th and 75th MEPC sessions ^[2].

Last May, the 74th Meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee was held in London. At the conclusion of this round of negotiations, a Definition of short-term measures to be implemented by the maritime sector to reduce its GHG emissions. However, the results did not live up to these expectations, proving to be much more modest and less encouraging. In fact, the Committee decided to first conduct a Impact Assessment of the Proposed Measures. Thus, the GHG working group at the 74th MEPC limited itself to define a procedure for evaluating measures and establish intersessional working groups to apply this procedure to the proposed measures^[4]. Consequently, the development of the IMO’s recommendations on short-term actions has been postponed until the next rounds of negotiations. The definition of medium- and long-term actions will be the subject of further analysis.

This is clearly very disappointing. While the UN agency’s official stance remains unclear, various stakeholders in the sector are sharing their visions of a a stronger and more proactive commitment. Two main levers are mentioned: theImproving Energy Efficiency and reducing the carbon intensity of the maritime sector's energy mix. With the aim of promoting energy efficiency in the current fleet, last April, the IMO received a letter requesting the Implementation of an average speed limit for container ships, as well as a absolute speed limit for all other types of vessels. More than 100 maritime companies and environmental organizations were signatories ^[5]. With regard to lower-carbon energy sources, the Biofuels are proving to be the most promising medium- to long-term solution for a large number of stakeholders, or in liquid form, as is the case with the Maersk giants ^[11] and CMA CGM ^[12], either in the form of biomethane, as proposed by Wärtsilä ^[13]. According to Hapag-Lloyd, LNG could be a transitional solution for the shipping industry ^[6], NYK ^[7] and DNV GL ^[8]. For Santos ^[9], as well as for Norwegian industry ^[10], Batteries could also play a role in the sector's transition to a low-carbon economy. Hydrogen rounds out the picture by attracting investment in Norway, for example ^[14]. There are many options, but decisions must be made urgently. The energy transition in the maritime sector will be a slow process, given the need to replace fleets and the long service life of ships.

The next decade will therefore be decisive for the development of the technologies that will become the standard by 2050. Whatever solutions the future may hold, they will need to be fully developed by 2030 so that they can be gradually rolled out between 2030 and 2050. Finally, in addition to the two courses of action mentioned above for decarbonizing the maritime sector, A third factor could play an equally important role: reducing needs, in other words, the moderation. While the first two are heavily dependent on technological progress, resource efficiency would represent a true paradigm shift, as it would require rethinking transportation flows to reduce both distances and the quantities transported. However, this would be the subject of a discussion that goes beyond the scope of the IMO …

Sources: ^[1]IMO: A body adopts a climate change strategy for shipping ^[2]IMO: Next Steps to Implement the IMO GHG Strategy ^[3]IMO: 73rd Session of the MEPC ^[4]IMO: 74th Session of the MEPC^[5]Financial Times^[6]Hapag-Lloyd^[7]NYK^[8]Lloyd’s List: LNG Will Be a Transitional Fuel by 2030, Nor-Shipping Hears^[9]Santos^[10]Lloyd’s List: Shipping Enters the Ion Age with Battery Technology^[11]Maersk^[12]The Maritime Executive^[13]Lloyd’s List: “Combustion engines are here to stay,” says Wärtsilä^[14]Lloyd’s List: Why Norway Is Backing Hydrogen as the Key to Decarbonizing Shipping by 2050