port terminal

Port terminals need to be more cost effective

Pressure is mounting on container ports to improve efficiency in terminal operations, as wholesale change in the shipping industry continues to increase competition and drive down revenue per box.

According to Mark Welles, Navis vice president and general manager Asia Pacific, terminal operators are “aggressively attacking their cost base and figuring out ways to use some of their tools to do more with less”.

This includes using automation to drive incremental changes that improve operational efficiency, whether waterside or at the terminal gate.

“Terminals are making the small or large changes they need to keep their businesses moving ahead against the challenges from consolidation on the carrier side,”

“Some terminals are handling more volume, but in some markets the revenue per teu is decreasing – or certainly not increasing the way it used to – so they’re having to manage their business in a different way.

“That efficiency drive has two parts: one is to be the better service provider [than regional port competitors]; but also to reduce your costs, which therefore either gives you more flexibility on the commercial side, or it means you’re a more profitable business,” he added.

Mr Welles was speaking after a visit to the Qingdao New Qianwan Container Terminal (QQCTN), which uses Navis N4, the port software specialist’s flagship terminal operating system (TOS).

“Full automation is working well for them and helping to set the stage for what’s possible in China and Asia, in terms of the success they’ve had,” he explained.

Navis has worked with ports to implement around 120 software “go-lives” at terminals around the world over the past two years. The port of Tianjin managed to install N4 at six terminals in less than 12 months, a feat Mr Welles described as “almost unheard of”.

The importance of a well-functioning TOS was brought into sharp focus by the IT failure experienced recently at Felixstowe. The botched installation of an in-house TOS led to prolonged operational interruptions and subsequent diverted vessel calls. The resulting supply chain disruption – which was at first contained to UK ports – has now spread to northern Europe.

It appears Hutchison, the Hong Kong port group that runs Felixstowe, was bucking a trend with the decision to develop its own TOS.

“It’s fair to say, from a macro-level, over the past five years we’ve seen more and more of the regional and global terminal groups partnering with an experienced solutions provider to ‘buy don’t build’,” said Mr Welles.

He claims ports generally prefer suppliers that provide turnkey solutions for the full spectrum of systems and equipment required for each aspect of terminal operations.

Source: The Loadstar

maersk

MSC, CMA CGM Present Plans for Fuel Surcharges

Following the footsteps of Maersk Line, the Swiss and French container shipping giants MSC and CMA CGM have unveiled their intention to introduce a new fuel adjustment surcharge ahead of the 2020 sulphur cap.

Mediterranean Shipping Company plans to introduce a new Global Fuel Surcharge as of January 1, 2019. The company expects its operating costs to increase significantly in preparation for the 2020 low-sulphur fuel regime.

MSC said that the cost of the various changes to the fleet and its fuel supply is in excess of USD 2 billion per year, the same as with Maersk Line.

“The new MSC Global Fuel Surcharge will replace existing bunker surcharge mechanisms and will reflect a combination of fuel prices at bunkering ports around the world and specific line costs such as transit times, fuel efficiency and other trade-related factors.”

Separately, CMA CGM informed that it decided to favor the use of 0.5% fuel oil for its fleet, and to invest significantly by using LNG to power some of its future container ships, and by ordering several scrubbers for its ships.

The company said that all these measures represent a major additional cost estimated, based on current conditions, at an average of 160 USD / TEU. The additional cost will be taken into account through the application or adjustment of fuel surcharges on a trade-by-trade basis, CMA CGM explained.

“The implementation of this new regulation, which represents a major environmental advance for our sector, will affect all players in the shipping industry. In line with its commitments, the group will comply with the regulation issued by the IMO as from 1 January 2020. In this context, we will inevitably have to review our sales policy regarding fuel surcharges,” Mathieu Friedberg, Senior Vice President Commercial Agencies Network, said.

The new International Maritime Organization (IMO) Low Sulphur Regulation will be effective from 1 January 2020 and will require all shipping companies to reduce their sulphur emissions by 85%.

Sulphur content in the fuel used for international shipping will have to be limited globally to 0.5%, compared with the current standard of 3.5%, in order to minimize the emissions.

However, Shippers have joined forwarders in condemning Maersk’s plan, pointing out that as the charge is per box, those shipping west with higher charges will end up paying for more collectively than they need to, to compensate for empties returning east. As  a result, the most profitable routes will enjoy higher-than-average surcharges.

In addition, Maersk is introducing the scheme a year before the higher fuel prices come in.

“Asking customers to contribute to new environmental costs is to be expected, but this charge lacks transparency; no data is available to let customers work out how the charge has been calculated,” said James Hookham, secretary general  of the Global Shippers’ Forum.

“Given historical experiences with surcharges, shippers are naturally suspicious over something shipping lines say is ‘fair, transparent and clear’.

“GSF will be taking this piece of financial engineering apart piece by piece, as we suspect this has more to do with rate restoration than environmental conservation.”

He added that Maersk could have chosen to fit scrubbers on all its ships, triggering a one-off expense, as some of its rivals are doing.

“For shippers, this is a better option than paying sulphur surcharges indefinitely.”

But he added that the unilateral manner in which Maersk introduced the change had also upset its customers.

“What also disappoints shippers is the lack of negotiation about the timing and the structure of the charge. It would have been better if Maersk had discussed its plans with individual customers in the course of confidential contract reviews, rather than just publishing something that wouldn’t be out of place in the puzzles section of your daily newspaper.

“We suspect that other shipping lines will be tempted to follow suit, but it would surely be of concern to competition authorities around the world if the same formula were to be used by other shipping lines, especially in the same Alliance.

“GSF would encourage Maersk to consult with customers and reconsider the strategy. These new charges may be all about low-sulphur fuel, but they still stink to us!”

Last week forwarders also revealed their anger over the “very major increases”.

“Rises of this magnitude are unjustified, and could be construed as blatant profiteering by shipping lines determined to exploit the situation,” said BIFA director general Robert Keen.

Source: The Loadstar / World Maritime News

low tariffs after brexit

A no deal Brexit could cause problems for haulage

As few as 1,224 UK hauliers could be eligible to transport goods to the EU if the country departs the union without a deal in place.

Logistics industry representatives say a UK-EU agreement on road transport must be prioritised over a trade deal.

Yesterday the UK government issued a series of technical notices outlining the situation in the event of a no-deal Brexit, which admitted that UK driving licences would no longer be valid on continental Europe’s road without an accompanying international driving permit (IDP).

The government said it was “seeking to negotiate a comprehensive agreement with the EU to cover the continued recognition and exchange of UK licences after exit”.

It added that if this approach failed it would pursue individual agreements with EU countries. However, it confirmed that EU licence holders would not be required to hold an IDP when operating in the UK.

Lorry drivers could be forced to obtain permits for the countries they visit, similar to those already used to drive in some states in the United States or Japan.

Despite reports that French Authorities may stop cross channel rail services as well as refuse UK aircraft permission to transit its air space, the Freight Transport Association said priority must be given to ensuring the haulage sector was able to continue operating.

Pauline Bastidon, head of European policy, said: “The UK’s logistics sector is the beating heart of the economy, and one on which most businesses rely for goods, services, raw materials and ingredients.  Without secure, safe and timely logistics movements between the UK and the EU, on which many schools, hospitals, shops and other businesses have come to rely, they will find it difficult to source goods in the short to medium term, while new trading arrangements are confirmed.

“That would create the very real risk of shortages and empty shelves.

“The priority now must be to secure a new UK-EU road transport agreement; an even more urgent priority than a trade deal.  Without permits there will be no trucks, and without them, no trade.”

She welcomed the proposal for a new UK-EU agreement on licences, but explained that even with this in place, the administrative burden on the industry would be enormous.

“These would still impose unwelcome burdens and cost on British hauliers seeking to acquire the necessary permits and there is no reassurance in the ‘No Deal’ papers that there would be sufficient to cover all transport moving to and fro across the UK’s borders.

“There is still a large amount to do to keep Britain trading efficiently with its biggest customer, the EU, and to suggest that these are processes which can be implemented swiftly would be to ignore the complexity of a huge administrative task now being placed on the UK’s freight industry.”

Far worse, however, would be a no-deal situation in which every UK haulier needed an IDP to operate in Europe, she said, given the lack of capacity on the part of UK authorities to issue the permits.

“The fact that the UK driving licence would only be accepted in partnership with an international driving permit would create delays and confusion for many operators, some of whom may not even be aware that they would require additional paperwork.

“Of real concern is that these permits would not be available to purchase at every post office, (the papers suggest 2,500 outlets, rather than the full network), and will not be on sale until 1 February, leaving operators little time to undertake the necessary administration ahead of Brexit day.

“At this point, we expect only 1,224 permits to be made available to UK hauliers every year if they wish to travel to the European Union. That number pales into insignificance when you consider that the port of Dover can handle up to 10,000 vehicle movements a day,” she said, adding that this could effectively break supply chains between the UK and Europe.

“Without a significant improvement in the planned number of accepted permits for HGVs travelling across the border, there is a very real threat to the integrity of the UK’s supply chain, and delays and product shortages could be a reality while alternative suppliers are sourced and arranged,” Ms Bastidon said.

Source: The Loadstar / The Independent

port of felixstowe

UK haulage crisis is tightening

Shippers are facing an anxious wait as the crisis in the UK haulage sector tightens its grip.

CMA CGM subsidiary ANL has announced a six-day delay on export collections due to a reduction in haulage availability, and HMM revising its policy.

ANL told customers the next available collection at major ports, including Felixstowe, London Gateway and Southampton, would be 17 September.

It said the reduction in haulage availability was linked to “continued issues” at Felixstowe, and rail engineering.

The delay also affects the UK ports of Immingham, Liverpool, Teesport and Tilbury, with one source noting that it was not only exports being affected.

“Clearly delays are being suffered on import collections, which apart from giving problems to the supply chain, will also increase costs linked to rent and demurrage,”

HMM has issued new rules on UK haulage, telling customers that, from 1 October, shippers must undertake all export collections and import deliveries at “their own risk”.

It blames UK haulage for the policy change.

The carrier said: “The UK road haulage market continues to face ongoing challenges as a result of road congestion, a general shortage of vehicle, driver and rail availability, plus increased cargo volumes.

“The problem is exacerbated by other external factors impacting haulage productivity such as port congestion and vessel diversions.

“Reliability and punctuality of all export collections and import deliveries has been impacted and these issues are likely to continue as many are ongoing or long-term rather than seasonal.”

Furthermore, the carrier said, it had reserved the right to be up to 90 minutes late, while still expecting any containers arriving within that period to be loaded or unloaded.

“We will give no consideration of extended free time or additional costs,” said the carrier. “Wasted journey costs will apply for any container arriving within this 90-minute period which is rejected for loading or unloading.”

To facilitate improved service and free up resource availability, HMM said it welcomed “any opportunities” to unload or deliver at night.

The issues surrounding haulage were leading to shippers being dealt a “double-whammy”.

“They are being hit twice, as not only are they not getting shipment, but they are also being charged for their goods being left quayside,” said the forwarder.

“And anyone who doubts there is an issue need only look at the number of new enquiries we have had, and how, predominantly, they have all been linked to haulage – this is a major issue.”

The forwarder said the problems, which started with Felixstowe’s failure to successfully migrate to its new IT system, were spreading. Many shipments destined for the UK’s largest box port have been rerouted to London Gateway and Southampton.

“You are seeing how Southampton is being more and more affected by issues because of all the rerouting that has occurred,” added the source.

“It is still possible to get containers delivered at short notice, but the hauliers are ramping up the prices, so they have the incentive.”

Source: The Loadstar

port of Southampton,

As peak season approaches so could crisis point

One forwarder told The Loadstar all UK ports had been affected by problems ranging from driver shortages and rail failures to issues arising from M&A activity.

Advance road bookings now require up to 10 days lead time.

“We are seeing failures on some 20% of the boxes we handle; that’s thousands of boxes, and from what we are hearing some of our competitors have it worse,” said the forwarder.

The port of Felixstowe has borne the brunt of the industry’s ire, thanks to the delays and congestion resulting from its efforts to integrate a new IT system. Last week, OOCL and CMA CGM announced they were withdrawing services and redirecting them to other UK gateways.

MSC has now announced it will divert its India/Pakistan-Europe IPAK service to London Gateway from next week.

“People are now actively avoiding Felixstowe, because of its IT issues, and redirecting services into regional ports,” the forwarder continued. “Liverpool generally does not experience any issues but even there we are seeing delays and backlogs.”

However, another forwarding source noted that while the port of Liverpool had experienced some issues, they had been relatively short-lived. He said “a few” larger ships had been diverted from southern ports into Liverpool, affecting operations for a “couple of days”.

He added: “Drivers were waiting up to eight hours to collect a container, but only in a certain area of the port – which did create some unrest.

“It didn’t take long to get back up to speed, with us collecting five to six containers per day, delivering to our warehouse, unloading and returning the empty with one driver.”

For the wider industry however, another forwarder told The Loadstar, the core issue was a lack of haulage – a view that appears to be supported by carriers demanding seven to 10 days advance booking. Those that fail to book this far in advance have been unable to get access to haulage space.

“If expectation for booking is 10 days, whereas previously the entire turnaround could be completed in three days, that tells you there isn’t the haulage capacity,” said the forwarder.

“This causes its own problems, with ‘pay and play’ taking effect and hauliers only working for the highest rates. Those unwilling to pay? Tough, the hauliers will find work elsewhere.”

Alongside the lack of available road haulage, the UK is also suffering from limited rail capacity, and with peak season approaching it is likely to get worse.

We request that you please contact us at your earliest convenience to secure your bookings.

The port of Southampton is at the moment experiencing delays which mean it can take 10-14 days to get an available space rather than the usual 2 or 3.  Planning in advance is of upmost importance.

Haulage capacity seems to have dropped quite significantly and this needs to be taken into account when planning for the next few months.

Please contact us for further information or if you require any help or assistance. We will keep you updated of any developments.

Source: The Loadstar

Beast from the East

We are now entering storm and typhoon season…

Typhoons and tropical storms have already hit Asia during July and August which have had a serious impact on port operations.

This in turn means that we may experience delays caused by the inclement weather.

The number of vessels arriving into port is likely to be disrupted with ports closing because of poor weather conditions.  Port closures will therefore lead to longer waiting times and delays.

We will keep you updated of any developments and if you have any questions or concerns please contact us at your earliest convenience.

wind propulsion

Wind propulsion technology testing begins

Norsepower, together with project partners Maersk Tankers, Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) and Shell Shipping & Maritime, today announced the installation of two Norsepower Rotor Sails onboard Maersk Pelican, a Maersk Tankers Long Range 2 (LR2) product tanker vessel.

The Rotor Sails are large, cylindrical mechanical sails that spin to create a pressure differential – called the Magnus effect – that propels the vessel forward. The Rotor Sails will provide auxiliary wind propulsion to the vessel, optimising fuel efficiency by reducing fuel consumption and associated emissions by an expected 7-10% on typical global shipping routes.

The Rotor Sails are the world’s largest at 30 metres tall by five metres in diameter and were installed on the product tanker vessel in the port of Rotterdam. The first voyage with the Rotor Sails installed will commence shortly.

“This project is breaking ground in the product tanker industry. While the industry has gone through decades of technological development, the use of wind propulsion technology onboard a product tanker vessel could take us to a new playing field. This new technology has the potential to help the industry be more cost-competitive as it moves cargoes around the world for customers and to reduce the environmental impact,” said Tommy Thomassen, Chief Technical Officer, Maersk Tankers.

The Rotor Sails have completed rigorous land testing, including thorough testing of various mechanical and performance criteria, and is the first Rotor Sails to be Class approved for use on a product tanker vessel. Extensive measurement and evaluation of the effectiveness of the Rotor Sails will now take place to test the long-term financial and technical viability of the technology. Independent experts from Lloyd’s Register’s (LR’s) Ship Performance team will acquire and analyse the performance data during the test phase to ensure an impartial assessment before technical and operational insights as well as performance studies are published.

Andrew Scott, Programme Manager HDV marine and offshore renewable energy, ETI explained: “We commissioned this project to provide a unique opportunity to demonstrate the untapped potential of Rotor Sails. Auxiliary wind propulsion is one of the few fuel-saving technologies that is expected to offer double-digit percentage improvements. The technology is projected to be particularly suitable for tankers and dry bulk carriers, and this test will assist in determining the further potential for Rotor Sails in the product tanker industry.”

Tuomas Riski, CEO, Norsepower, added: “We have great ambitions for our technology and its role in decarbonising the shipping industry. The installation of our largest ever Rotor Sails in partnership with these industry leading organisations shows that there is an appetite to apply new technologies.

“With this installation on the Maersk Pelican, there are now three vessels in daily commercial operation using Norsepower’s Rotor Sails. Each of these cases represents a very different vessel type and operational profile, demonstrating the widespread opportunity to harness the wind through Flettner rotors across the maritime industry.”

Dr Grahaeme Henderson, Vice-President, Shell Shipping & Maritime, concluded: “The shipping industry faces a major challenge in how it can economically ship the increasing amounts of goods and energy the world demands, whilst lowering its environmental impact. We see significant advantages in embracing, testing and driving innovative technologies that we believe show real promise in helping the shipping industry meet this challenge.”

Norsepower’s Rotor Sail solution is the first data-verified and commercially operational auxiliary wind propulsion technology available for the global maritime industry. When wind conditions are favourable the main engines can be throttled back, saving fuel and reducing emissions, while maintaining speed and voyage time. Each Norsepower Rotor Sail is made using lightweight composite sandwich materials, which ensure the Rotor Sail remains well-balanced and offers a hi-tech, low maintenance solution.

To view a video of the installation please go here

Source: Maersk Tankers

Singapore port

Singapore is ranked as the best shipping centre for 5th consecutive year

Singapore has topped the 2018 International Shipping Centre Development (ISCD) Index as the world’s best shipping centre for the fifth year in a row, beating cities including Hong Kong, Shanghai and London.

The index, which was published by the Baltic Exchange and Chinese news agency Xinhua, ranks 43 of the largest ports and cities in the world and serves as a guide for investors and governments on the most important shipping hubs.

Four of the top 10 ports are located in the Asia-Pacific region and three of them ranked in the top four spots. Singapore reached the highest place, thanks to its participation in the Maritime Silk Road initiative, which aims to strengthen connectivity and cooperation between Eurasian countries. Within this framework, customs procedures in Singapore, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates all performed efficiently.

Hong Kong overtook London to take second place for the first time in five years, while Shanghai was ranked as the fourth best shipping centre, thanks to its modern shipping logistics and services systems, as well as the development of its regional shipping counterparts.

“These shipping centres capitalise on their locations in developed shipping markets to provide comprehensive shipping services with abundant logistics and transportation support,” the study said. “Playing the role of international shipping hubs servicing a myriad of maritime trade routes and air flights, their development is buoyed by financial momentum from international economies and trades.”

Some of the major European centres dropped in the ranking due to the region’s overall weak economy: London fell one place to third; Hamburg came in seventh; and Athens was replaced by Busan in the tenth spot.

Rotterdam, however, gained two places to reach sixth, thanks to its improved operating efficiency and advancements in data gathering, artificial intelligence and other technology applications.

London retained first place (ahead of Singapore) as best centre for shipping services, a category that evaluates ports based on services covering ship broking, ship engineering, shipping business, ship repair, as well as maritime legal services and shipping finance services. The UK capital was also the centre with the highest number of maritime arbitrators, at 400, well ahead of Singapore in second place with 50-60.

Baltic Exchange CEO Mark Jackson said: “This report underlines the constant competition and innovation taking place in cities around the world to attract maritime related businesses. Location is an important ingredient for success in the shipping industry and plays an important part in meeting the latest challenges.”

Source: ShipTechnology.com

We are CDS compliant

HMRC has successfully implemented the first software release for its new Customs Declaration Service (CDS).

Supreme Freight Services are CDS compliant – we can assist importers in a complete consultation ahead of the CDS implementation.

This new Customs Declaration Service will deliver a modern system for importers and exporters who have to complete customs declarations when trading outside the EU.

CDS will replace the existing Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) system over three phases between August 2018 and early 2019. The new system will meet the requirements of the Union Customs Code (UCC), support the anticipated future import and export growth of the UK, and provide businesses with access to more of their customs information in one place.

Following implementation of the first release of CDS this week on 14 August, a selected group of importers will start making certain types of supplementary declarations on CDS. The majority of importers will start using CDS from November, once their own software provider or in-house IT team has completed development of CDS-compatible software. Exporters will follow after this. CHIEF will continue to operate in parallel while the transition of traders takes place.

Kevin Franklin, HMRC’s Customs Transformation Programme Director, said: “The first release of the new Customs Declaration Service is a major milestone. Going live on time is a great step to fully introducing the new system and is testament to the hard work of both HMRC staff and our partners.  We have been engaging closely with trade representatives including software developers, Community System Providers, freight forwarders, and traders themselves about CDS and we value the support from these organisations in preparing importers and exporters for the upcoming changes. Our priority now is to make sure software developers, agents and their clients are ready and we will continue to work closely with them throughout the transition.”

When fully rolled out, CDS will offer several new and existing services all in one place, and due to requirements of the UCC, some additional information will need to be collected and included in import and export declarations. This means importers, exporters and agents will need to work with their in-house or external software developers to understand the impact these changes will have on their businesses.

The changes for exports will be available on GOV.UK later in the year.

Please contact us at your earliest convenience for assistance.

Source: Gov.uk

climate change

Shipping is delivering on climate change

In a piece written for the Parliament Magazine, Violeta Bulc, the European mobility and transport Commissioner explained how the international shipping sector is doing its part to contribute to global climate change efforts.

Below are her thoughts:

In April, more than 100 countries agreed on an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from shipping at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO).

This was a significant achievement for the EU and its member states, which played an instrumental role in brokering and securing the agreement with international partners.

The agreement is another example of the EU becoming a stronger global actor to spur substantive and credible climate action. By defining an objective of at least 50 per cent GHG reductions by 2050, compared with 2008 levels, international shipping has become the first industry sector to agree globally on an absolute emission reduction aim.

The agreement also comes with a comprehensive list of potential reduction measures, including short-term measures. Undoubtedly, the IMO and the shipping sector were indispensable in setting this precedent. Yet reaching this agreement was no easy feat.

I had the opportunity to be part of the discussions and to interact with some of the key parties during the first day of the negotiations that led to this remarkable outcome. I met with EU member states representatives, who, despite some initial divergence on negotiating tactics back in Brussels, entered the discussions on solid and ambitious grounds.

I am proud to say that, following EU coordination and throughout the negotiations, the member states remained united and played a pivotal role in gathering the required political support during the negotiations.

Four MEPs – José Ignacio Faria , Dubravka Šuica, Jytte Guteland and Bas Eickhout – who engaged in many side meetings at the IMO, also supported the EU delegation.

“The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) agreement is another example of the EU becoming a stronger global actor to spur substantive and credible climate action”

The outcome was also aided by good cooperation of many EU member states with other like-minded partners including several Pacific Islands States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Mexico. The Marshall Islands for instance – one of the world’s biggest flag states and a remote small island state – are heavily impacted by climate change.

Their population is facing increasing difficulties in growing crops and drilling for drinking water, as increased floods increase salinity. Bridging the gap between positions on key issues such as emission reduction objectives and guiding principles of the strategy required a negotiation effort.

Several major flag states questioned whether it was appropriate to set a number for the emission reduction objective before data on fuel consumption and emissions become available. Their reticence was dispelled by the industry representatives, who publicly voiced the sector’s readiness to accept numbers as indicative targets for reductions in the future.

Many developing countries expressed concerns over the possible impacts of new emission reduction measures, for example, on their trade. To address such concerns, the Commission, the EU member states and MEPs present reaffirmed, in their outreach meetings that the EU is willing to consider further capacity building and technical cooperation to assist implementing future measures.

“I am proud to say that, following EU coordination and throughout the negotiations, the member states remained united and played a pivotal role in gathering the required political support during the negotiations”

Therefore I am pleased to see that the EU-funded, IMO-managed project which led to the establishment of the maritime technologies cooperation centres network was expressly acknowledged in the strategy as a capacity building project.

This is an example to others, including international financial institutions. Crucial factors in brokering the deal were the tireless efforts of IMO Secretary General, Kitack Lim, in encouraging inclusiveness and consensus in the discussions.

With this support in the background, the resolute chairmanships of Sveinung Oftedal of Norway, the Chair of the working group on reduction of GHG emissions from ships, along with Hideaki Saito, the Chair of the marine environment protection committee, made it possible to draw a line and build upon the support of the overwhelming majority of the IMO States present.

Not everyone was fully on board with the text of the adopted IMO strategy. The US, following on their recently announced plans to withdraw from the Paris agreement, and Saudi Arabia, given what the prospect of decarbonisation may mean for their main export product. Both expressed formal reservations to the adoption of the IMO strategy.

While the strenuous negotiations at MEPC 72 delivered a result that kept the IMO in the driving seat for defining an emissions agenda for international shipping, the real work, developing and adopting reduction measures, starts only now.

The full cooperation of both the EU and also all IMO member states is needed to agree on short-term measures with immediate emission reduction effects before 2023. Preparations on longer term actions should also begin.

Bulc ends with stating that she is optimistic that shipping is delivering its share to the global climate change efforts under the Paris agreement and the EU institutions are determined to strive for ambitious objectives, and continue the effective cooperation with our partners.

Global climate change is always a contentious issue, trade is on the rise again globally, and ships are back trawling our seas, connecting places and people. However, ships don’t just drive trade, they unfortunately contribute to climate change too in fact, global shipping is responsible for about 2.5% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and these are projected to rise by between 50% and 250% by 2050 if nothing improves.

Source: Parliament Magazine / Medium.com