Shipping decarb needs more port investment: ABL

Spanish Market: Electricity, Fertilizers, Hydrogen, Oil products
14/09/21

Port infrastructure needs to be significantly upgraded if the shipping industry is to achieve its decarbonization goals, according to panelists at an industry event hosted by the AqualisBraemar LOC (ABL) Group today.

Upgrading port infrastructure, more so than providing incentives to smaller shipowners to build environmentally-friendly ships, is the most important step the shipping industry could take now to decarbonize, according to panelist Dean Goves, managing director at Longitude Engineering, which is part of the ABL Group.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is targeting a 50pc cut in CO2 shipping emissions, which currently account for 2-3pc of the world's total, by 2050 from a 2008 baseline, though the US and now UK have called for net-zero emissions in that time frame.

One clear way for a port to help cut shipping emissions is through so-called cold ironing, said panelist George Savvopoulos, a consultant at ABL. Cold ironing is the process by which a a port powers an idling ship via electricity.

Such a practice would allow vessels in port to turn off their diesel-burning engines, which typically use about a fifth of the fuel compared to when ships are in full steam.

"All ports should be developing this type of facility," said Savvopoulos. "This will require investment but in most cases it's just not there."

Ports also need to be able to provide whatever kind of fuels ships end up using in the coming decades, like they do now with petroleum-based bunkers. Such fuels that will likely figure into shipping's energy mix — LNG, LPG, ammonia, hydrogen, biofuels — all require different facilities to be distributed onto ships.

About 12pc of ships on order at shipyards will have the ability to burn alternative fuel.

Ports need to "find the space and supply chains" to be able to accommodate them, Savvopoulos said.

But funds for such bunkering improvements are relatively scarce because of competing priorities among port investors.

Combating rising water levels, a direct impact of climate change, is the more pressing matter for port investors, said panelist David Handley of law firm Watson, Farley and Williams.

By Nicholas Watt

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

11/04/25

US MAP-DAP premium primed to return on tariffs

Houston, 11 April (Argus) — The period of MAP and DAP prices trading near parity will be short-lived because newly-imposed US import tariffs could amplify MAP supply woes, market participants told Argus . MAP and DAP prices have traded in close proximity since early January, diverting from the significant MAP premium seen last spring and summer when a surplus of DAP was imported into the US. After limited MAP barge trading in March, activity accelerated at Nola this week as it became clearer that all non-North American phosphate imports would face at least 10pc import tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump starting last week. The Nola MAP price was assessed at a midpoint of $636.50/st fob this week, up by $9/st from last week, while DAP was assessed $12.50/st higher at $632.50/st fob Nola. Despite the "reciprocal" tariffs on certain phosphate producing countries being lowered to a universal 10pc this week by Trump for 90 days — in line with the original tariff imposed on other countries such as Saudi Arabia and Australia last week — the remaining levy is still enough to deter vessels from coming to Nola, sources said. In response, the Nola MAP price has averaged a $5.75/st premium to the Nola DAP price for April so far, flipping from a $3.88/st average discount in March. That is still a far cry from October 2024, when the Nola MAP price averaged a $61.45/st premium over the Nola DAP. From August through November, the Nola MAP price was 13pc higher on average than DAP. US market participants expect the premium to expand in the coming months as MAP is the preferred product of most farmers during the fall application season, potentially impacting buying decisions for that period. The US from July through February has imported 759,000 metric tonnes (t) of DAP, down by 26pc from the same period last year, according to US Census Bureau data. This lapse in imports for the start of 2025 was an initial driver in DAP's rising premium over MAP. In comparison, MAP imports for the same period have totaled roughly 853,000t, up by just 5pc from the year before. But at least 290,000 t of MAP will need to be brought into the US between now and the start of the summer to equal out with the tonnage imported for the full 2023-24 fertilizer year ahead of fall applications. That is a task that may not be easily achieved given the new tariff on most phosphate imports. One buyer this week said they could consider switching usual MAP demand toward an alternative NPS product heading into October and November given the difficult supply outlook for the US. "We are very much in wait and see mode, trying to see how tariffs evolve and how it works its way into the market in terms of price," another buyer said. The significant premium MAP held last fall also limited overall phosphate applications conducted by farmers, therefore raising the bar for the amount of phosphate fertilizer farmers will need to put into the ground later this year to replenish soil nutrients. By Taylor Zavala US DAP/MAP barge prices Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Mexico suspends Valero fuel import permits

11/04/25

Mexico suspends Valero fuel import permits

Mexico City, 11 April (Argus) — Mexico's tax authority SAT on 9 April suspended US refiner Valero's fuel import permits, the company said today. The company did not specify why its import license was suspended. "Valero is addressing each administrative observation noted in the suspension to clarify the issues. Additionally, [authorities] mistakenly stated that the company does not have valid import permits, which is incorrect since the permits are valid through 2038," the company said. When consulted, Valero told Argus it has no further information to share at this time. In Mexico, Valero holds gasoline, diesel and jet fuel import permits valid through 2038. The company is one of only a handful of private-sector companies with such permits. Shell, Marathon and ExxonMobil hold permits to import only gasoline and diesel. Valero is the leading private fuel importer in Mexico. On 9 April, its sales accounted for 10pc of Mexico's gasoline and diesel demand, according to the company. Private-sector companies started importing fuel into Mexico in 2016 after the market opened to more competition, but under former president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's administration, the energy ministry (Sener) cancelled dozens of fuel import permits. Valero is cooperating with the Mexican government and has recently joined a voluntary price cap agreement to keep regular gasoline below Ps24/l ($4.45/USG), the company said, adding that it "implements rigorous traceability and security controls throughout its supply chain." The company stores fuel at four private-sector terminals in Mexico, with over 4mn bl of capacity. The company is also expected to start storing fuel at the new 1.1mn bl OTM terminal in Altamira, Tamaulipas, in the near future. By Cas Biekmann Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism

11/04/25

Participants mostly support IMO GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — International shipping organisations and market participants mostly support the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism approved today at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, but some raised concerns. The structure approved by the IMO establishes that ships must reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. Emissions above this target will be charged at $380/tCO2e. The levels defined by the approved regulation are achievable, according to a market participant, who said the gradually increasing targets may allow the market to properly adapt to the transition. The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) secretary general Guy Platten said the sector is already investing billions of dollars in 'green' technology, so the agreement gives certainty that sustainable marine fuels producers need. "The world's governments have now come forward with a comprehensive agreement which, although not perfect in every respect, we very much hope will be formally adopted later this year," he said. The European Shipowners (ECSA) secretary general Sotiris Raptis agreed the draft "is not perfect", but he celebrated progress towards a net zero emissions target, saying "it is a good starting point for further work" and pointing out that it may ensure the necessary investment in production of clean fuels. During a press briefing, IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said ships operating in international waters will be obliged to comply with the regulations after adoption, despite the US' refusal to engage with the discussions . Adoption of the pricing mechanism will be discussed and voted on in October. Offering a counterview, the Global Maritime Forum said the agreed measures may not be strong enough to reach IMO targets. "The GHG intensity targets create uncertainty as to whether the strategy's emissions reduction checkpoints for 2030 and 2040 will be met," it said. "As currently designed, measures are unlikely to be sufficient to incentivise the rapid development of e-fuels such as e-ammonia or e-methanol , which will be needed in the long run due to their scalability and emission reduction potential." It said that failure to invest in these fuels would put at risk the target of at least 5pc zero- and near-zero emission fuel use by 2030 and the industry's entire 2050 net-zero goal. The World Shipping Council's vice president Bryan Wood-Thomas praised the agreement and said one benefit of it is the pricing system that is "more aggressive" if a vessel fails to meet the GHG intensity standard. "But you also have a fee system that gives investors more confidence in actual revenue [from using cleaner fuels]," he said. The Brazilian representative told Argus the fact that some countries thought the agreement was too ambitious while others indicated it was not ambitious enough show the group may have reached a balance that can be possible to comply. About the Brazilian position, the representative said the country "was never against an agreement". "We were only against some aspects of the agreement, and we think that the membership has heard our concerns, and that's why we ended up pretty happy with the results", he said. Brazil voted in favour of the agreement today. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Madeleine Jenkins, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

11/04/25

IMO approves two-tier GHG pricing mechanism

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting, pending an adoption vote at the next MEPC in October. The proposal passed by a majority vote, with 63 nations in favor including EU states, the UK, China and India, and 16 members opposed, including Mideast Gulf states, Russia, and Venezuela. The US was absent from the MEPC 83 meeting, and 24 member states abstained. The proposal was accompanied by an amendment to implement the regulation, which was approved for circulation ahead of an anticipated adoption at the October MEPC. Approval was not unanimous, which is rare. If adoption is approved in October at a vote that will require a two-thirds majority, the maritime industry will become the first transport sector to implement internationally mandated targets to reduce GHG emissions. The text says ships must initially reduce their fuel intensity by a "base target" of 4pc in 2028 ( see table ) against 93.3 gCO2e/MJ, the latter representing the average GHG fuel intensity value of international shipping in 2008. This gradually tightens to 30pc by 2035. The text defines a "direct compliance target", that starts at 17pc for 2028 and grows to 43pc by 2035. The pricing mechanism establishes a levy for excessive emissions at $380 per tonne of CO2 equivalent (tCO2e) for ships compliant with the minimum 'base' target, called Tier 2. For ships in Tier 1 — those compliant with the base target but that still have emission levels higher than the direct compliance target — the price was set at $100/tCO2e. Over-compliant vessels will receive 'surplus units' equal to their positive compliance balance, expressed in tCO2e, valid for two years after emission. Ships then will be able to use the surplus units in the following reporting periods; transfer to other vessels as a credit; or voluntarily cancel as a mitigation contribution. IMO secretary general Arsenio Dominguez said while it would have been more preferable to have a unanimous outcome, this outcome is a good result nonetheless. "We work on consensus, not unanimity," he said. "We demonstrated that we will continue to work as an organization despite the concerns." Looking at the MEPC session in October, Dominguez said: "Different member states have different positions, and there is time for us to remain in the process and address those concerns, including those that were against and those that were expecting more." Dominguez said the regulation is set to come into force in 2027, with first revenues collected in 2028 of an estimated $11bn-13bn. Dominguez also said there is a clause within the regulation that ensures a review at least every five years. By Hussein Al-Khalisy, Natália Coelho, and Gabriel Tassi Lara IMO GHG reduction targets Year Base Target Direct Compliance Target 2028 4% 17% 2029 6% 19% 2030 8% 21% 2031 12% 25% 2032 17% 30% 2033 21% 34% 2034 26% 39% 2035 30% 43% Source: IMO Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more