The maritime and shipping industry – with more than 50,000 ships on the water – emitted 1.056bn t of CO2 in 2018, about 3pc of total global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The recent Maritime Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting in June 2021 laid down a concrete plan for minimising GHG emissions from ships by 50pc until 2050. According to the MEPC 76 meeting, vessels are required to calculate an Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI) and Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) from 2023. What does this mean and what steps should be taken?

 

Understanding and calculating EEXI

Starting from 2023, each vessel above 400 Gt will require a one-off EEXI calculation to confirm that the vessel meets the energy efficiency design standards. An International Energy Efficiency (IEE) certificate will be awarded if the vessel meets those standards.

Take for instance, a basic 82,000 dwt Kamsarmax vessel with no energy saving devices installed:

Main engine (ME) maximum continuous rating (MCR) 14,280 kw
ME specific fuel oil consumption (SFOC) 171 gms/kwhr
Auxiliary engine (AE) MCR 5pc of main engine MCR (Assumed as per EEXI guidance)
AE SFOC 187 gms/kwhr
Vessel’s speed on the power speed curve (Vref) 15.09 knots at 75pc MCR
Fuel Constant 3.151
Reduction factor 20
EEDI/EEXI reference line parameters A = 961.79
C = 0.477

 

 Required EEXI:  [1-(Reduction factor/100)] * [EEXI reference line parameters A*{(Vessel’s DWT)^(minus EEXI reference line parameters C)}]
 (1-(20/100)) * (961.79*((82000)^(-0.477))) = 3.49 grams/ton-mile
 Attained EEXI:  [( pc of MCR * MCR * Fuel Constant * ME SFOC) + (5pc * MCR * Fuel Constant * AE SFOC)] / [DWT * Vref]
 ((0.75*14280*3.151*171)+(0.05*14280*3.151*187))/(82000*15.09) = 5.00 grams/ton-mile

Based on the above calculations, the vessel does not meet EEXI’s requirements, because the attained EEXI (5.00 gms/t-mile) is greater than the required EEXI (3.49 gms/t-mile). So the vessel will have to reduce its MCR to comply with the EEXI regulation, and to attain the IEE Qualification.

 IEE Qualification:  [Required EEXI * (DWT * Vref)-( 5pc * MCR * Fuel Constant * AE SFOC)/(MCR * Fuel Constant * ME SFOC)
 (3.49*(82000*15.09)-(0.05*14280*3.151*187))/(14280*3.151*171) = 0.506

Based on the calculation above, the vessel can meet compliance standards if the main engine runs at 50.6pc MCR, where the attained EEXI matches the required EEXI. The vessel will be given the IEE certificate, if the main engine’s MCR continues to operate below 51pc and adjusts to the corresponding speed on the power speed curve (13.24 knots in this instance).

The formula to calculate EEXI was derived from the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI). EEDI is applicable to new ships built on or after 1 January 2013. Vessels built on or after 2013, with a valid IEE are not required to calculate EEXI. Some of the variables used in the EEXI formula are listed below:

EEDI/EEXI reference line parameter values:

Ship type A B C
Bulk Carrier 961.79 dwt 0.477
Gas Carrier 1,120 dwt 0.456
Tanker 1,218.8 dwt 0.488
Container ship 174.22 dwt 0.201
LNG carrier 2,253.7 dwt 0.474

 

 Reference line  = a * b ^ (-c)
 Required EEDI / EEXI  = [1 – (Reduction factor/100)] * Reference line

 

EEDI reduction factor:

Reduction factors (in percentage) for the EEXI relative to the EEDI reference line
Ship type Ship size Reduction factor
Bulk carrier 200,000 DWT and above 15
20,000 and above but less than 200,000 DWT 20
10,000 and above but less than 20,000 DWT 0-20*
Gas carrier 15,000 DWT and above 30
10,000 and above but less than 15,000 DWT 20
2,000 and above but less than 10,000 DWT 0-20*
Tanker 200,000 DWT and above 15
20,000 and above but less than 200,000 DWT 20
4,000 and above but less than 20,000 DWT 0-20*
Containership 200,000 DWT and above 50
120,000 and above but less than 200,000 DWT 45
80,000 and above but less than 120,000 DWT 35
40,000 and above but less than 80,000 DWT 30
15,000 and above but less than 40,000 DWT 20
10,000 and above but less than 15,000 DWT 0-20*
LNG carrier 10,000 DWT and above 30
*    Reduction factor to be linearly interpolated between the two values dependent upon ship size.
The lower value of the reduction factor is to be applied to the smaller ship size.

 

Are vessels compliant once EEXI is achieved? What is CII?

The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) is a measure of how efficiently a ship transports goods or passengers – linking carbon emissions to vessel capacity and vessel movement. The ship is given an annual rating ranging from A to E. All vessels above 5,000 Gt are required to attain and document an annual operational CII, to be verified against the required annual operational CII, according to the MEPC 76.

The ship is then given an annual rating ranging from A to E, by comparing the attained annual CII of a ship with the direction and distance it deviates from the required CII (DD vector for short).

Ship type Ship size DD vectors (after exponential transformation)
exp(d1) exp(d2) exp(d3) exp(d4)
Bulk carrier dwt 0.86 0.94 1.06 1.18
Gas carrier 65,000 dwt and above dwt 0.79 0.89 1.12 1.36
less than 65,000 dwt dwt 0.85 0.95 1.06 1.25
Tanker dwt 0.82 0.93 1.08 1.27
Container Ship dwt 0.83 0.94 1.07 1.19
LNG carrier 100,000 dwt and above dwt 0.91 0.98 1.05 1.11
less than 100,000 dwt dwt 0.77 0.91 1.12 1.37

Required Carbon Intensity Indicator

Taking the same basic 82,000 dwt Kamsarmax vessel used above:

Average Speed 13.24 knots (basis 50.6pc MCR)
Sailing days 292 days (75pc sailing 25pc at port)
Distance travelled 92,786 nm
Average fuel consumed 32t/day
Fuel Constant 3.151
Sailing days 292 days (75pc sailing 25pc at port)
CII reference line parameters A = 4,977
C = 0.626
2023 CII reduction factor 5pc

 

Required CII:  [CII reference line parameters A * {DWT^(minus CII reference line Parameter C)}]*[1-(CII reduction factor/100)]
 ((4977*(82000^(-0.626))*(1-(5/100))) = 3.97 grams/ton-mile
CO2 emitted per annum:  Fuel consumed * 1,000,000 (convert tons to grams) * Fuel constant
 9344*1000000*3.151 = 29,443e^6 grams
Ton-mile:  DWT*Distance sailed
 82000*92786 = 5,595e^6
Attained CII:  CO2 emitted per annum / ton-mile
 29443e^6/5595e^6 = 3.87 grams/ton-mile
Annual rating:  Attained CII / Required CII compared to DD vector
 3.87/3.97 = 0.97 (C rating)

 

A basic Kamsarmax with an annual rating of 0.97 is between DD vectors d2 (0.94) and d3 (1.06), and so receives a C rating. The annual rating would be an A for a bulk carrier, if it was at or lower than 0.86 (d1), and B if it was above superior boundary (0.86), but equal to or below the lower boundary (0.94). Vessels that receive A, B, or C ratings, will be issued a statement of compliance. Vessels that receive a D for three consecutive years, or an E rating, will be given a year to develop a corrective action plan that will enable the vessel to achieve at least a C rating. The Statement of Compliance to these vessels will not be issued unless the corrective action plan is reflected in a Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) and is verified by the administration or authorised organisations (vessel classification societies).

What are the various ways to implement SEEMP and make a vessel EEXI and CII compliant?

  1. Proper maintenance of the vessel’s hull at dry dock.
  2. Coating the vessel’s hull with good paint to increase hydrodynamic performance.
  3. Improve the vessel’s steering configurations.
  4. Have a more efficient aft-ship, propeller, and rudder arrangements.
  5. Reduce energy consumption in main and auxiliary engines, auxiliary machineries, air conditioning, and other minor energy consumers.
  6. Weather routing and choosing the best route for transportation of cargo.
  7. Using efficient energy saving devices.
  8. Slow steaming of the vessel.
  9. Using of alternative fuels instead of high-sulphur fuel oil or very low-sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO).

As a note, SEEMP plans cannot be applied across a company or fleet-wide, as these plans are ship specific and have to be implemented according to the vessel type, cargoes carried, ship routes, and other relevant factors.


The maritime industry is not currently on track to meet the IMO ambition for a 50 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, even under favorable assumptions, according to a new study released by think tank Nordic West Office. The study suggests that this target could eventually be achieved on the industry’s current trajectory, but it is likely to take several more decades than desired.

The 80-page study drew on input from well-placed participants, including Hapag-Lloyd, Carnival and the World Ocean Council. Using three global decarbonization scenarios developed by Shell as a starting point, the authors examined in precise detail how the industry – in all its moving parts – might be expected to transition to green fuels over time. The answer suggests that substantially more action and more cooperation will be required under all three scenarios, including the most optimistic option.

“The main conclusion of our project was rather sad and it was that even in the best possible scenario, we will not reach the ambitions of the IMO . . . to cut greenhouse gas emissions by half by 2050,” said Dr. Risto Penttilä, head of Nordic West Office, at a panel discussion at the UN Ocean Conference. “There’s hope we can still meet . . . both Paris [Agreement] and IMO 2018, but it needs a lot of work.”

To change this trajectory and accelerate the process, the study’s primary suggestion is to tackle decarbonization comprehensively and collaboratively – drawing in regulators, shippers, shipowners, investors, fuel suppliers, ports and other stakeholders to prevent “gaps” in the industry-wide effort. Providing all actors with a clear “zero by 2050” goal at IMO – along with predictable market-based mechanisms for carbon pricing – could help kick-start that effort.

The biggest bottleneck identified in the study is the need to build a supply chain for green fuels, which will require massive investment. However, the study identified dozens of further “enablers” that will need to be developed, depending on the specific vessel and application – like JIT arrival, improved routing, wind-assisted propulsion and much more.

The industry’s progress will be influenced by the pace of global decarbonization overall, which will be driven in part by geopolitics. The most optimistic scenario in the study relies on an environment of international cooperation, openness and collaboration on climate solutions; the least optimistic of the three envisions a fragmented international landscape with reduced trade and cooperation, which “will not bring about a lot of clean developments by the end of the decade,” the authors predicted.

“The current geopolitical trend that puts focus on food and security concerns does not favor decarbonization and will not bring shipping anywhere close to its ambitions. Getting closer to the ambitions requires even stronger decarbonization efforts than those currently envisaged,” the authors cautioned.

Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/study-shipping-is-set-to-miss-the-imo-2050-target


The MoU covers studies on the use of zero and low-carbon marine fuels for commercial shipping applications.

The Maritime and Port Authority (MPA) of Singapore has joined forces with CMA CGM Group to develop maritime decarbonisation, digitalisation and innovative solutions.

Under the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed in this regard, the duo will study the use of zero and low-carbon marine fuels, including e-methanol, e-methane and biofuels, for commercial shipping applications.

They will also research carbon capture solutions.

Furthermore, the MoU will support the exploration of maritime cybersecurity and just-in-time shipping, accomplished through data exchanges and reporting for port and cargo documentation.

The partnership will also focus on innovations, such as shipboard automation and smarter solutions on board ships.

Both parties will also invest in Singapore-based incubators and accelerators to support marine tech startups in the city-state.

As part of its 2050 net-zero target, CMA CGM placed an order for ten dual-fuel LNG-powered vessels and six dual-fuel methanol-powered vessels.

Designed to run on e-methane, three of these ships will carry the Singapore flag.

Currently, CMA CGM Group has 29 e-methane-ready vessels. It is expected to have a total of 77 e-methane-ready vessels by the end of 2026.

CMA CGM Group chairman and CEO Rodolphe Saadé said: “Decarbonisation, digitalisation and innovation are strategic priorities for CMA CGM and the entire shipping industry. Given Singapore’s key position in our global network, I am very pleased to sign this partnership with the MPA.

“It will allow us to address the challenges ahead and strengthen our existing strong ties with Singapore, its industries and its digital ecosystem while reflecting our attachment to this country.”

Last month, CMA CGM signed an MoU with PSA Corporation to implement new digital solutions to reduce carbon emissions.

Source: https://www.ship-technology.com/news/cma-cgm-mpa-maritime-decarbonisation/


The IMO Secretariat has initiated a project aiming to improve the availability of relevant maritime transport costs data for the Pacific SIDS/Pacific Region with a view to facilitating future assessments of the possible impacts on States of potential GHG reduction measures in shipping, including, as appropriate, carbon pricing instruments.  

To assist in this, the project aims to establish interim baselines and to initiate the modelling of the impact on Pacific SIDS of a hypothetical increase in transport costs or change in connectivity patterns. Central to the project’s success will be its ability to identify the foundation of a system of continued monitoring and collection of data on maritime transport costs in the Pacific region. 

The activity will be implemented by MTCC-Pacific, a centre of expertise established by IMO as part of the Global MTCC Network (GMN) and hosted by the Pacific Community (SPC) and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP). 

To ensure that the outcomes of the project are transparent and not policy prescriptive, a broad range of organizations, institutions and resources with relevant experience and expertise, including UNCTAD, will be involved. 

The main outcome of this project will be a Study on maritime transport costs data in the Pacific region which is to be submitted to the IMO Secretariat by 1 October 2022. 

It is also expected that the project will identify and initiate a possible permanent partnership or structure for the ongoing collection and sharing of maritime transport costs data and other relevant statistics for Pacific SIDS. The project is also expected to enhance the understanding of the determinants of maritime freight rates in the Pacific region. 


Vehicles carrier Lider Bulut (IMO 9198719) (Equasis and Marine Traffic name, Roro Feeder 1, AIS name report, Lider Bulut) developed a heavy starboard list and requested assistance when it was near Tuapse Port, Black Sea, Russia, during the evening of June 18. It was understood to have anchored on arrival from Samsun Turkey earlier in the day but to have developed a list – reportedly because of faulty ballasting – a few hours later. It heaved anchor and moved inshore. As of early June 19th the ship’s AIS was still on. The vessel was later confirmed by Russian Maritime Agency RosMoRechFlot to have been intentionally grounded, with water ingress. An SAR was underway and the ship was fenced off by several boom layers. There were 28 crew on board.

2000-built, Cyprus-flagged, 15,224 gt RoRo Feeder 1 is owned by Ugland Castor Car Carrier I AS care of Matrix ShipManagement Ltd of Limassol, Cyprus.

Two people on chemical/oil products tanker Nord Magic (IMO 9392793) which was anchored at Chittagong Anchorage, termed by the operator as “riding personnel”, died during the night of June 17th while checking empty cargo tank, according to local sources. They were taken to hospital but declared dead on arrival. The tanker arrived at Chittagong on June 15th after offloading cargo of soybean oil. There were 25 crew on board, mainly Indian nationals.

Norden said that “the two people who have very sadly passed away are not NSSM crew, they are riding personnel. The cause of the sad incident is still unknown.”

2009-built, Denmark-flagged, 29,266 gt Nord Magic is owned by Norden Asset Management AS of Hellerup, Denmark. It is managed by Norient Product Pool APS of Hellerup, Denmark. ISM manager is Norden Synergy Ship Management AS of Hellerup, Denmark. It is entered with North of England Club on behalf of Norden Asset Management AS. As of June 20th it was at anchor off Chittagong.

Fishing vessel Aleksandr Shalin (IMO 8832978) was in collision with fishing vessel Zaliv Petra (IMO 9130822) on June 16th in the Sea of Okhotsk, about 100nm southeast of Magadan. The Zaliv Petra was damaged at the hull on the starboard side aft. The vessel remained seaworthy and headed to the port of Busan for repairs. The Aleksandr Shalin suffered minor damage to the bow.

1990-built, Russia-flagged, 862 gt Aleksandr Shalin is owned and managed by Mag-Sea International of Magadan, Russia. As of June 19th the vessel was underway off Vladivostok, Russia.

1995-built, Russia-flagged, 748 gt Zaliv Petra is owned and managed by Sevrybflot LLC of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia. As of June 18th it was underway off Busan, South Korea.

Passenger ship Aegean Odyssey (IMO 7225910) was asked to leave the port of Nice a few hours after its arrival on June 16th following complaints from residents about the fumes it was emitting. Following a decision taken by the harbour master’s office, the vessel, carrying 300 passengers, sailed within the hour, just before midnight. The decision by the harbour master’s office and with the backing of the municipal authorities was taken under port police law. Local residents had begun complaining around 19:00 local time following the release of smoke and the noise made by its engines. The maritime agent Medov France, based in Marseilles, in charge of the stopovers of the ship on behalf of a charter company, asked for explanations from the port authorities on this decision, indicating in particular that it harmed the “reputation” of the company. The ship arrived on June 17th in the port of Toulon.

1973-built, Panama-flagged, 12,094 gt Aegean Odyssey is owned by Aegean Odyssey Maritime Pan of Piraeus, Greece. It is managed by Aegean Experience Maritime Lib of Piraeus, Greece. It is entered with American Club on behalf of Aegean OdysseyMaritime Co SA. As of June 20th it was at Marseille Port.


Ports and Maritime Organization (PMO) lodged a complaint to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) over the seizure of its tanker in Greek waters

hief Executive of Iranian Ports and Maritime Organization (PMO) announced the strong protest of the country to the International Maritime Organization following the seizure of Iranian oil tanker by the Greek government.

While protesting against the illegal seizure of Iranian oil tanker by Greece which was done with the support of US government, Deputy Minister of Roads and Urban Development Ali Akbar Safaei said that the Greek government’s illegal action against Iranian ship is contrary to the goals and positions of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as an international maritime authority.

Speaking with the Secretary-General of the IMO Kitack Lim, Safaei emphasized that this is not the first time that Iranian merchant ships and oil tankers have been directly or indirectly seized by the United States.

In recent years, a number of Iranian tankers have been seized by the United States and subsequently, Iranian Ports and Maritime Organization, on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran, lodged its complaint to the Legal Division of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), he continued.

Stating that the US actions are against the security in the seas as well as safe passage, the deputy roads minister stipulated, “Our ships and sailors have been under constant threat following harsh US sanctions. Therefore, we hope that IMO will pay special attention to this issue.”

As Iranian ship had requested emergency assistance from the Greek authorities, they, with the support of the United States, have seized the Iranian merchant and cargo ship and unloaded its cargo, he said, adding that such move is considered ‘an act of piracy’.

IMO Secretary-General, for his part, said that members of the International Maritime Organization are aware of Iran’s concern and protest against the recent events and “We are opposed to any discrimination or attack on maritime safety and security.”

Kitack Lim stated that he will bring up the issue in the upcoming meeting of IMO Assembly to find a solution.


The usual mix of progress and stalled initiatives occupied the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee convened earlier this month, setting the context for frantic discussions ahead of next year’s key meeting.

The monumental task of driving global consensus on reducing shipping emissions crawled forward ever so slightly at MEPC 78 this month. That may have made it frustrating for observers, but the meeting was successful in laying out a clear agenda for what needs to be achieved by MEPC 80 – the deadline for IMO to review and hopefully upgrade its 2050 and intermediate targets.

 

Given the time constraints of the virtual meetings, several proposals were deferred until the next MEPC, to be held in December. MEPC 78 focused on three key discussions around greenhouse gas emissions:

 

  • Proposals related to revision of the Initial IMO GHG Strategy, which is scheduled to be adopted at next year’s June MEPC meeting;
  • The outcomes of the intersessional working group meetings on GHG;
  • Proposals for mid-term GHG reduction measures and the International Maritime Research and Development Board;
Revising the IMO GHG strategy

The discussions at MEPC focused on revising the level of ambition in GHG emissions reductions while ensuring an equitable transition that does not unfairly burden developing states and small island countries.

 

While some countries argued for a higher 2050 target of reducing GHG emissions from shipping by 100%, others argued against, saying that IMO had the responsibility of taking a realistic and pragmatic approach. Other phased targets were considered, ranging from upgrading the 2030 ambition to introducing five-year targets.

 

With no chance of consensus in the current meeting, the formation of three new intersessional working group meetings was agreed; one to be held before MEPC 79 in December and a further two before MEPC 80 in mid-2023.

Outcomes of intersessional working groups

The intersessional groups before MEPC 78 had considered draft guidelines focused on the upcoming short-term measures to be introduced from November 2022 – the Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI), the annual operational carbon intensity indicator (CII) rating and an enhanced Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP).

 

The MEPC adopted a series of guidelines to support the implementation of these measures as well as approving draft amendments to appendix IX of MARPOL Annex VI on the reporting of EEXI and CII values to the IMO Data Collection System (DCS). The committee also agreed to include a new workstream on further revision of the IMO DCS in the agenda of the next working group.

 

An earlier intersessional meeting had focused on the debate around lifecycle assessment of marine fuels – seen as a critical step in ensuring that maritime emission regulations do not simply transfer emissions from sea to land. Guidelines on lifecycle GHG/carbon intensity for marine fuels (LCA guidelines) had been drafted, and MEPC 78 established a separate correspondence group to further the work.

 

The correspondence group will submit an interim report to MEPC 79, and final draft guidelines to be adopted by MEPC 80. The guidelines will allow for a Well-to-Wake calculation, including Well-to-Tank and Tank-to-Wake emission factors, of total GHG emissions related to the production and use of alternative marine fuels.

Arguably the biggest decision at MEPC 78 was on the long-debated International Maritime Research and Development Board, which proposed an innovation fund supported by a US$2 per tonne fuel levy. Much of the previous discussion had centered on how to ensure that the measure adequately supports the transitions of developing countries and those particularly exposed to the impacts of climate change.

 

Despite an updated proposal that would have added US$50 million to IMO’s technical capacity building programme – a near tenfold increase in funding for that project – no consensus was agreed. Instead the suggestion has been kept on the table to be considered among mid-term measures.

 

The committee noted the progress made by the intersessional working group in advancing towards the developing mid-term measures integrating various technical and carbon pricing elements. It noted the need for additional information on the proposed mid-term measures and encouraged proponents of measures to work together between MEPC meetings with a view to combining elements from proposals into a basket of measures.

 

The frustration of the IMRB proponents was evident – primarily through a frank statement released by the International Chamber of Shipping after the decision to include it under discussion as a mid-term measure rather than accept it as a short-term measure.

 

“By refusing to take forward the shipping industry’s proposed research and development fund, the IMO has wasted its opportunity to kick start a rapid transition to zero-carbon technologies which will be vital if we are to decarbonise completely by 2050,” said Guy Platten, Secretary General, International Chamber of Shipping.

 

“Despite the support of many IMO states, we have been frustrated by short-sighted political manoeuvring which has led to the proposal in effect being killed. The signal this sends means that the financial risk associated with green investment will remain high, slowing down efforts to switch to zero-carbon fuels as soon as possible.”

What’s next?

If progress seemed frustratingly slow at MEPC 78, there were some important outcomes. The reinforcement of MEPC 80 next year as the deadline for a revision of the GHG ambition will focus minds on that date, although the wide range of opinions indicates consensus will not be easy.

 

The allocation of more time to discussion on mid-term reduction measures between MEPC meetings will be welcomed by some and resented by others who are already concerned about the time and resources being poured into GHG discussions. But no one denies the work is crucial and the shortened virtual MEPC meetings mean more time for discussion is needed.

 

The EEXI and CII will enter force supported by a range of guidance and with a pledge to review how well they work by 2026. Time will tell how these affect the pace of shipping’s decarbonisation, especially with little focus on how the regulations will be enforced.

 

The next intersessional working group is provisionally scheduled to meet early December and has been set a clear roadmap in the terms of reference laid out at MEPC 78. It will aim to complete a circular on the Procedure for assessing impacts on States of candidate measures as well as consider mid-term measures and the revision of the IMO’s Initial GHG Strategy. It will also be charged with looking at incorporating lifecycle assessment of marine fuels into any measures.

 

A lot now rests with the intersessional working group. Progress there will determine the success of MEPC 80 in advancing the ambition of shipping’s emissions reduction, and deciding the mid-term steps it will


International Maritime Organization (IMO) Secretary-General Kitack Lim has urged further financial support for a UN-coordinated operational plan to address the threat of a major oil spill from the FSO Safer, moored off Yemen, after a pledging event in The Hague saw donors pledging $33 million in new funding.

“In the face of an impending environmental disaster, we must do all we can to prevent it. We must act now,” Secretary-General Lim said. “The time is now. The risks are high. We must act to avert disaster.”

IMO has been supporting contingency planning efforts in the region to prepare for a possible spill from FSO SAFER and to limit the impacts should one occur. An oil spill from FSO Safer would be a humanitarian and environmental disaster, with huge economic impacts for the shipping and maritime industry throughout the region.

The plan to mitigate the risk by transferring the oil to a safe temporary vessel needs financial resources, Lim said.

There is now $40 million available for the operation, which includes previously committed funds. The decaying floating storage and offloading unit is moored off the coast of Yemen and holds around a million barrels of oil. It could break apart or explode at any time.

The pledging event, hosted by the Government of the Netherlands and the United Nations, marked the start in the effort to raise the $144 million that the full plan requires, including $80 million for the emergency operation to transfer the oil to a safe temporary vessel. Also critical to the plan’s success is the installation of a long-term replacement capacity.


But according to the first Disclosure Report released earlier today., there was a wide range of results, extending from plus 46.2 to minus 26.1.

However, in the introduction to the Report, Cargill’s Jan Dieleman and Trafigura’s Rasmus Bach Nielsen, respectively Chair and Vice Chair of the Sea Cargo Charter Association, urged readers not to see the first Report as a league table. All signatories have very different profiles and activities, they noted, and comparisons are thus difficult. “What we do share is our belief that there is a positive feedback loop between transparency and action and our intention to limit adverse environmental impact,” they said.

Together, the 25 companies comprise major charterers and customers of shipping services in energy, agriculture, mining, and commodity trading. They account for about 15% of total bulk cargo shipped by sea last year.

Sea Cargo Charter’s membership has now grown to 33 but only those who signed up prior to September 2021 have reported in the first Disclosure Report. The organisation, which describes itself as a global framework for aligning ship chartering activities with society’s goals, is actively scouting for more members.

In a statement, Dieleman said: “Thanks to unprecedented levels of data sharing, we better understand the climate impacts of our business activities at a much more granular level, and can back up operational and strategic decision-making with real data. Signatories of the Sea Cargo Charter have diverse profiles and activities and this report holds us accountable to our targets and allows us all to play our part in addressing the environmental impacts of global maritime trade on people and the planet.”


The Assembly of the International Maritime Organization has elected Malta as the IMO’s Category C Council member for the 13th Consecutive time for the 2022-2023 biennium. The International Maritime Organisation is the United Nations agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships.

The Council is the executive organ of the International Maritime Organization and is responsible, under the Assembly, for supervising the work of the International Maritime Organization. The Assembly normally meets once every two years in regular session and is responsible for approving the work programme, voting the budget and determining the financial arrangements of the International Maritime Organization.

The Registrar General of Vessels in Malta said:

It is a great recognition of Malta’s efforts in the IMO. As one of the world’s largest maritime nations, it is important for us to be represented at the highest level, so to ensure that the IMO remains the global focal point for the regulation of shipping in these crucial years for the shipping sector. We take the IMO Council responsibility seriously as international shipping is important to global trade and Malta is an important maritime jurisdiction. We want to ensure fairness in rules so that all maritime stakeholders can compete on a same level playing field. The ultimate objective is to make shipping more efficient, safer and greener!

This news also comes in the wake of recently published statistics by the UNCTAD confirming once again that the Malta Flag is one of the most sought out European flags and has today the highest registered tonnage in Europe and sixth registered tonnage in the world. The Malta Flag is the flag of choice for many shipowners, ship managers and operators due to the high standards and quality of the flag. The high ranking amongst the Paris and Tokyo MOU list confirms year after year Malta’s commitment to said standards.


Company DETAILS

SHIP IP LTD
VAT:BG 202572176
Rakovski STR.145
Sofia,
Bulgaria
Phone ( +359) 24929284
E-mail: sales(at)shipip.com

ISO 9001:2015 CERTIFIED