IMO framework sends mixed signals on ship efficiency

THE International Maritime Organization’s new carbon price sends mixed signals when it comes to fuel efficiency.

The net zero framework, if adopted in October, is expected to boost the business case for energy saving devices such as sails, air lubrication and shaft power generators.

But it could also reward some ships for inefficiency in the short term, according to Marie Fricaudet, a senior research fellow at UCL’s Shipping and Oceans Research Group.

Fricaudet said ships with a greenhouse gas fuel intensity (GFI) score above the IMO’s direct compliance target were incentivised to be more energy efficient, since the more you burn the more you have to pay.

But the opposite was true for ships with a GFI score below the direct compliance target; a group that will include some LNG-fuelled ships in the first two years from 2028.

“The ships which are below that line are disincentivised to be energy efficient as long as they are below the line, because the more they burn the more they can sell credits,” Fricaudet said.

“So there is this mixed signal to energy efficiency.”

But that advantage became an instant disadvantage when the rules tighten and the same ship’s emissions come in above the line, so start incurring charges.

“You have a policy which is not only complex, but it’s also not consistent through time,” Fricaudet said.

Technologies like LNG were rewarded in the short term, but not competitive past the mid-2030s.

“The IMO is incentivising in the short term some technologies, which will hit them hard in the long term,” she said.

“For me it’s a recipe for stranded assets.”

There was a clear incentive to buy energy- saving devices for ships burning VLSFO, but this was less clear for the ships that stood to gain from selling surplus.

Kongsberg Maritime strategy and business development vice president Oskar Levander said the higher the carbon price, the better the business case for efficiency upgrades

for retrofits and newbuildings.

“More and more owners are asking for more advanced systems, wind power being a good example,” Levander said.

The IMO rules are yet to specify how much energy sources, such as wind and shore power, will qualify a ship for rewards. Europe’s FuelEU Maritime regulation has a compliance multiplier for wind, boosting its chances.

Levander added: “No one is buying bad ships today anymore. Most people are optimising the hulls and the propeller and doing the easy stuff.

“So you need to go into new technology to make the improvements.”

These included power take-off systems, which draw electricity from the main engine instead of from less efficient generators, as well as sails and air lubrication.

Levander said PTOs were not new, but were uncommon in mainstream shipping because shipowners disliked the capital cost in the past.

Last year, Kongsberg unveiled a design concept for a “super-efficient” bulk carrier that could in theory cut emissions by up to 50% with a mix of wing and suction sails, air lubrication, shaft power and a controllable-pitch propeller.

No one has ordered that exact design yet, but Kongsberg has had orders for parts of the technology package. Kongsberg is working on products to integrate and optimise emissions savings from the different upgrades.

Lloyd's List Daily Briefing 16 May 2025

#Decarbonisation #Sustainability #Regulation #Fuels #Technology #Innovation #ShipOperations #IMO #KongsbergMaritime