Shipping Industry Maintains Decarbonisation Push Despite Delay in Global Carbon Levy

The global shipping sector is continuing to commit substantial capital to lower-emission technologies, even after the postponement of a proposed international carbon levy. Industry executives and project data indicate that major operators remain focused on fleet transition strategies despite the absence of a unified global pricing framework.

In October, efforts led by the United States and Saudi Arabia delayed by one year a decision at the International Maritime Organization on a proposed $380 per metric ton carbon levy. The proposal, supported by the European Union, Brazil and several other nations, was intended to create a global price signal for emissions from a sector responsible for nearly 3 percent of worldwide greenhouse gas output.

While some analysts suggested the delay might disrupt planning cycles or defer capital commitments, interviews across shipping lines, ports, fuel suppliers and marine technology firms suggest that most companies are proceeding with previously announced decarbonisation investments.

 

Dual-Fuel Vessels Dominate New Orders

 

Data through 2028 show that vessels capable of operating on alternative fuels now represent the majority of new orders in key shipping segments. According to analysis of industry data, more than 1,100 dual-fuel container ships and vehicle carriers have either been delivered or placed on order, marking a 28 percent increase year-on-year.

Dual-fuel vessels now account for approximately 74 percent of the combined container ship and vehicle carrier orderbook. Industry estimates indicate that over $150 billion has been committed to these vessels to date, underscoring the scale of financial deployment even in the absence of a finalized global carbon price.

Most of the world’s nearly 50,000 commercial vessels still operate on conventional fuel oil or gas oil. However, in 2023, IMO member states agreed to pursue net-zero emissions from shipping by or around 2050. Anticipating regulatory tightening over the lifespan of vessels that typically operate for three decades, shipowners have increasingly favored designs that allow flexibility between traditional fuels and alternatives such as liquefied natural gas, methanol and ammonia.

Hakan Agnevall, chief executive of Wartsila, noted that shipowners tend to make investment decisions with a 30-year horizon. Regulatory adjustments over that period are viewed as inevitable, reinforcing the logic of investing in adaptable propulsion systems.

 

Read more: Deutsche Bank’s EU Green Bond Debut Strengthens Sustainable Finance Leadership

 

Major Operators Continue Alternative Fuel Strategies

 

Large shipping groups have reaffirmed their decarbonisation plans following the IMO delay. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines indicated it remains focused on LNG-fuelled vessels and early-stage adoption of ammonia and methanol. Maersk, which initially emphasized methanol, has expanded its portfolio to include LNG-fuelled ships and is testing ethanol as an additional pathway.

Belgian operator CMB.Tech has continued investments in ammonia bunkering and production infrastructure, reflecting expectations that demand for low-carbon fuels will strengthen over time.

While a small number of operators have opted for conventional fuel newbuilds, they remain exceptions rather than indicators of a broader reversal. Industry observers note that the long-term direction of maritime decarbonisation remains intact.

 

Regional Regulations Provide Commercial Signals

 

Companies cite regional frameworks as key drivers sustaining investment momentum. The European Union’s FuelEU Maritime regulation introduces penalties for vessels failing to reduce lifecycle emissions intensity, while the EU Emissions Trading System imposes carbon costs on certain maritime routes. These mechanisms create financial incentives for deploying dual-fuel and lower-emission vessels on European trade lanes.

Other jurisdictions are also introducing measures. The United Kingdom has proposed expanding its emissions trading system to cover international shipping from 2028, and Turkey is evaluating a comparable scheme. Several ports and states, including Djibouti and Gabon, have introduced maritime emissions levies.

These overlapping regulatory developments reduce reliance on a single global carbon price to justify capital allocation decisions. Operators serving Europe in particular face economic incentives to accelerate fleet upgrades to avoid penalties and potentially capture compliance-related rewards.

 

Explore OneStop ESG Marketplace: Sustainable fuels

 

Long-Term Perspective Anchors Capital Allocation

 

Maritime consultancy DNV has indicated that, despite short-term policy uncertainty, the structural trajectory toward decarbonisation has not materially shifted. Shipping companies must account for vessel lifespans that extend decades into the future, during which regulatory tightening is widely expected.

Fuel suppliers are also preparing for increased demand for LNG, bio-LNG and other alternative fuels in the near term. The delay in a global carbon levy may extend transition timelines, but it has not altered strategic positioning for many operators.

 

A Sector Advancing Amid Policy Flux

 

Unlike other heavy industries that have scaled back climate ambitions amid changing political signals, shipping has largely maintained its course. Capital commitments to flexible propulsion technologies and alternative fuels suggest that long-term compliance, market positioning and risk management considerations outweigh short-term regulatory delays.

As the IMO revisits carbon pricing discussions later this year, the industry’s investment patterns indicate that fleet modernisation and emissions reduction remain embedded within corporate strategies. For shipowners operating on multi-decade planning cycles, the expectation of progressively tighter environmental standards continues to shape capital deployment decisions.