Decarbonisation Technology - February 2022 Issue

updated format will be available at the time the GHG footprint calculation methodology will be finalised. This will allow experience to be gained with the GHG footprint assessment methodology and the verification process. Adding GHG footprint data to the BDN could initially be done on a voluntary basis and then become mandatory by the date that a MBM will be implemented. Proposed levy to fund R&D Another thing that was discussed once more by the Committee is an industry proposed fuel levy combined with the establishment of a Research & Development Fund. Again, no consensus has been reached yet on this proposal. But on the positive side, the proposal has not been rejected and has been referred for further discussion to a Working Group. Adopting this industry proposal would be a strong signal from the countries at IMO to support the industry in driving innovation in LC and ZC technologies, by setting up the mechanism to gather and manage funds to support the shipping decarbonisation process. The concept of managing a fund would be novel at IMO and hence it should not be a surprise that this takes some time. Criteria for assessment of proposed Market Based Measures Concerning the implementation of MBMs, I believe it is best not to rush into a measure now, but to prepare a decision based on a solid impact assessment of the different options that are on the table today. Key criteria to be considered for an effective MBM would be: • Provides a stable and predictable long-term framework • Will ensure a level playing field • Will be fit for consistent enforcement across the globe • Provides sufficient incentives for early movers • Avoids major disruptions to trade, e.g. due to an abrupt and steep increase in transportation costs. A more detailed analysis will be helpful to support IMO’s decision-making process, including the details that will need to be addressed to make a MBM fully fit for purpose. However, based on my own assessment, I believe a low carbon fuel standard would offer the strongest incentives for the development and early deployment of LC and ZC fuels. This could be implemented within

the scope of MARPOL Annex VI, building on the DCS regulation. It is obvious that fuel suppliers around the world will need to do their part in making alternative fuels available. But regulating the manufacturers and suppliers of fuels is something that needs to be done by IMO’s member countries. However, once an IMO MBM creates demand, surely both current and new innovative suppliers will be attracted to these markets. In fact, there IMO’s MEPC ismakingmeaningful progress, but next year will be critical to lay the basis for a credible and enforceable long-termplan to achieve an increased ambition by 2050 are already quite a few initiatives under way to explore scalable manufacturing options for LC and ZC fuels, which should give all involved the confidence that, with a suitable regulatory stimulus, these can become a reality in the next decade and that they can be scaled up as needed to meet the 2050 target. Concluding remarks Summing up, IMO’s MEPC is making meaningful progress, but next year will be critical to lay the basis for a credible and enforceable long-term plan to achieve an increased ambition by 2050. IMO should then formally adopt its Finalized GHG Strategy in 2023. References IMO, 2016. IMO Train the Trainer (TTT) Course on Energy Efficient Ship Operation, Module 2 – Ship Energy Efficiency Regulations and Related Guidelines , London: IMO. IMO, 2018. EEDI database – Review of status of technological development (Regulation 21.6 of MARPOL Annex VI), MEPC 73/INF.11 , London: IMO. Jasper Faber, S. H. S. Z. e. a., 2020. Fourth IMO GHG Study - Final Report , Delft: CE Delft.

Eddy Van Bouwel evbouwel@skynet.be