Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

Presso lo storico molo Joubert di Saint-Nazaire – lo stesso in cui sono state costruite leggende del mare come il transatlantico Normandie – si è svolta la cerimonia di battesimo dell’Orient Express Corinthian, l’unità a vela più imponente mai realizzata fino ad oggi. Con una lunghezza fuori tutto di 220 metri, un dislocamento di 15.000 tonnellate e una stazza di 26.200 Ums, la nave – che rappresenta un’operazione di eccellenza del brand Orient Express, parte della collezione di lusso del Gruppo Accor, ed anche un laboratorio tecnologico per la propulsione eolica su scala industriale – è pronta a salpare il prossimo 2 maggio per la sua stagione inaugurale nel Mediterraneo. Dal punto di vista tecnico, il Corinthian si distingue per l’integrazione del sistema SolidSail, una soluzione proprietaria sviluppata da Chantiers de l’Atlantique dopo dieci anni di ricerca e sviluppo. L’armamento consiste in tre alberi in carbonio che superano i 100 metri di altezza, ciascuno dotato di vele rigide da 1.500 metri quadrati completamente automatizzate. La versatilità del sistema è garantita dalla capacità degli alberi di ruotare a 360 gradi per ottimizzare l’angolo di incidenza rispetto al vento, oltre alla possibilità di inclinarsi fino a 70 gradi, accorgimento ingegneristico questo che risulta fondamentale per permettere il passaggio del mega sailing yacht sotto i principali ponti del mondo. Le prove in mare condotte a febbraio 2026, informa il cantiere francese in una nota, hanno già validato l’efficienza della piattaforma: con una brezza di 20 nodi, la nave ha raggiunto una velocità di 12 nodi navigando esclusivamente a vela, raggiungendo un risultato che non ha precedenti per un’unità di questo tonnellaggio. L’architettura propulsiva non si affida esclusivamente al vento, ma adotta un approccio ibrido basato sull’impiego del gas naturale liquefatto e, con questa soluzione, concorre al raggiungimento del miglior indice Eedi (Energy Efficiency Design Index) della sua categoria. Sul fronte della sicurezza e dell’impatto ambientale, la nave presenta innovazioni tecnologiche che rispondono concretamente alle regole della decarbonizzazione del trasporto marittimo, che potranno essere d’esempio all’intera industria cantieristica. L’Orient Express Corinthian integra infatti sistemi di monitoraggio assistiti da intelligenza artificiale per il rilevamento di mammiferi marini e un impianto di posizionamento dinamico che permette di mantenere la stazione senza ricorrere all’ancoraggio, tutelando l’integrità dei fondali. L’ ospitalità a bordo, continua il cantiere, riflette il paradigma dello “slow travel” voluto da Accor, accogliendo appena 110 passeggeri in 54 suite panoramiche con superfici comprese tra i 45 e i 230 metri quadrati. Gli interni, curati dall’architetto Maxime d’Angeac, sono ispirati al movimento Art Déco e caratterizzati da marmi, legni pregiati e finiture artigianali tipiche del savoir-faire francese. Nonostante tutte le peculiarità di alto livello della nave, sottolinea la nota, l’aspetto operativo più rilevante per il mercato risiede nella flessibilità degli itinerari. La programmazione prevede infatti tratte da una a quattro notti combinabili tra loro, consentendo una personalizzazione rara nel segmento crocieristico di fascia alta. L’offerta di bordo è completata da cinque ristoranti sotto la direzione dello chef Yannick Alléno, una marina privata e una spa Guerlain, il tutto gestito secondo una formula all-inclusive ad alto valore aggiunto. Il progetto Corinthian si inserisce in una più ampia strategia di flotta del cantiere francese che vede già in fase di allestimento l’unità gemella, l’Orient Express Olympian. Quest’ultima, varata lo scorso 17 aprile presso il molo di Penhoët, debutterà nel 2027 e consoliderà la partnership strategica tra il gruppo Accor e Chantiers de l’Atlantique. Con questo binomio di velieri, conclude la nota, l’industria navale francese traccia una rotta percorribile verso un futuro in cui la tecnologia velica torna a essere protagonista del trasporto marittimo commerciale e turistico. ISCRIVITI ALLA NEWSLETTER QUOTIDIANA GRATUITA DI SHIPPING ITALY SHIPPING ITALY E’ ANCHE SU WHATSAPP: BASTA CLICCARE QUI PER ISCRIVERSI AL CANALE ED ESSERE SEMPRE AGGIORNATI

Luxembourg, April 30, 2026- ArcelorMittal (referred to as “ArcelorMittal” or the “Company” or the "Group") (MT (New York, Amsterdam, Paris, Luxembourg), MTS (Madrid)), the world’s leading integrated steel and mining company, today announced results1for the three-month period ended March 31, 2026 1Q 2026 key highlights: Safety focus:Protecting employee health and safety is a core Company value. The multi-year safety transformation continues to deliver measurable improvements, with LTIFR improving to 0.45x in 1Q 2026 from 0.63x in 1Q 2025Delivering structurally improved margins:The Group's results continue to demonstrate resilience, with 1Q 2026 EBITDA per tonne of $131/t increasing by $15/t year-on-year, reflecting the benefits of the strategic investment program, continued asset optimization and diversified market exposures. Net income in 1Q 2026 was $0.6bn (basic EPS of $0.76/sh)Operational momentum:Record iron ore production and shipments in Liberia and a return to normalized operating levels in North AmericaSeasonal investment in working capital:A typical seasonal working capital investment of $1.5bn during the quarter led to a free cash outflow of $1.3bn and an increase in net debt to $9.3bn4. Liquidity7remains at a robust $9.9bn and the Company's positive FCF outlook for 2026 and beyond remains unchangedConsistent cash generation, supporting balanced capital allocation and continued growth investment:Over the past 12 months, the Company generated $2.0bn in investable cash flow6(net cash provided by operating activities less maintenance/normative capex). Over the same period, the Company invested $1.5bn in strategic capex to build incremental long-term EBITDA capacity, returned $0.7bn to shareholders, and allocated $0.2bn to M&ACapital return policy is creating significant value for shareholders:The Company paid its first quarterly interim dividend of $0.15 per share in March 2026, as part of a proposed annual dividend of $0.60 per share. The Company will continue to return a minimum of 50% of post-dividend free cash flow to shareholders through share buybacks. The fully diluted share count has been reduced by 38% since September 20205 Strategic focus: Well positioned to benefit from a balanced and fair European steel market:The Company believes that CBAM (which now imposes a carbon cost on imports), together with the recently agreed tariff rate quota (TRQ) trade tool (expected to be effective from July 1, 2026), structurally resets the outlook for the European steel industry. Lower imports will lead to higher capacity utilization, restoring profitability and returns on capital to healthy, sustainable levels. ArcelorMittal is well positioned to capture the volume upside through: improved utilization of its existing operating capacity; restart of idled blast furnaces (Fos (France) & Dabrowa (Poland) currently in preparation); and the commissioning of the new Gijon EAF and expanded EAF capacity at Sestao Strategic growth projects have good momentum and support higher EBITDA and ROCE:1Q 2026 capex of $1.3bn includes $0.2bn payment on signing new Mineral Development Agreement in Liberia11. 2026 capex guidance remains unchanged at $4.5bn-$5.0bn and includes $1.7-$2.0bn of strategic capex on high return projects. The potential incremental EBITDA impact of strategic capex projects (including completed M&A) is now $1.8bn6and includes the benefits of the recently approved electric arc furnace at Dunkirk and previously announced EAF investments at Sestao and Gijón Financial highlights (on the basis of IFRS1): Commenting, Aditya Mittal, ArcelorMittal Chief Executive Officer, said: “Performance in the first quarter was resilient despite the unsettled backdrop in the Middle East with profitability of $131/t EBITDA reflecting the benefits of our global diversified asset portfolio and the consistent application of our strategy. We also continued to improve our safety performance with the lowest quarterly LTIFR in the history of the Group, showing the tangible results of our sustained focus in this area. “The fundamentals of the business have improved over the past three months, driven in particular by the favourable structural reset in the European policy environment, including CBAM and the new tariff rate quota (TRQ) which is expected to significantly reduce imports into Europe from July 1. ArcelorMittal is well positioned to capture this upside through existing capacity and by re-starting idled capacity. In Europe, this will result in higher domestic capacity utilization and restore profitability and ROCE to healthy, sustainable levels. “This will be also an important year for the Company’s strategic growth projects, which reflect the depth of the Company’s opportunity set across diverse growth vectors. Our investments, which ultimately will add an incremental $1.8 billion EBITDA, include the expansion of AM/NS India’s plant in Hazira, the ramp-up of mining in Liberia, the ramp up of the new EAF at Calvert to full capacity, as well as various opportunities related to the energy transition. We are also pleased that we have been able to take final investment decision on the new EAF in Dunkirk, supported by various policy initiatives at the European and French levels. “We remain confident in ArcelorMittal’s prospects for the balance of the year, with the expected favourable impacts of new policy including a materially improved pricing and volume environment. Combined with the impact of our strategic investments, this supports ArcelorMittal’s free cash flow outlook and the delivery of consistent capital returns to shareholders.” Safety and sustainable development Health and safety: Protecting employee health and well-being is a core value of the Company. The Group’s multi‑year safety transformation continues to deliver measurable improvements, with LTIF rate improving to 0.45x in 1Q’26 (from 0.63x in 1Q’25). In 2026, the program entered its implementation and scale-up phase, with a strong focus on strengthening execution discipline and delivering consistent, high-quality safety performance across all regions through the safety roadmaps. Efforts have centered on reinforcing key enablers such as health and safety leadership capabilities, robust risk management, process safety management, and effective contractor integration. Together, these actions contribute to achieving our overarching ambition of zero fatalities and serious injuries through sustained improvement. For further details on the progress to date on our safety transformation program, see the 2025 Sustainability report available on the Company's website. Own personnel and contractors – Lost time injury frequency rate Sustainable development highlights: Analysis of results for 1Q 2026 versus 4Q 2025 Sales increased by 3.2% to $15.5 billion in 1Q 2026 as compared to $15.0 billion in 4Q 2025, primarily reflecting higher average steel prices. Operating income increased to $0.8 billion in 1Q 2026 as compared to $0.3 billion in 4Q 2025, which had included $194 million of exceptional charges3. Depreciation cost for 1Q 2026 was $749 million, lower than $856 million in 4Q 2025 which was impacted by certain assets reaching end of life. 12M 2026 depreciation guidance remains unchanged at approximately $3.0 billion. EBITDA increased by 5.4% to $1,679 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $1,593 million in 4Q 2025, primarily driven by improved performance in the North America segment. Foreign exchange and other net financial charges amounted to $80 million in 1Q 2026, lower than $450 million in 4Q 2025, primarily reflecting lower foreign exchange charges. The prior period also included a non-recurring cost of $0.1 billion related to the extension of the mandatory convertible bond10. Net interest cost increased to $133 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $91 million in 4Q 2025, primarily due to higher gross debt and lower interest income. Income tax expense of $136 million in 1Q 2026 compares with an income tax benefit of $201 million in 4Q 2025. 4Q 2025 was impacted by recognition of deferred tax assets following revised expectations of future profitability, primarily in Europe. Net income in 1Q 2026 increased to $575 million (EPS of $0.76/sh) compared with $177 million (EPS of $0.23/sh) in 4Q 2025. Adjusted net income of $654 million was higher in 4Q 2025 primarily on account of higher deferred tax benefits partially offset by higher foreign exchange and other net financial charges. Net cash used in operating activities in 1Q 2026 amounted to $9 million and includes a $1.5 billion seasonal investment in working capital. Capex totalled $1.3 billion for 1Q 2026 (including a $0.2 billion payment on signing new Mineral Development Agreement in Liberia)11. Net debt increased to $9.3 billion as at March 31, 2026, as compared to $7.9 billion on December 31, 2025. Analysis of operations North America Crude steel production increased by 18.3% to 2.1Mt in 1Q 2026, as compared with 1.8Mt in 4Q 2025, primarily driven by the successful restart of the Mexico Long products blast furnace following preventive maintenance. Sales increased by 8.3% in 1Q 2026 to $3.3 billion, as compared to $3.0 billion in 4Q 2025, primarily reflecting higher steel shipments (+5.2%) and higher average steel selling prices (+3.5%). Operating income improved to $206 million in 1Q 2026 as compared with an operating loss of $21 million in 4Q 2025. EBITDA in 1Q 2026 increased to $383 million as compared to $204 million in 4Q 2025, driven mainly by a positive price-cost effect and higher steel shipments. Brazil9 Sales in 1Q 2026 decreased by 3.2% to $2.8 billion as compared to $2.9 billion in 4Q 2025, driven by lower steel shipments (-8.8%), largely reflecting seasonality and timing of slab export volume, partially offset by higher average steel selling prices (reflecting a richer mix). Operating income was broadly stable at $223 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $229 million in 4Q 2025. EBITDA in 1Q 2026 of $334 million was stable as compared to $341 million in 4Q 2025, primarily due to lower steel shipments, partially offset by a richer mix (lower slab exports). Europe Crude steel production totaled 6.8Mt in 1Q 2026, representing a 6.8% increase compared to 6.4Mt in 4Q 2025. Production in 1Q 2026 nevertheless remained impacted by ongoing maintenance ahead of planned restarts in 2Q 2026. Compared to 1Q 2025, crude steel production was also impacted by the sale of the company’s Bosnian operations. Sales increased by 10.6% to $7.4 billion in 1Q 2026 as compared to $6.7 billion in 4Q 2025, primarily reflecting higher steel shipments (+8.1%), with Flat products up 12.1% and Long products down 2.1% and higher average steel selling prices. Operating income in 1Q 2026 was $239 million as compared to $49 million in 4Q 2025, which primarily included $166 million of exceptional charges3. EBITDA in 1Q 2026 of $501 million compared to $518 million in 4Q 2025, with the benefits of higher steel shipments offset by a negative price cost effect including the impact of reduced free CO2 allocations. With CBAM in place, the additional CO2 cost is expected to be recovered via steel prices from 2Q 2026 onwards. Sustainable Solutions Sales in 1Q 2026 were broadly stable at $2.6 billion as compared to 4Q 2025. Operating income improved to $69 million in 1Q 2026 from an operating loss of $10 million in 4Q 2025, which included $28 million of exceptional charges related to restructuring costs and impairments of $17 million. EBITDA increased to $124 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $106 million in 4Q 2025 with improved performance of the downstream businesses. Mining Note: Mining segment comprises iron ore operations of ArcelorMittal Mines Canada (AMMC) and ArcelorMittal Liberia. Sales in 1Q 2026 were broadly stable at $0.9 billion as compared to 4Q 2025. Iron ore production totalled 9.7Mt in 1Q 2026, 3.2% lower versus 10.1Mt in 4Q 2025, driven by seasonally lower volumes at ArcelorMittal Mines Canada (AMMC) offset by higher output in Liberia. Liberia delivered another record quarter for iron ore production and shipments. The continued concentrator capacity ramp‑up is expected to support higher sinter feed shipments with higher price realizations. Liberia shipment guidance remains unchanged at >18Mt in 2026. Operating income increased to $215 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $198 million in 4Q 2025. EBITDA of $299 million in 1Q 2026 was 4.8% lower as compared to $314 million in 4Q 2025 primarily due to higher freight costs. India and JVs Income from associates, joint ventures and other investments declined to $177 million in 1Q 2026, as compared to $206 million in 4Q 2025, due to weaker Chinese investee performance partly offset by stronger AMNS India results. ArcelorMittal has investments in various joint ventures and associate entities globally. The Company considers AMNS India (60% equity interest) joint venture to be of particular strategic importance, warranting more detailed disclosures to improve the understanding of its operational performance and value to the Group. AMNS India Sales increased by 1.6% to $1.6 billion in 1Q 2026 as compared to 4Q 2025, driven by higher average steel selling prices offset in part by 12% decrease in steel shipment volumes due to planned maintenance. EBITDA increased by 17.9% to $195 million in 1Q 2026 as compared to $166 million in 4Q 2025, primarily due to a positive price-cost effect, partially offset by lower steel shipment volumes. Recent development ArcelorMittal Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Position1 ArcelorMittal Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations1 ArcelorMittal Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash flows1 Appendix 1: Capital expenditures1 Appendix 2: Debt repayment schedule as of March 31, 2026 As of March 31, 2026, the average debt maturity is 7.5 years. Appendix 3: Reconciliation of gross debt to net debt Appendix 4: Adjusted net income and adjusted basic EPS Appendix 5: Terms and definitions Unless indicated otherwise, or the context otherwise requires, references in this earnings release to the following terms have the meanings set out next to them below: Adjusted basic EPS:refers to adjusted net income divided by the weighted average common shares outstanding. Adjusted net income:refers to reported net income less impairment items and exceptional items and related tax impacts and one-off tax charges. Apparent steel consumption:calculated as the sum of production plus imports minus exports. Average steel selling prices:calculated as steel sales divided by steel shipments. Cash and cash equivalents: represent cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and short-term investments. Capex:represents the purchase of property, plant and equipment and intangibles. The Group’s capex figures do not include capex at the JVs level (i.e. AM/NS Calvert until June 18, 2025 and AMNS India). Crude steel production:steel in the first solid state after melting, suitable for further processing or for sale. Depreciation:refers to amortization and depreciation. EPS:refers to basic or diluted earnings per share. EBITDA:defined as operating income (loss) plus depreciation, impairment items and exceptional items and income (loss) from associates, joint ventures and other investments (excluding impairments and exceptional items if any). EBITDA/tonne:calculated as EBITDA divided by total steel shipments. Exceptional items:income / (charges) relate to transactions that are significant, infrequent or unusual and are not representative of the normal course of business of the period. Free cash flow (FCF): refers to net cash provided by operating activities less capex less dividends paid to minority shareholders. The term free cash outflow is used when the difference is negative (i.e. negative free cash flow) Foreign exchange and other net financing income/(loss): include foreign currency exchange impact, bank fees, interest on pensions, impairment of financial assets, revaluation of derivative instruments and other charges that cannot be directly linked to operating results. Gross debt: long-term debt and short-term debt. Impairment items:refers to impairment charges net of reversals. Income from associates, joint ventures and other investments: refers to income from associates, joint ventures and other investments (excluding impairments and exceptional items, if any). Investable cash flow:refers to net cash provided by operating activities less maintenance/normative capex. Iron ore reference prices:refers to iron ore prices for 62% Fe CFR China. Pricing is generally linked to market price indexes and uses a variety of mechanisms, including current spot prices and average prices over specified periods. Therefore, there may not be a direct correlation between market reference prices and actual selling prices in various regions at a given time. Kt:refers to thousand metric tonnes. Liquidity:defined as cash and cash equivalents (included cash held as part of assets held for sale) plus available revolving credit facilities LTIF:refers to lost time injury ("LTI") frequency rate equals lost time injuries per 1,000,000 worked hours (own personnel and contractors) and includes fatalities; an LTI is an incident that causes an injury that prevents the person from returning to his/her next scheduled shift or work period. Maintenance/normative capex:refers to capital expenditures outside of strategic capital expenditures projects (and includes cost reduction plans and environment projects as well as general maintenance capital expenditures). Mt:refers to million metric tonnes. Net debt:long-term debt and short-term debt less cash and cash equivalents (including cash and cash equivalents held as part of assets held for sale) Net interest expense:includes interest expense less interest income. Operating results:refers to operating income/(loss). Operating segments:North America segment includes the Flat, Long and Tubular operations of US, Canada and Mexico; and also includes all Mexico mines. The Brazil segment includes the Flat, Long and Tubular operations of Brazil and its neighboring countries including Argentina, Costa Rica, Venezuela; and also includes Andrade and Serra Azul captive iron ore mines. The Europe segment includes Flat and Long operations, and through October 30, 2025, included Bosnia and Herzegovina captive iron ore mines; Sustainable Solutions division includes Downstream Solutions and Tubular operations of the European business and our renewables operations in India. The Others segment includes the Flat, Long and Tubular operations of Ukraine and South Africa, the captive iron ore mines in Ukraine, holding companies and intragroup stock margin eliminations. Mining segment includes iron ore operations of ArcelorMittal Mines Canada and ArcelorMittal Liberia. Own iron ore production:includes total of all finished production of fines, concentrate, pellets and lumps and includes share of production. Price-cost effect:a lack of correlation or a lag in the corollary relationship between raw material and steel prices, which can either have a positive (i.e. increased spread between steel prices and raw material costs) or negative effect (i.e. a squeeze or decreased spread between steel prices and raw material costs). ROCE (Return on capital employed):refers to operating income, excluding impairment and exceptional items, plus income from associates, JVs and other investments (excluding impairments and exceptional items, if any), minus income taxes (excluding one-off tax charges) divided by the average equity plus net debt for the period. Shipments:information at segment and Group level eliminates intra-segment shipments (which are primarily between Flat/Long plants and Tubular plants) and inter-segment shipments respectively. Shipments of Downstream Solutions are excluded. Working capital change (working capital investment / release):refers to movement of change in working capital - trade accounts receivable plus inventories less trade and other accounts payable. Footnotes First quarter 2026 earnings analyst conference call ArcelorMittal Management will host a conference call for members of the investment community to present and comment on the three-month period ended March 31, 2026 on:Thursday April 30, 2026, at 9.30 US Eastern time, 14.30 London time and 15.30 CET. To access via the conference call and ask a question during the Q&A, please register in advance:https://register-conf.media-server.com/register/BI1a2bb6183076462ea977c387e5eb4d3c Alternatively, the webcast can be accessed at:https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/a3gekyiy A copy of the earnings call transcript will also be available on the website. Forward-Looking Statements This document contains forward-looking information and statements about ArcelorMittal and its subsidiaries. These statements include financial projections and estimates and their underlying assumptions, statements regarding plans, objectives and expectations with respect to future operations, products and services, and statements regarding future performance. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the words “believe”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “target”, "projected", "potential", "intend" or similar expressions. Although ArcelorMittal’s management believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, investors and holders of ArcelorMittal’s securities are cautioned that forward-looking information and statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond the control of ArcelorMittal, that could cause actual results and developments to differ materially and adversely from those expressed in, or implied or projected by, the forward-looking information and statements. These risks and uncertainties include those discussed or identified in the filings with the Luxembourg Stock Market Authority for the Financial Markets (Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) made or to be made by ArcelorMittal, including ArcelorMittal’s latest Annual Report on Form 20-F on file with the SEC. ArcelorMittal undertakes no obligation to publicly update its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Non-GAAP/Alternative Performance Measures This press release also includes certain non-GAAP financial/alternative performance measures. ArcelorMittal presents EBITDA, EBITDA/tonne, free cash flow (FCF), adjusted net income and adjusted basic earnings per share which are non-GAAP financial/alternative performance measures, as additional measures to enhance the understanding of its operating performance. The definition of EBITDA includes income from share of associates, JVs and other investments (excluding impairments and exceptional items if any, of associates, JVs and other investments) because the Company believes this information provides investors with additional information to understand its results, given the increasing significance of its joint ventures. ArcelorMittal believes such indicators are relevant to provide management and investors with additional information. ArcelorMittal also presents net debt, liquidity and change in working capital as additional measures to enhance the understanding of its financial position, changes to its capital structure and its credit assessment. Investable cash flow is defined as net cash provided by operating activities less maintenance/normative capex, and the Company thus believes that it represents a cash flow that is available for allocation at management’s discretion. The Company’s guidance as to free cash flow and additional EBITDA estimated to be generated from certain projects is based on the same accounting policies as those applied in the Company’s financial statements prepared in accordance with IFRS. ArcelorMittal is unable to reconcile, without unreasonable effort, such guidance to the most directly comparable IFRS financial measure, due to the uncertainty and inherent difficulty of predicting the occurrence and the financial impact of items impacting comparability. For the same reasons, ArcelorMittal is unable to address the significance of the unavailable information. Non-GAAP financial/alternative performance measures should be read in conjunction with, and not as an alternative to, ArcelorMittal's financial information prepared in accordance with IFRS. Comparable IFRS measures and reconciliations of non-GAAP financial/alternative performance measures are presented herein. About ArcelorMittal ArcelorMittal is one of the world's leading steel and mining companies, with a presence in 60 countries and primary steelmaking facilities in 14 countries. In 2025, ArcelorMittal had revenues of $61.4 billion and crude steel production of 55.6 million metric tonnes, while iron ore production reached 48.8 million metric tonnes. Our goal is to help build a better world with smarter steels. Steels made using innovative processes which use less energy, emit significantly less carbon and reduce costs. Steels that are cleaner, stronger and reusable. Steels for electric vehicles and renewable energy infrastructure that will support societies as they transform through this century. With steel at our core, our inventive people and an entrepreneurial culture at heart, we will support the world in making that change. This is what we believe it takes to be the steel company of the future. ArcelorMittal is listed on the stock exchanges of New York (MT), Amsterdam (MT), Paris (MT), Luxembourg (MT) and on the Spanish stock exchanges of Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid and Valencia (MTS). For more information about ArcelorMittal please visit:https://corporate.arcelormittal.com/ Enquiries ArcelorMittal investor relations: +44 207 543 1128; ESG: +44 203 214 2801 and Bonds/credit: +33 1 57 95 50 35.E-mail:investor.relations@arcelormittal.com ArcelorMittal corporate communications (e-mail:press@arcelormittal.com) +44 207 629 7988. Contact: Paul Weigh +44 203 214 2419 Attachment

ANCONA - Le chiamano controdeduzioni, ma sono vere e proprie stilettate. All’indomani delle richieste di integrazioni del Ministero dell’Ambiente anticipate dal Corriere Adriatico, l’Autorità portuale risponde alle prime osservazioni che Regione e Comune di Ancona avevano depositato al Mase riguardo il banchinamento per grandi navi da crociera al molo Clementino. APPROFONDIMENTI IL DOCUMENTO Molo Clementino, il Ministero chiede altre integrazioni all’Authority: «No alla Penisola? Diteci perché» Le soluzioni A partire da un tema che lo stesso dicastero dell’Ambiente aveva chiesto di approfondire, ovvero la possibile esistenza di progetti alternativi al Molo che siano meno impattanti dal punto di vista ambientale e paesaggistico. Due gli orizzonti: la futuristica (e futuribile) Penisola e la più concreta banchina 26, già operativa ma destinata ai container. Nel primo caso, la replica dell’Authority è netta. Rispondendo alla Regione, i tecnici fanno presente che «si tratterebbe di una alternativa fittizia», subordinata all’approvazione del nuovo Piano regolatore portuale (ancora in corso) e ad un iter autorizzativo a parte, oltre che caratterizzata da «tempi sicuramente non compatibili con l’esigenza del porto di Ancona di disporre di un accosto adeguato alle navi di nuova generazione». Ribadiscono: senza molo Clementino, «non solo non sarà possibile dare impulso allo sviluppo del traffico crocieristico ma il porto dorico vedrebbe venir meno gli attuali traffici in seguito alla graduale dismissione delle navi di lunghezza inferiore ai 275 metri», il massimo oggi transitabile nel nostro scalo, con accosto alla banchina 15. Il realismo Il Comune, invece, aveva proposto di spostare l’accosto per grandi navi alla banchina 26, nella Darsena Marche, oggi destinata ai container. «L’ampliamento della destinazione funzionale - scrivono gli uffici dell’Authority - richiederebbe l’adozione di una variante al Piano regolatore e l’avvio di una nuova procedura ambientale, e non risulta pertanto percorribile e nemmeno ipotizzata nel nuovo Piano regolatore». Motivano anche: gli spazi sono quelli che sono, già oggi sono limitati perché gli accosti di portacontainer sono sempre più frequenti e dover destinare ampie porzioni di banchina ai servizi per i passeggeri delle navi da crociera sarebbe un problema. Gli operatori chiedono più spazio, non meno. E poi, la presenza di navi passeggeri richiederebbe la sospensione delle operazioni commerciali per motivi di sicurezza in varie fasi. Un grosso problema, insomma. La soluzione proposta da Palazzo del Popolo, infatti, «sarebbe possibile solo a discapito del traffico container, che si sposterebbe quindi presso altri porti, con conseguente perdita di occupazione locale». E ancora, i tecnici fanno notare che questo accosto, lontanissimo dalla città, «renderebbe impossibile per i passeggeri raggiungere il centro a piedi, aumentando il traffico veicolare e la propensione degli stessi a rimanere a bordo, con conseguente venir meno della fruizione della città». Tradotto: nessuno farebbe più shopping sul Corso. I temi, naturalmente, sono anche altri. Come il cold ironing, l’alimentazione elettrica delle navi in sosta così da permettere loro di spegnere i motori e abbattere l’inquinamento. I consumi Per l’Ap, il consumo di corrente sarebbe di circa 12,5 MW, che per 8 ore di accosto per 180 giorni all’anno vorrebbe dire un consumo di 12.600 MW/h all’anno, ovvero quello di poco meno di 4mila nuclei famigliari da 3 componenti ciascuno. Il cold ironing farebbe risparmiare 4.716 tonnellate di Co2 all’anno, ovvero l’inquinamento prodotto da circa 3mila auto in un anno. Il risparmio lordo sarebbe di oltre 7mila tonnellate, ma bisogna considerare anche i consumi per la produzione dell’elettricità. Sul fronte dell’inquinamento acustico, invece, «si esclude che la nave da crociera ormeggiata in banchina nella sua funzionalità operativa possa modificare il clima acustico rilevato nell’area». Anzi, eventuali sforamenti «dipendono esclusivamente dall’attuale traffico» sulla viabilità ordinaria. Le auto e i tir, insomma. Mica le navi.

Washington state startup Panthalassa is building self-propelled floating platforms that generate electricity from ocean waves and use it to power AI data centers at sea. The platform, dubbed Ocean-3, has devices that have no anchor, need no fuel, and have no cables connecting them to shore. Each platform rises and falls with the waves, forcing water through an internal turbine to generate electricity. The generated power then runs onboard computing hardware that processes AI tasks on the spot, with results sent back via satellite. "The ocean is really unlimited in terms of how much energy is available," said Garth Sheldon-Coulson, CEO and co-founder of Panthalassa. "It will really be the cheapest energy on the planet." The Ocean-3 works more like a floating hydroelectric dam. As waves lift the platform, water inside a tube is forced upward into a ballast tank. This water then flows into a spinning turbine, which generates electricity. The system is self-propelled, moving like a large Roomba rather than being tethered to the ocean floor. Sign up to the TechRadar Pro newsletter to get all the top news, opinion, features and guidance your business needs to succeed! Multiple units deployed together can function as a single floatingdata center, with no carbon emissions and no strain on local power grids. "When you deploy many of our systems, they work together basically as a data center," Sheldon-Coulson said. "So, we think of it as a really good alternative to data centers on land." Due to high electricity consumption, which drives up carbon emissions and household utility bills, the industry has been looking for an alternative to land-based AI data centers. There have been discussions aboutunderwater data centersas well asdata centers in space, but none of these seem to be short-term plans. As the demand for compute grows and traditional power grids collapse, Panthalassa offers an alternative that bypasses land acquisition and fossil fuel dependence. Construction of the Ocean-3 units is already underway, and Sheldon-Coulson expects them to be operating offshore by August of this year. The company eventually hopes to deploy thousands of these platforms far out at sea. Panthalassa has all of the private funding it needs because AI companies are eager for quicker, cleaner ways to get power than building data centers on land. "It is really exciting that we're working on something that is coming along right at the right time," Sheldon-Coulson said, "in a way that's much cleaner, much more sustainable, and quite scalable." Although the concept is elegant, there is one uncertainty: the ocean. It has a way of breaking things that work perfectly in testing. Saltwater corrosion, biofouling, and storm damage are not hypothetical problems for marine equipment; they are daily realities. The Ocean-3 platforms will need to survive hurricanes, salt spray, and years of continuous motion without mechanical failure. Satellite links also introduce latency that may not suit all AI workloads, and the cost of repairing a broken generator in the middle of the ocean will be huge. Panthalassa has proven that wave energy can power a floating platform, but proving it can do so reliably for years is a much harder challenge. Still, for an industry desperate for power and willing to try almost anything, the ocean offers something that no data center on land can match: unlimited space and a power source that never stops moving. ViaCBS News Follow TechRadar on Google Newsandadd us as a preferred sourceto get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds. Efosa has been writing about technology for over 7 years, initially driven by curiosity but now fueled by a strong passion for the field. He holds both a Master's and a PhD in sciences, which provided him with a solid foundation in analytical thinking. You must confirm your public display name before commenting Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.

Sarà operativo fino a fine anno – precisamente fino al 31 dicembre 2026 – il nuovo quadro temporaneo per gli aiuti di Stato adottato oggi dalla Commissione Europea con lo scopo di sostenere i settori colpiti dalla crisi in Medio Oriente (Middle East Crisis Temporary State Aid Framework). Tra i settori trattati dal Metsaf, spiega la stessa Commissione, ci sono anche quelli dei trasporti stradali, ferroviari, per vie d’acqua interne e di short sea su tratte intraeuropee, al fianco di quelli di agricoltura e pesca, i quali potranno ricevere sostegni a coprire fino il 70% degli extracosti dovuti per il carburante e per i fertilizzanti. In generale, l’aumento di prezzo sarà determinato da ciascuno Stato membro esaminando la differenza tra il prezzo di mercato pertinente e un prezzo di riferimento storico applicabile. Per questi settori, un’opzione semplificata renderà più facile per i beneficiari essere ammissibili all’aiuto, consentendo agli Stati membri di calibrare gli importi dei singoli sostegni su elementi quali le dimensioni e il tipo di attività dei beneficiari, una stima generale del consumo di combustibile nel settore o altri parametri pertinenti, consentendo a ciascun beneficiario di ricevere un contributo fino a 50mila euro. Per quel che riguarda nello specifico i trasporti marittimi, il framework appena varato include i collegamenti short sea intraeuropei, spiegando che questi potranno beneficiare della misura dato che “un sostegno temporaneo potrebbe attenuare le conseguenze di aumenti eccezionalmente marcati del prezzo del combustibile causati dalla crisi”. Per essere ammissibili – chiarisce il documento – tali aiuti dovranno essere concessi in forma di “sovvenzioni dirette, agevolazioni fiscali e di pagamento o in altre forme, quali garanzie, prestiti e capitale proprio”, a condizione che il loro valore nominale totale non superi l’intensità di aiuto e i massimali di aiuto applicabili”. I valori utilizzati dovranno essere “al lordo di qualsiasi imposta o altri oneri” e potranno coprire “fino al 70 % dei costi supplementari per il combustibile causati dalla crisi in Medio Oriente”. Il periodo ammissibile, prosegue il testo, decorrerà “dal 1° marzo 2026 al 31 dicembre 2026 al più tardi”. Da rilevare che il documento chiarisce esplicitamente che gli aiuti “non coprono direttamente i costi dell’Ets, né usano i prezzi Ets come parametri per determinare la compensazione, mantenendo quindi gli obblighi e gli incentivi dell’Ets”. Tra le condizioni poste, c’è quella secondo cui i sostegni non possono essere concessi a imprese che si trovavano già in difficoltà, con l’eccezione delle piccole e microimprese che già lo erano prima del 28 febbraio 2026, e purché non soggette a procedure concorsuali per insolvenza e non abbiano ricevuto aiuti per il salvataggio o la ristrutturazione. “Conseguire un’economia pulita – ha chiosato Teresa Ribera, Vicepresidente esecutiva per una Transizione pulita, giusta e competitiva – è ciò che ci proteggerà dalle crisi energetiche del futuro. La transizione energetica rimane la strategia più efficace per l’autonomia, la crescita e la resilienza dell’Europa. Tuttavia le recenti impennate dei prezzi dell’energia richiedono una risposta immediata. Il quadro temporaneo introduce soluzioni facilmente applicabili che attenueranno gli effetti della crisi e sosterranno così il continuo sviluppo di settori fondamentali dell’Ue quali l’agricoltura, la pesca e i trasporti”. ISCRIVITI ALLA NEWSLETTER QUOTIDIANA GRATUITA DI SHIPPING ITALY SHIPPING ITALY E’ ANCHE SU WHATSAPP: BASTA CLICCARE QUI PER ISCRIVERSI AL CANALE ED ESSERE SEMPRE AGGIORNATI

EasyJetyRolls-Royceanunciaron este miércoles que han completado con éxito un importante hito en pruebas con hidrógeno como combustible de aviación, marcando un paso significativo en los esfuerzos por reducir las emisiones del sector. Por primera vez en la industria, las compañías han probado unmotor aeronáutico Rolls-Royce Pearl 15modificado, alcanzando la potencia máxima de despegue mientras funcionaba con hidrógeno al 100%, en elStennis Space Center de la NASA, cerca de Bay St. Louis (Misisipi). Este importante logro es el resultado de unprograma de cuatro añosentre Rolls-Royce,easyJety socios globales para explorar elhidrógeno como posible combustible de aviacióny generar conocimiento técnico para futuras aplicaciones de propulsión. EasyJet explicó que ha desempeñado un papel clave apoyando el desarrollo de latecnología deturbinas de gas de hidrógenocomo parte de sus ambiciones dedescarbonización a largo plazo. La ampliación de la colaboración de Rolls-Royce con Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) ha acelerado el progreso hacia sus objetivos tecnológicos, aportando capacidades adicionales en áreas clave de ingeniería. Durante esta fase del programa, los ingenieros demostraron que unmotor a reacción moderno, adaptable para aviones de pasillo único, puede funcionar de forma segura conhidrógeno gaseosoa lo largo de todo el ciclo de vuelo simulado, incluyendo el arranque, despegue, la fase de crucero y el aterrizaje. El programa de Rolls-Royce siguió un enfoque incremental basado en la tecnología para demostrar los fundamentos. Desde las primeras pruebas de motor en Boscombe Down (Reino Unido) en 2022,la tecnología se amplió y desarrolló mediante un programa en Reino Unido y Europade ensayos de componentes y sistemas, incluyendo la creación de unainstalación de pruebas de hidrógeno a escala real en el HSE, antes de su integración completa en un motor demostrador alimentado por hidrógeno. Las modificaciones iniciales también se centraron en adaptar el motor para sustituir el combustible convencional por hidrógeno, teniendo en cuenta tanto las emisiones de carbono como las no relacionadas con CO₂ mediante un amplio programa de combustión. David Morgan, director de operaciones en easyJet, afirma: "Este hito pionero en la industria es una prueba clara del progreso logrado en nuestra colaboración con Rolls-Royce, llevando el hidrógeno desde un concepto inicial hasta un motor completo y pruebas exitosas en tan solo unos años.Demostrar el funcionamiento con hidrógeno al 100% a gran escalaes un logro muy significativo y supone un paso importante hacia la ambición de easyJet de alcanzar lascero emisiones netas, apoyando la transición a largo plazo hacia una aviación más sostenible". El programa ha aportado valiosos conocimientos sobre lacombustión del hidrógeno, lossistemas de combustibley laintegración del motor, respaldando el potencial de futuros aviones propulsados por hidrógeno para reducir significativamente las emisiones de carbono en la aviación europea y británica, complementando además el uso decombustibles sostenibles de aviación (SAF)para apoyar el crecimiento futuro, tal y como se recoge en el informe Enabling Hydrogen in the European Aviation Market. Adam Newman, responsable de ingeniería delprograma demostrador de hidrógenode Rolls-Royce, comenta: "Este programa nos ha proporcionado la comprensión más clara de la industria sobre cómo se comporta el hidrógeno en unaturbina de gasaeronáutica moderna. Mediante un enfoque de pruebas colaborativo y por fases, hemos validado tecnologías de combustión, combustible y sistemas de control, y demostrado el uso seguro del hidrógeno desde el diseño hasta la puesta en marcha, mantenimiento y pruebas". "Hemos explorado una amplia gama de condiciones operativas, incluidos escenarios de fallo, lo que ha permitido operar a máxima potencia y durante todo el ciclo de vuelo. La rapidez en la ejecución ha sido clave, y los conocimientos adquiridos, muchos de ellos aplicables adistintos combustibles, se utilizarán en futuros programas, incluidoUltraFan, reforzando nuestra confianza en que la turbina de gas seguirá siendo clave en el futuro de la aviación sostenible", añadió. Anupam Singhal, presidente de fabricación de Tata Consultancy Services, señala: "Este hito refleja lo que es posible cuandolaingeniería avanzadase combina con capacidades digitalesy una profunda colaboración en el ecosistema para acercar lainnovación disruptivaa la realidad. En TCS, estamos orgullosos de apoyar a Rolls-Royce en la aceleración de lapropulsión con hidrógenomediante nuestra experiencia en ingeniería, sistemas y software. Este logro marca unavance significativo, demostrando no solo la viabilidad del hidrógeno, sino también la preparación del sector para convertir la ambición en ejecución". Eldoctor Nigel Moss, responsable del sector aeroespacial en el centro científico delHealth and Safety Executive(Reino Unido), afirma: "Durante más de dos décadas, nuestro centro ha desarrollado unaexperiencia líder mundial en la manipulación segura del hidrógeno, y nuestro trabajo en este proyecto incluyó la construcción y prueba de infraestructuras de hidrógeno presurizado para cumplir exigentes requisitos de seguridad y rendimiento. Como siempre en el sector aeroespacial, la seguridad ha sido una prioridad absoluta en este trabajo innovador". Christine Powell,directora interinadel centroNASA Stennis, añade: "La NASA Stennis ha demostrado ser unlugar de referenciaque permite a la industria realizar pruebas especializadas necesarias para sus misiones. Este hito es un gran ejemplo de cómo nuestra infraestructura y experiencia pueden aprovecharse para avanzar en tecnologías futuras y resolver desafíos más amplios". EasyJetyRolls-Royceanunciaron este miércoles que han completado con éxito un importante hito en pruebas con hidrógeno como combustible de aviación, marcando un paso significativo en los esfuerzos por reducir las emisiones del sector.

Dublin, April 29, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The"Top 10 Growth Opportunities in Alternative Fuels, 2026"report has been added toResearchAndMarkets.com'soffering. This study evaluates the top 10 growth opportunities for the alternative fuels market in 2026.Decarbonization, digital transformation, and technology innovation have accelerated significantly in the past 5 years. As the global energy industry undergoes an unprecedented transition, this change brings exciting new growth opportunities to the oil and gas (O&G) sector. However, shifting to a net-zero carbon-emissions future means that pricing, energy security, and industry disruption also pose challenges for many companies. The energy industry has scarcely been out of the news in the past few years, particularly regarding price fluctuations, supply challenges, security issues, environmental impact, and rising global demand. The transport industry accounts for 30% of the global energy demand, of which 90% comprises oil products. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the transport sector amount to about 8 gigatons (GT) a year, about one-seventh of global emissions. Governments worldwide are developing blending mandates for alternative fuels, with demand for biodiesel, renewable diesel, liquified natural gas (LNG), and synthetic fuels (eFuels) expected to double by 2030, driven by technological advancements. Cross-industry convergence is inevitable in the alternative fuels market, with many O&G companies collaborating with airline companies to develop the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) market. Top 10 Growth Opportunities For more information about this report visithttps://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/k1yfix About ResearchAndMarkets.comResearchAndMarkets.com is the world's leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends.

ATHENS, Greece, April 29, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Diana Shipping Inc. (NYSE: DSX), (the “Company”), a global shipping company specializing in the ownership and bareboat charter-in of dry bulk vessels, today announced that, through a separate wholly-owned subsidiary, it has entered into a time charter contract with Refined Success Limited, for one of its Capesize dry bulk vessels, the m/v New York. The gross charter rate is US$27,500 per day, minus a 5.00% commission paid to third parties, for a period until minimum February 1, 2028 up to maximum March 31, 2028. The charter is expected to commence on May 1, 2026. The m/v New York is currently chartered, as previously announced, at a gross charter rate of US$17,600 per day, minus a 5.00% commission paid to third parties. The “New York” is a 177,773 dwt Capesize dry bulk vessel built in 2010. The Company also announced that, through a separate wholly-owned subsidiary, it has entered into a time charter contract with Oldendorff GmbH & Co. KG, for one of its Ultramax dry bulk vessels, the m/v DSI Pyxis. The gross charter rate is US$16,000 per day, minus a 5.00% commission paid to third parties, for a period until minimum June 15, 2027 up to maximum August 15, 2027. The charter is expected to commence on May 3, 2026. The m/v DSI Pyxis is currently chartered, as previously announced, at a gross charter rate of US$13,100 per day, minus a 5.00% commission paid to third parties. The “DSI Pyxis” is a 60,362 dwt Ultramax dry bulk vessel built in 2018. The employments of “New York” and “DSI Pyxis” are anticipated to generate approximately US$23.76 million of gross revenue for the minimum scheduled period of the time charters. Diana Shipping Inc.’s fleet currently consists of 36 dry bulk vessels (4 Newcastlemax, 8 Capesize, 4 Post-Panamax, 6 Kamsarmax, 5 Panamax and 9 Ultramax). The Company also expects to take delivery of two methanol dual fuel new-building Kamsarmax dry bulk vessels by the second half of 2027 and the first half of 2028, respectively. As of today, the combined carrying capacity of the Company’s fleet, excluding the two vessels not yet delivered, is approximately 4.1 million dwt, with a weighted average age of 12.43 years. A table describing the current Diana Shipping Inc. fleet can be found on the Company’s website, www.dianashippinginc.com. Information contained on the Company’s website does not constitute part of this press release. About the Company Diana Shipping Inc. is a global provider of shipping transportation services through its ownership and bareboat charter-in of dry bulk vessels. The Company’s vessels are employed primarily on short to medium-term time charters and transport a range of dry bulk cargoes, including such commodities as iron ore, coal, grain and other materials along worldwide shipping routes. Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements Matters discussed in this press release may constitute forward-looking statements. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides safe harbor protections for forward-looking statements in order to encourage companies to provide prospective information about their business. Forward-looking statements include statements concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events or performance, and underlying assumptions and other statements, which are other than statements of historical facts. The Company desires to take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and is including this cautionary statement in connection with this safe harbor legislation. The words “believe,” “anticipate,” “intends,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “project,” “plan,” “potential,” “may,” “should,” “expect,” “pending” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements in this press release are based upon various assumptions, many of which are based, in turn, upon further assumptions, including without limitation, Company management’s examination of historical operating trends, data contained in the Company’s records and other data available from third parties. Although the Company believes that these assumptions were reasonable when made, because these assumptions are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies that are difficult or impossible to predict and are beyond the Company’s control, the Company cannot assure you that it will achieve or accomplish these expectations, beliefs or projections. In addition to these important factors, other important factors that, in the Company’s view, could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements include the strength of world economies and currencies, general market conditions, including fluctuations in charter rates and vessel values, changes in demand for dry bulk shipping capacity, changes in the Company’s operating expenses, including bunker prices, drydocking and insurance costs, the market for the Company’s vessels, availability of financing and refinancing, changes in governmental rules and regulations or actions taken by regulatory authorities, tariff policies and other trade restrictions, potential liability from pending or future litigation, general domestic and international political conditions, including risks associated with the continuing conflict between Russia and Ukraine and related sanctions, potential disruption of shipping routes due to accidents or political events, including the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East, vessel breakdowns and instances of off-hires and other factors. Please see the Company’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for a more complete discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties. The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statement, or to make any other forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Corporate Contact:Margarita VeniouChief Corporate Development, Governance &Communications Officer and SecretaryTelephone: + 30-210-9470-100Email:mveniou@dianashippinginc.comWebsite:www.dianashippinginc.comX: @DianashipInvestor Relations/Media Contact:Nicolas Bornozis / Daniela GuerreroCapital Link, Inc.230 Park Avenue, Suite 1540New York, N.Y. 10169Tel.: (212) 661-7566Email:diana@capitallink.com

Ubicación del esapcio de la ZAL Port donde se situará la futura hidrogenera./ Port de Barcelona Cristina Buesa ElPort de Barcelonaha dado un paso decisivo ensu estrategia de descarbonizaciónal adjudicar aSympH2onyla construcción y explotación de lafutura hidrogenera del recinto. El proyecto, licitado en septiembre del año pasado, supondrá una inversión superior a los 20 millones de euros, según han informado desde la autoridad portuaria y se trata de unainfraestructura clave para el suministro de hidrógeno verde a vehículos y maquinaria portuaria. La nueva instalación se ubicará en unaparcela de unos 7.000 metros cuadrados en la ZAL Prat, junto a las principalesáreas logísticas de El Prat de Llobregat y la Zona Franca. Su puesta en marcha permitirá abastecer a camiones, autobuses y equipos portuarios, "actuando como palanca para laprogresiva transformación de flotashacia modelos de cero emisiones", aseguran. El proyecto, adjudicado en el consejo de administración de este miércoles, va más allá de una hidrogenera convencional. Incluye tanto laproduccióncomo elsuministrode hidrógeno verde, además de soluciones integrales de movilidad. Entre ellas, unidades móviles para repostar maquinaria que no pueda desplazarse hasta la planta y la posibilidad de conexión futura mediante canalizaciones a grandes consumidores industriales. En términos técnicos, la planta contará con unacapacidad de electrólisis de 3,1 MW en 2030, ampliable hasta 6,2 MW en 2032. A pleno rendimiento, podrá producir hasta 540 toneladas anuales de hidrógeno verde. Este se generará in situ mediante electrolizadoresalimentados con energía 100% renovable, garantizando un combustible neutro en emisiones, en línea con los criterios ya fijados en el concurso público lanzado en 2025. Accesos a la ZAL del Port de Barcelona, la primera plataforma logística que se construyó en el Estado./ Zowy Voeten La concesión, otorgada por unperiodo de 40 años prorrogables, incluye también la urbanización de los accesos y la construcción de una rotonda para facilitar la operativa de entrada y salida de vehículos. La adjudicación consolida el papel de SympH2ony comosocio tecnológico del puerto en la transición energética. La compañía,creada en 2024 por Toyota Tsusho Europe y Messer, tiene como objetivo acelerar la implantación del hidrógeno en sectores difíciles de electrificar, como el transporte pesado y la logística. Su propuesta en Barcelona se enmarca en una estrategia más amplia para desarrollar unecosistema europeo del hidrógeno, combinando producción, infraestructuras de repostaje, vehículos de pila de combustible y servicios asociados para la gestión de flotas. La nueva hidrogenerase integrará en elPlan de Transición Energética del puerto, junto a iniciativas como laelectrificación de muelles(Nexigen) y los proyectos fotovoltaicos en la ZAL. Con ello, el enclave busca consolidarse comohub regional de producción y distribución de hidrógeno verdey avanzar en la sustitución de combustibles fósiles en la cadena logística. Noticias relacionadas y más La infraestructura, cuyaentrada en operación estaba prevista inicialmente para 2028 tras la licitación, se perfila como una de las primeras de estas características en el sistema portuario español, tanto por su capacidad como por su modelo integral de producción y suministro. Suscríbete para seguir leyendo

ALMERÍA 29 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS) - La Autoridad Portuaria de Almería (APA) ha puesto el foco en la estación marítima con la adjudicación de la redacción del proyecto básico y de ejecución y la asistencia técnica y dirección facultativa para llevar a cabo su rehabilitación energética y la de sus edificios anexos, lo que redundará en el refuerzo de la eficiencia energética, la mejora de las instalaciones portuarias para pasajeros y la modernización del Puerto de Almería en línea con las actuaciones de integración del puerto con la ciudad. Tal y como ha detallado la APA en un comunicado, esta adjudicación ha sido contratada a la UTE Ferrer-GMÁSP por 253.782 euros (IVA incluido) y un plazo de tres meses para la elaboración de los proyectos y de un año, a partir de la firma del acta de comprobación de replanteo, para la dirección y asistencia técnica de obra. Con este proyecto y la construcción de una terminal exclusiva para el pasaje de cruceros en el suroeste de la estación, que actualmente está en fase de licitación, la autoridad portuaria ha asegurado que "reducirá el consumo energético y las emisiones de CO2, dotará de mayor calidad a los servicios al pasaje, a la vez que potenciará la estética arquitectónica de los edificios a través de un sistema envolvente que modernizará sus fachadas". En suma, el proyecto de rehabilitación energética de la estación marítima y la de sus edificios anexos abarca concretamente cuatro edificaciones, en concreto, la estación marítima, con una superficie construida de 8.244 metros cuadrados (m2); el edificio de servicios múltiples de 647 m2 y dos edificios anexos de 481 m2 y 244 m2, respectivamente. La Guardia Civil intercepta en la A-7 un camión que circulaba cargado y con 26 defectos técnicos de gravedad Transportes asegura que al puente del Centenario en Sevilla le queda "menos de un 10% de obra y garantiza la seguridad China ordena a sus compañías energéticas afectadas que ignoren las sanciones impuestas por EEUU Lerma (Burgos) congrega a miles de personas en su 64ª edición de la Feria de Maquinaria Agrícola Detenido un hombre por la muerte violenta de una mujer en Esplugues de Llobregat (Barcelona)

MADRID 29 Abr. (EUROPA PRESS) - Exolum, en colaboración con Servernside Carbon y Técnicas Reunidas, trabajará en el desarrollo de una terminal de almacenamiento de dióxido de carbono (CO2) en Avonmouth, en el puerto de Bristol (Reino Unido), con la previsión de que entre en operación a partir de 2031, según ha informado este miércoles. Una vez operativa, la terminal podrá gestionar hasta seis millones de toneladas de CO2 al año: una capacidad equivalente al volumen de emisiones anuales del suroeste de Inglaterra y que será "clave para garantizar la continuidad de la actividad industrial y reforzar su competitividad en el proceso de descarbonización", afirma la empresa española en un comunicado. La futura instalación será el primer hub de CO2 a gran escala del país diseñado con un modelo "totalmente flexible y escalable", que permitirá el transporte por ferrocarril y por barco, lo que contribuirá a "acelerar su despliegue", explica. Así, añade, la infraestructura permitirá a la industria del suroeste de Inglaterra, las Midlands y el sur de Gales conectarse al ecosistema de captura, transporte y almacenamiento de carbono (CCUS) del Reino Unido, con lo que se facilitará su adaptación a "un entorno cada vez más exigente en materia de descarbonización". Finalmente, esta también podrá contribuir al desarrollo de nuevos sectores (como centros de datos regionales con demanda de energía libre de emisiones o proyectos de combustible de aviación sostenible) y ofrecerá "una solución eficiente para que industrias intensivas en energía puedan capturar, transportar y almacenar sus emisiones". Para llevar a cabo el proyecto, Exolum ha constituido la sociedad Exolum 7CO2, que será la responsable de la inversión y el desarrollo del proyecto: proporcionará recursos técnicos y humanos y aplicará su modelo operativo. En la alianza formarán parte Servernside Carbon -como asesor estratégico, cooperando en la interlocución con las administraciones públicas y los principales actores industriales e impulsando iniciativas de captura como servicio y proyectos vinculados al desarrollo regional de combustible de aviación sostenible- y Técnicas Reunidas -que actuará como socio de ingeniería de la terminal y participará en el desarrollo de proyectos asociados-. "A través de Exolum 7CO2, ponemos nuestra experiencia en logística energética al servicio de la industria para desarrollar una terminal de CO2 independiente, abierta y escalable, alineada con los más altos estándares operativos", sostiene el vicepresidente sénior de Exolum Global Energy Logistics, Nacho Casajús. Por su parte, el cofundador de Severnside Carbon, Paul Davies, señala que la incorporación de Exolum "supone un paso decisivo para generar confianza entre los emisores regionales y acelerar la inversión en captura de carbono y nuevas industrias asociadas", mientras que el director de track (unidad de negocio de bajas emisiones de carbono de Técnicas Reunidas), Joaquín Pérez de Ayala, afirma que el proyecto refuerza su "compromiso con la descarbonización industrial". CCOO y UGT convocan más de 100 manifestaciones por el 1 de Mayo para clamar por la vivienda y los salarios Vox admite que la prórroga de alquileres que rechazó en el Congreso beneficiaba "puntualmente" a inquilinos Planas entiende que haya quien "ve con preocupación" Mercosur y apuesta por asegurar "igualdad de condiciones" Naturgy comunica una filtración de datos que afecta a un 3% de sus clientes en España Sánchez celebra la entrada en vigor de Mercosur como una de las "mayores áreas de libre comercio del mundo"

SHANGHAI,April 29, 2026/PRNewswire/ --Envision Energy, a global leader in green technology, today announced its participation in the pilot phase of the AEA Ammonia Certification System, a global certification system designed by theAmmonia Energy Association(AEA) to facilitate the transparent, trusted international trade of low-emission ammonia. The AEA Ammonia Certification System is a voluntary system that allows producers, traders, and consumers to demonstrate key environmental attributes – namely carbon footprint and origin – using independently verified data. The AEA Ammonia Registry, built and operated by MiQ, provides participants with a digital infrastructure that enables secure data transfer, transparency, and traceability across the ammonia supply chain, from certificate generation, through trading, to retirement. The AEA Ammonia Certification System is a voluntary system that allows producers, traders, and consumers to demonstrate key environmental attributes – namely carbon footprint and origin – using independently verified data. The AEA Ammonia Registry, built and operated by MiQ, provides participants with a digital infrastructure that enables secure data transfer, transparency, and traceability across the ammonia supply chain, from certificate generation, through trading, to retirement. The pilot supports three distinct chain of custody models — Segregated, Mass Balance, and Book & Claim. Envision uses Book & Claim to address the logistical challenges of long-distance physical delivery and facilitate the growth of a global green ammonia market. Book & Claim enables trading of environmental attributes without physical transport, reducing cost and emissions and effectively decoupling the green attributes from the physical supply chain. Similar models already exist in renewable power and SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuel) and this is the first application for ammonia. "We are excited to join the AEA Ammonia Certification System and use its Book & Claim feature to streamline the global distribution of verified low-emission molecules." said Frank Yu, Senior Vice President of Envision Energy. "This allows our customers to confidently decarbonize their operations regardless of their geographical proximity to our production hubs, accelerating the adoption of green ammonia as a bankable, net-zero commodity." Trevor Brown, Executive Director of the AEA, said "we are delighted to welcome Envision as one of the first participants of the AEA Ammonia Certification System pilot. We look forward to demonstrating with them the ability of our system's robust chain of custody models to meet diverse customer requirements in the dynamic new markets that we see emerging for low-emission ammonia across the Asia-Pacific region." In March 2026, Envision completed the first end-to-end commercial delivery of green ammonia from its Net Zero Industrial Park in Chifeng, China to the Port of Ulsan, South Korea, validating the entire value chain – from renewable power-to-X businesses to complex international maritime logistics. Envision officially commissioned the world's largest and most advanced AI-powered green hydrogen and ammonia production facility in July 2025, with 320,000 tons annual capacity, achieving real-time optimization and stability at an industrial scale. Frank Yu will present Envision's projects and its participation in the AEA Ammonia Certification System pilot at theWorld Hydrogen 2026 Summitin Rotterdam, Netherlands, on May 19, in a panel session moderated by the AEA's Trevor Brown. Photo -https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/2968738/image3.jpg

“Somehow all of the interesting energy for discussions about the long-range future of humanity is concentrated on the right,”wroteJoshua Achiam, head of mission alignment at OpenAI, on X last year. “The left has completely abdicated their role in this discussion. A decade from now this will be understood on the left to have been a generational mistake.” It’s a provocative claim: that while many sectors of the world, from politics to business to labor, have begun engaging with what artificial intelligence might soon mean for humanity, the left has not. And it seems to be right. As a movement, it appears the left has not been willing to engage seriously with AI — despite its potential to affect the lives and livelihoods of billions of people in ways that would normally make it just the kind of threat, and opportunity, left politics would concern itself with. Instead, the left has, for a mix of reasons good and bad, convinced itself that AI is at the same time something to hate, to mock, and to ignore. “The GenAI sector’s foremost feat of marketing has been the termintelligenceitself,”N+1, one of America’s foremost left publications, recently wrote. “A much more important question: What if China develops time travel or warp speed before we do?” asked Will Menaker, a host of the popular left podcast Chapo Trap House, when responding on X in December to a discussion of the possibilities of advanced AI. “Large language models do not, cannot, and will not ‘understand’ anything at all,”arguedTyler Austin Harper, the self-described “leftist, sort of Marxist-skewing” former professor, nowThe Atlanticstaff writer, last summer. Whether you hate AI or not — that’s up to you. There are many things to dislike about how it’s currently being developed, and valid reasons to dislike its very existence. But disliking something and ignoring it are different activities, and only one positions you to do anything about it. There are, of course, high-profile voices on the left who talk about AI; perhaps the most famous American leftist, Bernie Sanders, is nowwarningabout its dangers. But just as he has often been a lonely voice in Congress, on AI he stands apart from those within his own part of the political spectrum. Take another high-profile voice associated with the left, at least when it comes to tech, Cory Doctorow, one of the world’s most esteemed sci-fi and technology writers. In December, Doctorow published thetext of a speechgiven to the University of Washington called “The Reverse-Centaur’s Guide to Criticizing AI.” His purpose was to “explain what I think is going on here with this AI bubble, and sort out the bullshit from the material reality.” At its heart is the claim that “AI is just a word guessing program, because all it does is calculate the most probable word to go next.” In case you missed the point, Doctorow repeated it elsewhere in plainer words: AI is merely a “spicy autocomplete machine.” This idea, that large-language models merely produce statistically plausible word sequences based on training data, without having any idea about what the words refer to, has become the baseline across much of the left-intellectual landscape. Thanks to it, fundamental questions about AI’s capabilities, now and in the future, are considered settled. The publications that play a key (if diminished) role in the left-wing argumentative ecosystem have converged on this line. Here are four. The Nation: “AI only ‘knows’ anything in the same way that a calculator knows that 2 plus 3 is 5, which is why it cannot be counted on to learn and develop in the same way that a human would.” The New Republic: “Generative AI chatbots simply ‘predict’ the next word in a sequence using methods that require vast computational resources, data, and labor. . . they cannot ‘think’ or ‘understand’ language. . .” The New York Review of Books: “Chatbots regurgitate and rearrange fragments mined from all the text previously written. As plagiarists, they obscure and randomize their sources but do not transcend them.” N+1: “Large language models, which promise so much today, do not offer judgment, let alone intelligence, but unrivaled pattern-processing power, based on a vast corpus of precedents.” Social media reinforces this consensus, so that anyone who turns from theNYRBto Reddit or Bluesky, or the remaining left corners of X, will see the same thing. “Ppl don’t know how ChatGPT works,” one recent post said. “It doesn’t ‘know’ things. It autocompletes sentences. It makes things up.” The post has more than 70,000 likes. As with many left ideas these days, the autocomplete view of AI is a popular adaptation of the views held by critical academics. People who follow AI closely will know this, though they may not know how deeply embedded in left discourse in particular these views have become. “If you take the phrase ‘artificial intelligence,’ in a sentence like ‘does AI understand?’ or ‘can AI help us make better decisions?’, and you replace it with ‘mathy maths’ or ‘SALAMI’ [an acronym for Systematic Approaches to Learning Algorithms and Machine Inferences], it’s immediately obvious how ridiculous it is. You know, does the SALAMI understand?” Theaboveis from Emily Bender, a University of Washington computational linguist and the person probably most responsible for the autocomplete view and its adoption in left circles. Except she gives it another name, the “stochastic parrots” hypothesis, which explains the impression of intelligence that LLMs offer in the immediately graspable image of a bird that talks but doesn’t know anything. This was a stroke of mimetic genius: the 2021paperit was coined for, written by Bender with Timnit Gebru, Angelina McMillan-Major, and Margaret Mitchell, has been cited around 8,000 times. From there, it’s echoed throughThe NationandN+1and Bluesky, sometimes without attribution. In 2023, when chatbots were more toy than tool, AI-as-autocomplete was maybe a defensible position. But now? That view takes next-token prediction, the technical process at the heart of large-language models, and makes it sound like a simple thing — so simple it’s deflating. And taken in isolation, next-token prediction is a relatively simple process: do some math to predict and then output what word is likely to come next, given everything that’s come before it, based on the huge amounts of human writing the system has trained on. But when that operation is done millions, and billions, and trillions of times, as it is when these models are trained? Suddenly the simple next token isn’t so simple anymore. Instead, a web of associations grows so complex and so clearly productive it reminds one of Stalin’s apocryphal comment that quantity has a quality all its own. Yet the properties of scale do not often enter the left conversation. Nor do several other factors. Factors such as the likelihood that training a system to predict across millions of different cases forces it to build representations of the world that then, even if you want to reserve the word “understanding” for beings that walk around talking out of mouths, produce outputs that look a lot like understanding. Or that reserving words like “understanding” for humans depends on eliding the fact that nobody agrees on what it or “intelligence” or “meaning” actually mean. And that, if you’re arguing for human uniqueness, you need to show that the trillions of neuron-connections in the brain aren’t also doing next-token prediction, or something like it. As if that weren’t enough, it’s now debated whether “predicts the next token” remains an accurate and comprehensive description of what current systems are up to. Reinforcement learning has shifted the training objective from “what word would appear next on the internet” to “what response would a human prefer” — and today’s reasoning models are trained to work through problems step by step rather than answer in a single pass. Given all this, the fraction of meaning in the autocomplete view of current AI is alarmingly akin to the random, not always incorrect observations about temperature cycles conservatives used to throw around in debates about climate change. In both cases, a debatable description of mechanism is mistaken for proof of (in)significance. CO2 makes up only 0.04% of the atmosphere, which sounds much too little for it to drive global warming — until you learn CO2’s molecular structure lets it absorb infrared radiation in ways nitrogen and oxygen can’t. Similarly, “AI just predicts the next token” sounds deflating — until you consider what predicting the next token involves and start to ask if there’s really such a difference between predicting and learning. Indeed, it’s a little disturbing how closely this discourse follows climate-debate patterns set down 20 years ago by the right. Either a man-made phenomenon isn’t happening or, if it is, it’s not important. The common words in those articles, “just,” “simply,” “only,” are there because the argument doesn’t stand up without them. As it has for conservatives and climate change, dismissing a phenomenon that is already showing evidence of significant impact on the world puts a fair amount of epistemic stress on the people who do it. If AI is just “spicy autocomplete,” then what’s responsible for the current frenzy of attention? Autocorrect could explain away pre-ChatGPT interest levels without too much trouble. But it doesn’t come close to accounting for the trillions now invested, the data centers appearing around every corner, or the daily reports of AI automating task after task. Another piece of framing is therefore needed to shore the argument up. What’s responsible for the AI frenzy? False consciousness and trickery. “Artificial intelligence, if we’re being frank, is a con: a bill of goods you are being sold to line someone’s pockets,” write Bender and Alex Hanna in their bookThe AI Con, published in 2025 to grateful reviews in literary and intellectual quarters. In this view, the money and attention flowing into AI aren’t reflections of anything real, they’re simply the con in action. This belief is echoed in Doctorow’s essay. To him, tech CEOs are hucksters trying to Ponzi in more investment. “The primary goal is to keep the market convinced that your company will continue to grow, and to remain convinced until the next bubble comes along,” he writes. Of course, the 5-10x annual increases in AI lab revenues, that ChatGPT was the most rapidly adopted consumer technology in history, that consumer is another word for ordinary person and not tycoon — nowhere do these facts enter the picture. What’s left is a view of capitalism not as a system that can unfairly externalize harm, or as a negative system altogether, but as essentially a fake one. This impression is enhanced by the bizarre way the issue of AI taking human jobs comes up in these discussions. The left hates tech CEOs and knows they’re out to get the ordinary worker, but the left also thinks the CEOs are idiots and can’t actually pull it off. Thus, Doctorow claims, “Bosses are mass-firing productive workers and replacing them with janky AI, and when the janky AI is gone, no one will be able to find and re-hire most of those workers, we’re going to go from dysfunctional AI systems to nothing.” Or, in Bender and Hanna’s words, “AI is not going to replace your job. But it will make your job a lot shittier.” The picture is practically Cubist: management is trying to fill your role — with something that’s not real and can’t do it. Right at this mystifying point is where some understandable reasons for skepticism enter. It’s not as if the tech world hasn’t spent billions of dollars on iffy technologies before. Matt Bruenig, the left writer, founder of the People’s Policy Project, and someone who doesn’t share the autocorrect view of AI, explained those reasons sympathetically in an email. “The tech sector has a credibility problem as well because, in the decade or so prior to LLMs,” he wrote, “it seemed to be primarily fixated on blockchain and cryptocurrencies which do appear to be completely useless, at least as far as production goes.” It is hard to argue with that. Likewise, there are clear contradictions in how tech talks about AI. Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh, director of the AI: Futures and Responsibility Programme at the University of Cambridge and someone who has decades of experience trying to discuss advanced AI in left-leaning intellectual circles, described the skepticism that results from these contradictions. “CEOs say, ‘We think our technology might destroy the world,’ and then they go and build it,” he said. “To people coming to this topic fresh, those actions don’t match up with the belief. If they think what they’re doing is destroying the world, why are they doing it? Either they’re complete psychopaths or they don’t really believe that.” There are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of the motivations and claims of the people in charge of AI companies. The question that the left seems determined to avoid, however, is why that necessarily means you should dismiss the underlying technology, especially given the evidence so far. The gap between what AI systems can do now and what previously hyped technologies ever delivered is already vast. Crypto, for all its flaws,becauseof all its flaws, never got a fraction of the energy and attention from non-boosters AI now gets; to take another example, the metaverse remains a joke to everyone except for Mark Zuckerberg. But try to point this out in these circles and it might not go well. In May, Ethan Mollick, a Wharton professor and a measured voice on AI, announced he was limiting his posts on Bluesky because “talking about AI here is just really fraught.” In reply, a reasonably well-known left journalist said, “Maybe we can chase him off the goddamn earth too.” Ó hÉigeartaigh, for his part, said he regularly gets called a useful idiot running interference for Big Tech. No one person designed the system of buttressed beliefs that’s built up across left-intellectual discourse; no doubt it grew together because each has trouble carrying weight on its own. But it does come from somewhere. As the Bender and Mollick and Ó hÉigeartaigh examples suggest, the closer to academia one gets, it seems, the more surrounded by this thinking — which is a bit strange, since, as the many alarmed reports of students handing over their studies to ChatGPT indicate, the university is one of the places AI has already affected most. On the other hand, it’s a bit less strange if you consider it as an example of an intellectual war that’s escaping into the world from academia. Here Bender is again the way to understanding. Her view of AI is based on a firm belief about the nature of knowledge that comes from her work in linguistics. “The language modeling task, because it only uses form as training data, cannot in principle lead to learning of meaning,” she writes in one paper, meaning, basically, that because LLMs are disembodied, they cannot connect words to the things in the world they describe — which is a problem, since connecting words to things is the essence of meaning. The key term in that claim is “in principle.” It means that no amount of improvement in LLM ability could ever change the claim, and indeed, as LLMs have improved, Bender has shown little sign of altering her view. This description of how AI works is in other words more a philosophical definition than an empirical description. That’s why the main energy of her work lately is to reframe — to drag things from process and output back to philosophy. That’s why “understanding” becomes “parroting,” “neural networks” become “mathy maths,” “LLMs” become “synthetic text extruding machines.” She who best changes the terms wins the debate is the approach, and Bender has in many ways done just that. (Of course, that “Can mathy maths help us make better decisions?” is a perfectly cogent question, to which the answer is almost certainly yes, shows the limits of this approach.) Bender is entitled to her philosophy. She knows what she’s committing to and what risks she’s running. And, to be fair, she doesn’t think that AI is always useless. “There are applications of machine learning that are well scoped,” she’s written. “These include such everyday things as spell-checkers.” But, for the most part, the people who parrot the parrots hypothesis thirdhand don’t know this. They don’t know they’ve signed up in a long-running philosophical war. They think they are talking about capabilities, about scientific measurement. And that mismatch is leading them into worrying places. In part, they’re not aware of this because an opaque sorting has happened in academic AI research in recent years. “The people who are most optimistic about rapid progress,” said Ó hÉigeartaigh, have “disproportionately seen industry as a place to do their work, in part because you need a lot of compute and resources to do it.” The bullish ones have left academia, which means those who remain are by definition more bearish. Academic practices play into this process too. Publishing in journals requires peer review, and peer review is slow. As Zvi Mowshowitz, who writes perhaps the world’s most exhaustive newsletter on AI, said, “Nobody in real academia can adhere to their norms and actually be in the conversation, because by the time you’re publishing, everything you were trying to say is irrelevant,” a generation or two behind the cutting edge. Another incentive for researchers to leave for industry, then. This splitting of a field that once would have been forced to coexist has probably made industry too optimistic about the pace of progress and made academia too skeptical. That then skews what’s heard by people who listen to academia but not industry — and nearly everyone with that tendency, today, is on the left. They hear only the skeptics, unaware that real science is taking place in the AI labs too (or especially), done by PhD’d researchers they might trust if only they sat in a faculty office. How long can this situation hold? The example of climate change shows such attitudes can linger for quite a long time in a rump group dedicated to them. So perhaps it’s better to ask how long these attitudes will continue to spread outside that group. Here, things look brighter. Epistemic distress is not the whole story of the left-of-center world. Though sometimes you can hear parrots squawking in the background, the left-leaning, general-interest outlets that tend to have New York in the name —TheNew YorkerandNew YorkandThe New York Times, for instance — are much more willing to consider a wide range of views about what’s happening with AI. And AI is entering left electoral discussion in a meaningful way. The Biden administration took AI seriously in its last years. Bernie Sanders is suddenly frantic. “Despite the extraordinary importance of this issue and the speed at which it is progressing, AI is getting far too little discussion in Congress,” hewroteinThe Guardianrecently. “Right now, there is an amazing lack of political discourse for something that will be a very high priority later,” a Sanders adviser and founder of More Perfect UniontoldAxiosthis fall. A strategist for Zohran Mamdani said that “every candidate should be embracing an aggressive vision” on AI regulation. On the whole, then, and refreshingly, given the low view of politicians these days, the politicians left of center are in better shape on “take AI seriously, please” than the intellectuals. Alex Bores, a New York state assemblymember running for Congress on a platform heavy on AI regulation, ascribes that to daily contact with the public. When people come up to him now, he hears worry about AI’s capabilities, not dismissal of them. “We’re hearing it from our constituents. This is a concern that is brought up to me,” he said. “When you see things happening quickly, when you see your neighbors being impacted, our job is to take action. This has moved very, very quickly from the theoretical to the real.” Still, despite the relative alertness from political quarters, it’s hard to avoid the impression that the right is more alert, both to AI’s opportunity and its danger. That doesn’t mean they are masters of wise AI policy. Both the accelerationists and the industrialists influential in the current administration show it is alarmingly often the opposite. It simply means that, between them and the Steve Bannon anti-tech wing, more or less the entirety of the movement agrees AI is not a fake technology. One key sign: conservative intellectual magazines are in better shape than their left counterparts, generally blending a reasonably accurate grasp of the technology with concerns about social costs, along with — and this is something missing from nearly any portion of the left — some hope for what AI might mean for humanity. Take this, fromCommentary: “As we learn to live with AI, I believe we’ll become more comfortable with the notion that these models ‘think.’ After all, the LLMs are getting better all the time.” OrAmerican Affairs: “AI may serve as a powerful force multiplier for a well-honed native intelligence, or as a substitute for developing it in the first place.” And there’s really nothing on the left compared to the philosophical depth with whichThe New Atlantishas approached AI over the last few years. There are many costs of the left-intellectual world not taking AI seriously, and they will be paid by many quarters — with the left first in line. As Achiamput it, “when there’s a Big Problem that is going to be top of mind for everyone in a decade, whoever is first to the Big Problem gets to set all the rules for discussion and debate about it. In politics it’s a miss if you sit that out.” More concretely, not taking AI seriously might blind the left to its political uses. “One possible concern might be the left-wing abstaining from using the tools when the right-wing does not, in politics, campaigning, policy,” Bruenig worried. There is already some data to this effect: 44% of Republican political consultants use AI for work daily, compared to 28% of Democratic ones, according to the American Association of Political Consultants. Then there are the costs beyond the left — costs to the public and policy. The left’s current stance leads to a focus not on dealing with AI by regulating it wisely or preparing for it but on popping the economic bubble, which here is a baked-in fact of history and not a possibility of the future. After all, if AI is fake, nothing needs to be done except dispel the myth that it is real. And sometimes even that isn’t required: the bubble will pop itself; AI development is always already stopping. “The AI bubble . . . will burst,”N+1writes. “The technology’s dizzying pace of improvement, already slowing with the release of GPT-5, will stall.” This stirring call to non-action was published in fall 2025 — in other words, weeks before the release of the three models, Gemini 3, GPT 5.1, and Opus 4.5, that pulled AI capable of changing daily life from the future into the present. (Since it must be said: it is entirely possible a bubble-popping crash happens — but even that likely won’t stop AI development.) So it’s probably not ideal that just before what might — or might not — be the moment of greatest job dispossession in history, or of democratic dispossession, or worse, or better, part of the group historically most concerned with such things is plugging its ears. What should it be doing instead? There’s a huge amount of open room for left contributions to shaping the near and far futures. These are more the subject for another essay, but it’s worth gesturing to a few, in order from most concrete to most exotic. On the near future, Dean W. Ball, until recently one of the White House’s key AI policy writers, is adamant that by not taking AI abilities seriously, the left is going to miss important ways of improving government. “The left persuasion requires a state that’s good at doing things,” he said. “If I were the left, the first thing I would be doing” would be to ask, “How can we use this to massively advance state capacity and massively expand the ability of the government to deliver public services to people?” Bores thinks AI offers an opportunity to speed the US to cleaner energy. “We desperately need to upgrade our electric grid,” he said. “Now we have a system where you have basically unlimited private capital willing to invest in our electric grid, but the incentives right now are to turn on or buy power privately from old coal or oil places, because it’s just quicker to get approval for that than it is to hook up a renewable source.” As for the far or more exotic futures: what’s the best shape to universal basic income if it’s needed? What if it’s wanted? Can treaties be designed to slow a race to superintelligence and reduce the risk of a catastrophe? What is the ethical view of post-humanism? Hardly any on the left is considering these questions in ways worth agreeing or disagreeing with. Aaron Bastani, the hard left British journalist, is one exception. His 2019 bookFully Automated Luxury Communismenvisions the ways technological development could eventually abolish material scarcity and free humanity from toil. “The demand would be a 10- or 12-hour working week, a guaranteed social wage, universally guaranteed housing, education, healthcare and so on,” hesaidin 2015. Far from revealing a thrall to capitalism, these attitudes reflect a belief in industrial power that goes all the way back to Karl Marx. But who’s listening? Instead, you sometimes get the discomfiting sense you’re watching ghosts — people who were so unprepared for the future, because they were so certain they knew it, that they were already out of it. Tempering that feeling is one thing the AI observers spoken to here emphasized: it isn’t yet too late to change direction. How much time, who knows. Ball, who doesn’t believe AI poses a strong risk to human civilization, thinks “there’ll always be time” to catch up. Mowshowitz, who does believe that, said, “I don’t think it’s too late. The world yearns for more and better thoughts.” Ó hÉigeartaigh was more urgent. “There’s potentially a narrowing window to really engage on this,” he said. “It would be really nice to get perspectives across the political spectrum just in case this giant transformation in human society does come along.” Share

​​La scommessa industriale e il primato petrolchimico, le lotte operaie e l’ambiente avvelenato, lo sradicamento delle fabbriche, la ripartenza ad ostacoli. Cent’anni dopo il decollo del primo polo metallurgico e navale, i leader sindacali nazionali di Cgil, Cisl e Uil convergeranno a Porto Marghera per un Primo Maggio di memoria e speranza. Un secolo di storia economica e sociale ad un battito del cuore da Venezia, un progetto radicale senza precedenti nel Paese. Concepito da Piero Foscari, deputato della destra liberale, realizzato dall’élite finanziaria veneziana - Giovanni Volpi di Misurata, Giovanni Stucky, Nicolò Papadopoli Aldobrandini - con l’avallo della Banca Commerciale Italiana e il robusto sostegno dello Stato. Corre il 23 luglio 1917, l’annus horribilis di Caporetto, quando il governo Boselli autorizza la Società Porto Industriale all’avvio dei lavori nell’area paludosa dei Bottenighi, espropriando nel contempo un quarto del territorio di Mestre: è il prologo alla bonifica dei terreni lagunari (oltre quindici milioni di metri quadrati strappati al “salso”), all’escavo di canali artificiali, alla costruzione di reti stradali e raccordi ferroviari. Un disegno ambizioso e controverso quello di Volpi, influente tecnocrate nel Ventennio fascista, deciso a «sospingere Venezia nei tempi moderni» superandone l’esclusiva vocazione turistica. Che diventa realtà negli anni Venti, con la nascita del primo cantiere (Breda), l’inaugurazione del Canale Vittorio Emanuele tra la stazione marittima e Marghera (1922), l’apertura al traffico di merci e materie prime (1926), l’insediamento di una cinquantina di stabilimenti preceduto dall’accorpamento al capoluogo dei quattro comuni investiti dagli impianti. Che attinge alla manodopera rurale e procede per gradi. Dapprima le lavorazioni di base, la distillazione del carbon fossile e la produzione di vetro, i fertilizzanti e gli anticrittogamici, le raffinerie, i depositi di oli minerali. In seguito, a partire dagli anni Trenta, lo sviluppo della meccanica, i metalli non ferrosi, l’ammoniaca sintetica per concimi e il ventaglio di produzioni minori che si valgono della centrale termica più potente nel circuito nazionale. Duramente bombardati nel secondo conflitto mondiale, gli stabilimenti sono rapidamente ricostruiti e sorge anzi una seconda zona industriale, attraversata dal canale culminante nella Bocca di Malamocco. Un boom frenetico e per molti versi selvaggio (il rialzo del piano campagna includerà l’interramento di rifiuti tossici) che moltiplica la popolazione a Mestre (90 mila abitanti), Marghera (25 mila) e nei borghi limitrofi di Favaro, Zelarino, Chirignago. Un’espansione di ciminiere e fonderie che garantisce profitti colossali ai monopolisti e negli anni Sessanta si traduce in duecento aziende attive con 40 mila lavoratori (dal proletariato urbano ai “metalmezzadri” provenienti dalla provincia) per un transito annuo superiore ai 7 milioni di tonnellate, invidiato dai maggiori terminal europei. È l’età del conflitto nell’oasi rossa del Veneto bianco: scioperi massicci, lotte unitarie per un salario equo (le «cinquemila lire uguali per tutti»), difesa della salute, denuncia dell’inquinamento. Toni Negri, Massimo Cacciari, Gianni De Michelis: Potere operaio che mobilita gli studenti ai cancelli e sfida il riformismo della sinistra storica. Il miraggio della “terza zona siderurgica”, persino, progettata su tremila ettari, rimasta sostanzialmente sulla carta, che si aggrappa al record di traffico marittimo (1974) ma già sconta l’inversione di tendenza dei primi anni Ottanta. Un decennio insanguinato dagli omicidi di Sergio Gori e Giuseppe Taliercio, dirigenti del Petrolchimico, vittime delle Brigate Rosse; sgretolato negli assetti societari produttivi. È il declino di un modello gigantista, simboleggiato dal processo ai “Signori della chimica”, imputati per la morte di 157 lavoratori di Montedison ed Enichem, esposti agli effetti cancerogeni del cloruro di vinile monomero. Fino alla storia recente, alla profonda, faticosa, transizione in atto: la Zona logistica semplificata (2020) istituita per favorire il rilancio con incentivi fiscali e amministrativi, lo spegnimento della torcia nella raffineria nel 2023, l’incompiuta bonifica del suolo contaminato. Così i grandi gruppi cedono il passo, il terziario avanza e l’occupazione arretra a 12 mila addetti con 120 aziende spalmate su 2mila ettari. Così le rappresentanze dei lavoratori respingono la «monocoltura turistica» in nome di una «manifattura sostenibile».

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition. Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off). Archives This is are-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler I am finalizing a textbook on climate risk and am posting chapters as I finish them. I’d previously posted chapters aboutembedded energyandphysical climate risk; this post is a chapter on transition risk, the economic and social risks of the transition to a clean-energy economy. In the context of climate risk, transition risk encompasses the economic and social risks associated with a shift towards a low-carbon economy. Such an effort would fundamentally reshape our world and create critical financial uncertainty for assets and industries tied to the old, carbon-intensive system. Reaching “net zero” is the ultimate goal of most climate policy. This means reducing greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible, with any remaining emissions that are too difficult or costly to eliminate are canceled out by an equivalent amount of “negative emissions” — processes that actively pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. These negative emissions are the “net” part of net zero and it acknowledges the practical reality that some sectors, like long-distance air travel or ocean shipping, may be incredibly difficult to decarbonize in the near future. What are these negative emissions technologies? The two primary methods discussed are Direct Air Capture (DAC), which uses machines to filter carbon dioxide directly from the air, and Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Sequestration (BECCS), which involves growing crops, burning them for energy, and capturing and burying the resulting carbon dioxide. However, both technologies face significant hurdles, including high costs, large energy requirements, and, in the case of BECCS, immense land use needs that could compete with food production and biodiversity. Once we reach net zero,global temperatures will stabilize— although they won’t recover to pre-industrial levels for tens of thousands of years. Getting the climate to actually cool on time scales we care about (decades to centuries) would would require pulling even more carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, or deploying some type of climate engineering approach like injecting aerosols into the stratosphere. The scale of the net zero transformation means that reaching net zero will fundamentally overhaul vast parts of the global economy. Many big sectors of our economy — energy, transportation, industry, agriculture — must be reshaped, and that reshaping will create enormous opportunities as well as painful dislocations. The transition to a low-carbon economy is not simply a matter of swapping one energy source for another; it requires rebuilding infrastructure, retraining workers, and redirecting trillions of dollars in investment. Some industries are poised to prosper. Renewable energy is the most obvious example: in 2025, the world added over 700 GW of new capacity, and sustaining that pace for decades will require ongoing investment in manufacturing, installation, and maintenance of wind turbines and solar panels. The profits for those well positioned will be enormous. The electric vehicle industry and its supply chains — from battery manufacturers to mining operations for lithium and cobalt — also stand to grow dramatically. Companies that build and manage electrical grid infrastructure, including new transmission lines and energy storage systems, will see surging demand. So too will firms specializing in energy efficiency, building retrofits, and emerging technologies like green hydrogen and sustainable aviation fuels. Even agriculture could see new revenue streams as farmers are paid to adopt practices that sequester carbon in soil. Other industries, however, face serious decline. Fossil fuel producers (coal, oil, and natural gas) confront the prospect of their core product becoming obsolete, stranding assets worth trillions of dollars. Workers in these industries, from coal miners to oil rig operators, risk losing their livelihoods. The effects extend well beyond extraction: refineries, pipelines, and petrochemical plants all face an uncertain future. The automotive sector will also see significant disruption, as the shift to electric vehicles renders the internal combustion engine and its complex supply chain of transmissions, exhaust systems, and fuel injection components irrelevant. Communities built around these industries may face economic devastation if the transition is not carefully managed. This uneven distribution of winners and losers will create difficult economic and political challenges, particularly during the transition period. The enormous capital investment required — in renewable generation, grid modernization, EV charging infrastructure, industrial retooling, and carbon removal — must be mobilized quickly, creating the risk of supply chain bottlenecks, inflation in key materials, and financial instability. Managing this transition in a way that is both fast enough to meet climate targets and equitable enough to maintain broad public support is one of the defining policy challenges of our time. A core concept in transition risk is the “stranded asset”. A stranded asset is defined as an asset that loses significant value well before the end of its expected economic life. This loss is often sudden and unexpected, driven by changes in market conditions, technology, or policy. While this can happen for many reasons, it is a particularly potent risk in the context of climate change, arising from both direct physical impacts and the economic shifts of the energy transition. For example, here is ahouse that literally fell into the ocean in North Carolina in Sept. 2025: From Zillow.com, this was a pricey house: This house could have stood for another few decades, but it collapsed into the ocean due to coastal erosion that was certainly made worse by sea level rise. When that happened, its value instantly dropped to zero, a stark, nonlinear impact that produced a stranded asset. While physical risks can strand assets, the concept first gained prominence in discussions about transition risk and the fossil fuel industry. Oil and gas companies are valued in the trillions of dollars, with much of that valuation based on their proven reserves—oil and gas that is in the ground and ready to be produced. The transition to a net-zero economy, however, requires that a significant portion of these reserves be “left in the ground” and never burned. Once the market fully accepts that these assets cannot be produced due to climate policies, their value could drop to zero rapidly. The danger of these fossil fuel assets becoming stranded extends far beyond the energy companies themselves. It poses a systemic risk to the broader economy because large swaths of the general public have financial exposure to these companies through their investments, including 401k programs, pensions, and mutual funds. The sudden devaluation of these energy assets could negatively affect many people’s investment and retirement funds, which in turn could have a widespread and devastating impact on the financial security of the general public. This same principle applies to the real estate sector. Consider a commercial office building with a low energy efficiency rating located in a city that passes a new ordinance mandating high-performance standards for all buildings. The owner is suddenly faced with a difficult choice: either undertake a costly, large-scale retrofit to meet the new legal requirements or risk being unable to legally rent the space. If the retrofit is too expensive, the building’s value is stranded, as its primary function — generating rental income — has been eliminated by a policy change aimed at reducing emissions. Another often-overlooked category of risk lies in intangible assets. For companies in the S&P 500, these assets — such as brand value, reputation, and intellectual property (IP) — can represent up to 90% of their total market value. Their non-physical nature makes them vulnerable to rapid devaluation. For example, imagine a company that holds a highly valuable portfolio of patents for a new, efficient diesel engine technology. If a major country or region, aiming to meet climate targets, decides to ban the sale of all new diesel cars, the market for that technology disappears. The intellectual property, once a significant asset, has its value evaporate almost overnight. This is a direct parallel to the risk facing fossil fuel companies, whose reserves — a tangible asset on paper — could become worthless if they cannot be produced. A final critical category that is often overlooked is human capital. Human capital represents the skills, knowledge, and expertise that workers have developed over their careers — assets that can suddenly lose their value in the transition to a low-carbon economy. Consider a mechanic who has spent 30 years perfecting the art of repairing internal combustion engines. This individual has accumulated expertise in diagnosing problems, understanding the mechanical systems, and maintaining gasoline-powered vehicles. As the world shifts to electric vehicles — which require fundamentally different maintenance skills — this expertise becomes obsolete. The mechanic’s human capital, built over decades, is stranded. The scale of this challenge is enormous. Huge numbers of workers have built their careers in fossil fuel industries. Coal miners possess specialized knowledge about underground operations, safety protocols, and extraction techniques. Oil field workers understand drilling technologies, reservoir management, and petroleum systems. Pipeline operators and refinery technicians have invested years developing skills specific to a carbon-intensive economy. As these industries contract or disappear entirely, these workers face the prospect of their expertise becoming rapidly becoming worthless. This creates both an economic and social crisis. Unlike a stranded power plant that can be written off a company’s books, stranded human capital represents real people with families, mortgages, and communities that depend on their income. A 50-year-old coal miner cannot simply retrain as a software developer overnight. The geographical concentration of these industries compounds the problem — entire regions have been built around fossil fuel extraction, creating communities where the primary source of skilled employment may disappear. The human dimension of stranded assets also creates political risk for the climate transition itself. Workers facing the loss of their livelihoods can become powerful opponents of climate action, slowing the transition for everyone. The fear and anger generated by the transition can translate into political movements that resist or reverse climate policies, as workers vote to protect their immediate economic interests over longer-term economic reality. To better understand and manage transition risks, theTask Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)developed a framework that organizes these risks into four distinct categories. This framework has become the global standard for how companies and investors think about and report climate-related financial risks. Policy and legal risks emerge when governments and courts take action to address climate change. These interventions can fundamentally alter the economic landscape, often with little warning. Carbon pricing represents one of the most direct policy tools. When governments implement a carbon tax or cap-and-trade system, they make it more expensive to emit CO2. For instance, a carbon price of $50 per ton of carbon dioxide would add around $20 to the cost of a barrel of oil, fundamentally changing the economics of oil production and consumption. Companies that built their business models around cheap fossil fuels suddenly face dramatically higher operating costs. Efficiency standards create another layer of policy risk. The UK’s Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard (MEES) provides a clear example: it prohibits landlords from renting properties with poor energy efficiency ratings. A landlord who owns an older, inefficient building faces a stark choice — invest heavily in retrofits or watch the property become unrentable, thereby creating a stranded asset. The legal dimension adds another layer of risk through climate litigation. There are many lawsuits winding through the courts where people are taking fossil fuel companies to court because they have been or expect to be harmed by climate-change-driven extreme weather. This potential climate liability could expose fossil fuel companies to enormous financial risk, much like tobacco companies faced when the health impacts of their products became legally actionable. Technology risk represents the classic story of disruption — when a new, cheaper, or better technology makes existing technologies obsolete. In the climate context, this risk is accelerating as clean technologies have reached critical tipping points. The most dramatic example is the drop in renewable energy costs. Solar power costs have fallen nearly 90% over the past 15 years. In most parts of the world, building a new solar or wind farm is now cheaper and faster than building a new coal or gas plant — even without subsidies. This is rapidly reordering energy economics and energy markets. Coal plants that were expected to operate profitably for 40 years are being shut down early not because of regulation, but because they simply can’t compete economically with cheaper energy sources. Natural gas plants will be next. Electric vehicles present another technological disruption. As battery costs decline and performance improves, EVs are becoming not just environmentally preferable but superior products — they accelerate faster, require less maintenance, and increasingly cost less to own and operate than internal combustion engines. This technological shift threatens not just automakers who are slow to adapt, but entire ecosystems built around gasoline vehicles: gas stations, oil change shops, parts suppliers, and even dealerships whose business models depend heavily on service revenue from complex internal combustion engines. Market risks encompass the shifts in supply, demand, and investor sentiment that can rapidly revalue assets and companies. As an example, demand for transition minerals like lithium, cobalt, and copper is soaring as the world builds batteries and renewable energy infrastructure. Companies that secured supply chains for these materials early have gained significant competitive advantages, while those arriving late face production bottlenecks and inflated costs. Conversely, demand for thermal coal is collapsing in many regions, leaving coal mining companies with reserves that may never be extracted. Perhaps more significant is the shift in investor perceptions. For decades, oil companies were valued based on their proven reserves — the oil and gas they had rights to extract. Now, many investors view these same reserves as worthless,unburnable carbonthat will never generate revenue. This shift in perception led BP to write down its assets by $17.5 billion in 2020, with Shell following with a $22 billion write down. These companies acknowledged that much of their oil would likely remain in the ground forever. The power of changing investor sentiment was dramatically demonstrated in 2021 when Engine No. 1, a tiny activist hedge fund, successfully won three board seats at ExxonMobil. Their argument wasn’t environmental but purely financial: Exxon’s failure to plan for the energy transition was destroying long-term shareholder value. This showed that transition risk has moved from the margins to the center of corporate governance. Reputational risk reflects the changing expectations of consumers, employees, and society at large. As public concern about climate change grows, companies associated with high emissions face damage to their brands and their social license to operate. The financial sector illustrates how reputational concerns translate into business decisions. In 2019, Goldman Sachs announced it would no longer finance new thermal coal mines or Arctic oil exploration. While framed partly in risk management terms, the bank explicitly cited reputational considerations and changing client expectations as key drivers. They recognized that being associated with these projects was becoming bad for business, potentially costing them clients and talented employees who increasingly consider environmental factors in their career choices. Consumer pressure is also reshaping entire industries. The rapid growth of plant-based milk alternatives like Oatly directly responds to, among other things, consumer concerns about dairy’s environmental impact. Traditional dairy companies, seeing their market share erode, are scrambling to launch their own non-dairy alternatives. This shift isn’t driven by regulation or technology costs but by changing consumer preferences that make high-emission products less desirable, regardless of price or quality. These four categories of risk — policy and legal, technology, market, and reputation — don’t operate in isolation. They interact and amplify each other, creating feedback loops that can accelerate the transition and magnify risks for unprepared economies. Consider how technological advances in renewable energy trigger cascading effects across all risk categories. As solar and wind become cheaper than fossil fuels (technology risk), governments gain political cover to implement stricter emissions standards and carbon pricing (policy risk), knowing these policies won’t dramatically increase energy costs for voters. These policies, in turn, shift investor capital away from fossil fuels and toward renewables (market risk), further driving down clean energy costs through economies of scale. Companies slow to adapt find themselves not just technologically obsolete but facing reputational damage for clinging to outdated, polluting technologies (reputational risk), which makes it even harder to attract capital, customers, and talent. The automotive industry provides another vivid example of these interconnected risks. As electric vehicles improve and battery costs fall (technology risk), governments implement EV mandates and phase out internal combustion engines — Norway by 2025, the UK by 2030 (policy risk). These policies signal to investors that traditional automakers without credible EV strategies are poor long-term investments, triggering capital flight (market risk). Meanwhile, young consumers increasingly view gas-powered vehicles as environmentally irresponsible, especially luxury gas vehicles (reputational risk). Each risk reinforces the others: technological improvements justify stricter policies, which shift market dynamics, which shape public perception, which in turn creates pressure for even more aggressive policies and faster technological development. Understanding these interconnections is essential for understanding transition risk. A company cannot address one type of transition risk while ignoring the others — they must recognize that these risks compound and prepare for the systemic changes that result from their interaction. The recognition that the shift to a low-carbon economy will create winners and losers, particularly among workers and communities reliant on fossil fuel industries, has given rise to the concept of ajust transition. A just transition is an effort to ensure that the benefits of a green economy are shared broadly and that the costs do not fall unfairly on those who can least afford them. The core idea is to provide support, retraining, and new economic opportunities for workers and communities whose livelihoods are threatened by the phase-out of carbon-intensive industries. This is not merely an ethical consideration; it is a pragmatic one. The threat of widespread job losses can create powerful political opposition to climate action, potentially slowing down or even derailing the transition for everyone. Therefore, managing the human side of the transition is critical to its success. In a just transition, we would repurpose skills: For example, the skills required to build an offshore oil rig are similar to those needed for constructing an offshore wind platform. A just transition would facilitate this shift through targeted programs. The private market is unlikely to manage this process efficiently or equitably. Government action is therefore needed to fund retraining programs and help workers seamlessly switch to new jobs in the growing green economy. Germany’s approach to phasing out coal mining in its Lausitz region serves as a prominent example. The German government is investing €40 billion to manage the process by funding new infrastructure, research institutes, and extensive retraining programs. The goal is not just to compensate for lost jobs but to actively build a new, sustainable economic future for the region. Transition risk represents a fundamental restructuring of the global financial and social order. As this chapter has detailed, the journey toward a net-zero economy is far more than a simple technological swap. It is a complex, multi-dimensional shift driven by the interplay of policy, technology, and market and social dynamics. While this transition offers immense opportunities for innovation and growth in green sectors, it simultaneously creates the systemic threat of stranded assets — devaluing not just physical infrastructure and fossil fuel reserves, but also intangible intellectual property and the human capital of millions of workers. Ultimately, the success of this overhaul hinges on the ability to manage these risks. Because the private market is not naturally equipped to solve the social dislocations caused by such rapid change, proactive governance and strategic investment are essential to ensure a just transition, so that the shift to sustainability does not leave vulnerable communities behind. Balancing the urgent need for decarbonization with the economic security of the workforce is not just a moral imperative, but a practical necessity to maintain the political and social stability required to reach our climate goals. This is a draft of a section of my climate risk textbook (slightly edited & reformatted to make it appropriate for Substack). I’d very much like to identify errors now, so if you see any, please let me know in the comments. 00 Printable Version|Link to this page Comments 1 to 6: You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new,register here. The Consensus Project Website THE ESCALATOR(free to republish)

The Maritime and Port Authority ofSingapore(MPA) is making moves to improve shipping sustainability. The entity recently entered a partnership with United Nations Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and renewed an agreement with the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach for a green and digital shipping corridor. The UNCTAD partnership will allow MPASingaporeto make a significant contribution to accelerating the transition toward more sustainable, resilient and inclusive global maritime transport—no small feat since many ports are reliant on fossil fuels.Related StoriesLogisticsIndonesia Shuts Down Malacca Strait Toll Talk, Distancing From HormuzLogistics'Pressures Are Indeed Mounting' from Iran War, Says Port of Long Beach CEO The second-busiest port in the world,Singaporehas the potential to play a significant role in shaping practical, scalable solutions for improving the sustainability of global maritime trade. Under the agreement, MPA Singapore will join UNCTAD in promoting cleaner fuels and digital technologies across ports and shipping networks. The effort will focus on solutions that can be adapted elsewhere in the world, such as sustainable finance, digital innovation and workforce development. The initiative will also support developing countries through outreach such as training, advisory services and institutional strengthening. Along with environmental sustainability, the effort aims to also fortify the ports in preparation for potential disruptions, allowing them to better anticipate and react to shipping challenges such as those experienced during the pandemic and more recently due to the Iran conflict’s impact on the Strait of Hormuz. “This partnership brings together Singapore’s operational excellence andUNCTAD’s global development expertise,” said Pedro Manuel Moreno, acting secretary-general of UNCTAD. “It will help accelerate a maritime transition that is not only greener and more efficient, but also resilient and inclusive—while contributing to global discussions at the UN Global Supply Chain Forum 2026.” MPA Singapore also renewed its memorandum of understanding on the green and digital shipping corridor with the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. First signed in 2023 and renewed for another three years with this latest commitment, the agreement solidifies the ports’ commitment to decarbonization and digitization along the trans-Pacific route, one of the world’s busiest container lanes. Since signing the initial agreement, the three ports have achieved several milestones, including completion of a baseline study in 2024, onboarding of industry partners to explore the potential for pilot trials, and the establishment of work streams to promote pilot initiatives in alternative fuels, digitization and energy efficiency. “The Singapore-Los Angeles-Long Beach Green and Digital Shipping Corridor has made good progress, transitioning from intent to implementation,” said Ang Wee Keong, chief executive of MPA. “The renewal of our partnership paves the way towards more sustainable shipping along the trans-Pacific route. This gives industry greater confidence to plan investments and diversify energy options for greener shipping.” The three ports also have accelerated their alternative fuels bunkering capabilities over the past three years. MPA completed methanol bunkering trials in 2023 and subsequently awarded three methanol bunkering supply licenses, while the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports have commissioned a clean fuels study and are preparing for a methanol pilot in 2026. These advancements will prepare the three ports for green fuel trials in the next phase of their partnership. The ports also have conducted port-to-port data exchange testing and started pilot collaborations with Mitsui O.S.K. Lines. By renewing the memorandum, the ports also agree to continue working to deploy low- and zero-emission fuels and digital solutions for shipping on the trans-Pacific corridor. That includes supporting fuel supply and infrastructure, developing pilot and demonstration projects, strengthening port-to-port data connectivity, and promoting interoperability, cybersecurity and common standards. “Decarbonizing goods movement between the largest ports in the United States and Asia requires international cooperation and that’s exactly what we’re doing through our work on the green and digital shipping corridor,” said Gene Seroka, executive director of thePort of Los Angeles. “We are committed to working toward the deployment of zero lifecycle carbon container ships on the corridor by 2030. This important corridor is the foundation upon which we’ll build the future of maritime shipping.” The memorandum was signed ahead of Singapore Maritime Week 2026, facilitated by C40 Cities, a global network of mayors working to advance city climate action around the world. “Seaports sit at the intersection of trade, geopolitics, climate and technology,” said Noel Hacegaba, CEO of thePort of Long Beach. “This convergence is what makes partnerships like the green and digital shipping corridor so impactful as a tool to decarbonize maritime shipping. We call it the ‘green print’ for decarbonizing the trans-Pacific route, the busiest trade route on Earth. It will be particularly important in the years ahead as we tackle our largest source of emissions, from cargo vessels, by accelerating the use of clean fuels such as methanol.” Receive Our Daily Newsletter & Special Offers

Le parole di Bonifazi sono pesantissime: «Ad Ancona è esplosa la mortalità cardiovascolare, triplicata, quella respiratoria è salita del 40%» ANCONA – «L’aria dei porti». È il titolo dell’inchiesta di Report andata in onda ieri sera 27 aprile che ha messo sotto i riflettori nazionali il porto di Ancona, le sue emissioni e l’annosa questione del banchinamento del Molo Clementino per accogliere le grandi navi da crociera. Una trasmissione che ha acceso i riflettori su qualcosa che ad Ancona si sa ma che sembra non si voglia guardare troppo da vicino: mentre la città litiga sul futuro del suo porto, il presente avvelena i polmoni. I numeri della medicina I numeri li ha messi in fila Floriano Bonifazi, pneumologo e allergologo anconetano che da cinque anni studia gli effetti delle navi sulla salute pubblica, come ha raccontato a Report: «Ad Ancona è esplosa la mortalità cardiovascolare, triplicata, arrivata al 30% in più, quella respiratoria al 40% in più, come incremento percentuale di rischio. Un dato pesante. Se si fossero rispettate le norme dell’Organizzazione mondiale della sanità avremmo avuto ottanta morti in meno all’anno da PM2,5 (particolato fine, ndr) e trenta morti in meno all’anno per biossido d’azoto se ci fossimo tenuti nei 10 microgrammi per metro cubo». Cifre che pesano come macigni e che raccontano una patologia urbana in corso, non teorica. Il reportage Le navi all’ormeggio, come spiega il reportage curato da Bernardo Iovene, tengono i motori accesi per garantire energia a bordo: i camini scaricano nell’aria particolato fine, ossido di azoto e biossido di zolfo, una nube che si abbatte direttamente sui quartieri affacciati sul porto. Da maggio 2025 nel Mediterraneo è formalmente obbligatorio l’uso di carburanti con contenuto di zolfo allo 0,1 per cento, ma nella pratica oltre il novanta per cento delle navi continua a bruciare olio combustibile con tenori di zolfo fino al 3,5 per cento, aggirandosi con gli scrubber: sistemi di lavaggio dei fumi che prelevano acqua dal mare e la riversano in porto con residui di idrocarburi policiclici aromatici, black carbon e sostanze che entrano nella catena alimentare marina. Il nodo molo Clementino Inevitabilmente la trasmissione ha aperto il capitolo molo Clementino, il progetto di banchinamento sul fronte esterno del porto storico che da mesi divide la città. Da una parte il Comune con il sindaco Daniele Silvetti, che ha espresso parere negativo al progetto, affiancato dall’opposizione di sinistra, dal M5s, da Europa Verde e da gran parte della stessa maggioranza di centrodestra; dall’altra l’Autorità di sistema portuale, guidata da Vincenzo Garofalo, e il fronte favorevole allo sviluppo crocieristico che include pezzi di Fratelli d’Italia. Attenzione, però, perché la giunta Silvetti non è contraria alle navi da crociera, ma al banchinamento del molo Clementino, mentre ospiterebbe le navi da crociera in un’altra zona del porto, nella cosiddetta banchina rettilinea, la 26 più la 27 ancora da completare, definita «soluzione di preminente interesse pubblico sotto il profilo ambientale, economico e paesaggistico». Le parole del sindaco Silvetti, intervistato da Iovene, ha posto la domanda nella sua forma più diretta: «Lei immagina cosa significa, oltre a potenziare elettricamente una nave da crociera di oltre 300 metri, far arrivare dentro a quel terminal centinaia di tir, bus e auto ogni giorno?». Garofalo ha replicato con una presa di distanza: «No, il sindaco non si è messo di traverso, ha espresso soltanto alcune perplessità». Una mediazione diplomatica che non rende la misura del braccio di ferro reale. MSC, che su 45 sbarchi previsti nella stagione 2026 ne conta 30 di proprie navi, ha già minacciato di levare le ancore: «Stiamo valutando seriamente se rimanere o meno ad Ancona», ha avvertito Luigi Merlo, responsabile per l’Italia di CTL Maritime. Regione e Ministero La Regione Marche ha trasmesso al ministero dell’Ambiente un parere critico, chiedendo di verificare la sostenibilità complessiva e la coerenza della localizzazione dell’intervento, con particolare attenzione agli impatti sul porto storico, sul paesaggio e sulla salute pubblica. Nel frattempo il ministero dell’economia e delle finanze ha bloccato 101 milioni di euro di finanziamenti destinati allo scalo, compresi i 22 milioni stanziati dal Mit per il banchinamento. Il nodo del futuro del porto dorico non è solo urbanistico o commerciale, è sanitario. E Report lo ha reso evidente mettendo in fila i dati epidemiologici di città portuali come Ancona e Civitavecchia, dove l’indice di mortalità risulta più alto rispetto alla media, con correlazione diretta alle emissioni navali. Ancona non compare tra i porti europei più inquinati – meno di cinquanta navi da crociera l’anno, contro le oltre 400 di Livorno o Civitavecchia – ma i numeri di Bonifazi dicono che il danno è già in corso, prodotto ogni giorno dai traghetti con i motori costantemente accesi davanti ai palazzi e ai negozi, i bar, i ristoranti del centro. Il Molo Clementino porterebbe le crociere a 100-150 navi l’anno. Più traffico, più emissioni, più persone. La domanda che l’inchiesta di Iovine lascia sospesa sopra il porto dorico è la stessa che la città sembra stentare ad affrontare: si può ragionare di sviluppo senza prima fare i conti con la salute di chi ci vive?

228 ispezioni su navi italiane e straniere, per un totale di oltre 2.600 controlli individuali e 8 navi fermate. Sono alcuni dei numeri del bilancio dell'attività della capitaneria di porto di Genova sull'inquinamento delle navi. "Nel 2025 la Capitaneria di Porto di Genova ha condotto un'intensa attività di controllo a tutela della qualità dell'aria, verificando il rispetto delle normative internazionali ed europee in materia di emissioni inquinanti delle navi. In un contesto geografico in cui lo scalo marittimo è intrinsecamente fuso con il tessuto urbano, la Capitaneria ha operato per garantire un equilibrio rigoroso tra l'operatività industriale e il diritto alla salute della cittadinanza. Complessivamente sono state effettuate 228 ispezioni su navi italiane e straniere, per un totale di oltre 2.600 controlli individuali. La nuova normativa del 2025 sul tenore di zolfo L'anno 2025 ha segnato un passaggio normativo rilevante: dal 1° maggio il Mediterraneo è diventato ufficialmente area SECA (Sulphur Emission Control Area), con obbligo di utilizzo di combustibili con tenore di zolfo non superiore allo 0,10%. Un traguardo atteso da anni, che Genova aveva già anticipato con il Genoa Blue Agreement. Sul fronte giuridico, il TAR Liguria ha rigettato integralmente il ricorso presentato da un armatore avverso il fermo disposto dalla Capitaneria nel 2024, riconoscendo espressamente la correttezza tecnica e procedurale dell'operato ispettivo. Una conferma importante della solidità del lavoro svolto. La Capitaneria ha continuato a partecipare attivamente ai tavoli istituzionali — in primo luogo l'Osservatorio Ambiente e Salute del Comune di Genova — mantenendo un dialogo aperto e costruttivo con comitati, associazioni di cittadini, Municipi, Difensore Civico e commissioni consiliari. Un rapporto nato dalla chiarezza reciproca e cresciuto nella fiducia. "Inquinamento da traffico marittimo è questione concreta" L'inquinamento atmosferico generato dal traffico marittimo è una questione concreta per tutte le città portuali, e Genova — con il porto che si sviluppa a poche centinaia di metri dal centro abitato — lo vive con particolare intensità. Per questo la Capitaneria di Porto esercita con rigore le proprie funzioni di controllo, in attuazione di un quadro normativo internazionale ed europeo articolato e in continua evoluzionè. "Il porto è parte della città, non un'entità separata" “Il porto di Genova è parte della città, non un'entità separata da essa. Per questo il controllo delle emissioni delle navi non è per noi un adempimento burocratico, ma un impegno concreto verso chi vive e lavora in questa città. I numeri di questo rapporto raccontano un lavoro serio, condotto ogni giorno con rigore tecnico e con la consapevolezza che dietro ogni ispezione c'è la qualità dell'aria che respiriamo tutti." Come si svolgono le ispezioni Le ispezioni ambientali sulle navi non si limitano a una verifica documentale. Sono controlli tecnici approfonditi che richiedono competenze specialistiche e si articolano su più livelli, dalla documentazione di bordo fino all'esame fisico dei componenti dei motori. L'obiettivo primario rimane la prevenzione. Le navi soggette a ispezione Sono sottoposte a ispezione tutte le navi commerciali — da carico e passeggeri battenti bandiera italiana e straniera — che scalano il porto di Genova. Le navi straniere vengono selezionate secondo i criteri del Port State Control (PSC) stabiliti dalla Direttiva europea 2009/16/CE recepita dal d.lgs. 53/2011, attraverso il sistema informatico europeo THETIS. Le navi italiane sono ispezionate in occasione delle visite periodiche per il rinnovo della certificazione, in base alle disposizioni del d.lgs. 37/2020 e del DPR n. 435/1991. Inoltre, sono sottoposte a controllo anche le unità che si sono rese protagoniste di emissioni anomale segnalate dai cittadini o individuate dai sistemi di monitoraggio della Capitaneria. I controlli tengono conto di diversi parametri: l'anno di costruzione della nave, il tonnellaggio, la potenza installata e qualsiasi modifica successiva — come la sostituzione di motori principali, gruppi elettrogeni o inceneritori. Una nave che emette fumo durante una manovra nel porto di Genova Cosa viene verificato Nel corso di ogni ispezione vengono effettuati da un minimo di 10-15 a un massimo di 30-40 controlli distinti. Le verifiche riguardano tre aree principali: Documentazione, Componenti tecnici, Sistemi EGCS / Scrubber Certificato Internazionale per la Prevenzione Marcatura IMO (IMO ID) dei componenti Certificazione dell'impianto dell'Inquinamento Atmosferico (IAPP) Testate, pompe iniezione, iniettori, turbine Manuali e manutenzioni periodiche Certificati motori (EIAPP) Rispondenza al Technical File approvato Parametri di funzionamento Fascicoli tecnici (Technical File) Pezzi di ricambio presenti a bordo Calibrazioni e sensori Record Book of Engine Parameters Software gestione parametri motore Registri di utilizzo Ricevute di consegna combustibile (BDN) Procedura cambio combustibile Le misure in caso di non conformità Quando vengono riscontrate deficienze o vi sono fondati dubbi sulla conformità, l'ispezione si fa progressivamente più dettagliata. Le ispezioni condotte superano la dimensione burocratica e documentale per addentrarsi in verifiche tecniche Si può arrivare allo smontaggio di pompe e iniettori, all'apertura dei carter dei motori per verificare la marcatura di bielle, pistoni e alberi a camme, fino alla verifica dei settaggi di funzionamento. In caso di esito negativo, le misure vanno dalla prescrizione scritta fino al fermo della nave, attraverso: – imposizione di ispezioni addizionali alla certificazione IAPP; – sanzioni amministrative; – fermo e divieto di utilizzo di motori, diesel generatori o impianto scrubber; – fermo della nave fino alla rettifica delle deficienze; – comunicazione all'Autorità giudiziaria nei casi più gravi. Il Genoa Blue Agreement Il Genoa Blue Agreement è un accordo volontario — rinnovato per la terza volta nel 2023 — che coinvolge l'intero cluster marittimo genovese: compagnie di navigazione, armatori, operatori portuali e rimorchiatori. L'obiettivo era rendere la zona entro le 3 miglia nautiche dal porto di Genova assimilabile a un'area SECA, con combustibili al massimo allo 0,10% di zolfo in massa. Le navi aderenti si impegnavano a completare il passaggio al combustibile a basso tenore di zolfo già all'entrata nello schema di separazione del traffico (VTS) — ben prima di quanto previsto dalla legge — e per tutto il periodo di permanenza in porto, inclusa l'uscita. Rientrano nell'accordo anche le navi dotate di scrubber (EGCS), quelle alimentate a GNL e quelle che utilizzano combustibili alternativi senza componenti fossili (biofuel, ammoniaca, metanolo, etanolo), in linea con la crescente decarbonizzazione del settore. Con l'entrata in vigore della SECA Mediterraneo nel maggio 2025, l'obbligo normativo ha raggiunto i livelli già previsti dall'accordo. Il Genoa Blue Agreement rimane tuttavia pienamente in vigore per tutti gli altri impegni che lo caratterizzano: monitoraggio delle emissioni, segnalazione tempestiva di fumosità anomala, manutenzioni, controlli della Capitaneria e dialogo continuo con gli operatori. Gli ossidi di azoto (NOx) sono tra i principali inquinanti prodotti dalla combustione dei motori diesel marini. Le principali non conformità Le deficienze rilevate hanno riguardato principalmente tre ambiti. – La tenuta del registro dei parametri di funzionamento dei motori principali e dei gruppi elettrogeni: irregolarità nella compilazione, omissioni o mancata corrispondenza con i valori reali rilevati a bordo. – La marcatura dei componenti: installazione di parti (pompe iniezione, iniettori, testate, turbine) prive della marcatura IMO obbligatoria o non conformi al Technical File approvato del motore. – La certificazione: assenza o non aggiornamento dei certificati EIAPP a seguito di interventi di manutenzione straordinaria, o configurazione motore non corrispondente a quella certificata. Le azioni adottate Le deficienze riscontrate sono state oggetto di verifica approfondita per analizzarne le cause e impedirne il ripetersi. Tra le azioni concrete adottate nel 2025: – smontaggio e sostituzione di testate, iniettori e pompe dei motori principali e ausiliari non conformi; – messa fuori servizio di motori principali e ausiliari prima della partenza, in attesa della sostituzione delle componenti non conformi; – fermo delle unità — sia italiane sia straniere — fino alla rettifica delle deficienze; – elevazione di sanzioni amministrative; – coinvolgimento degli Organismi riconosciuti (Società di Classificazione) per ispezioni addizionali e aggiornamento della certificazione; – informative al Comando Generale delle Capitanerie di Porto – Guardia Costiera e al Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Sicurezza Energetica per le azioni di indirizzo nazionale. Anche gli Organismi riconosciuti responsabili del rilascio della certificazione IAPP hanno emesso note di attenzione alle compagnie e ai propri ispettori sulle problematiche di marcatura dei componenti, a seguito e in coordinamento con l'attività ispettiva della Capitaneria di Genova.

As Australia’s immediate fuel crunch eases aftersuccessful effortsto diversify supply, policymakers are turning their attention to dealing with the next energy security crisis. The question is, what would actually work? The Coalition this weekannounced a policyto double onshore reserves of liquid fuels to 60 days’ supply, or around 1 billion litres of petrol, diesel and aviation fuel. For its part, the Labor governmentis expectedto announce new energy security measures ahead of the budget. Last week, the government canvassed options to refine more fuels in Australia, whether by expanding capacity for the nation’s two remaining fuel refineries following a firethat damagedViva’s Geelong refinery earlier this month, reopening closed refineries, or evenbuilding a new one. Of these options, modestly boosting fuel storage is the only sensible one. The level would need careful calibration. But it cannot stand alone. The Coalition’s plan focuses only on getting back to “normal” – meaning dependent on overseas shipments of fossil fuels – and not on reducing demand through electrification and biofuels. Normal doesn’t exist any more. This year’s energy crisis is the second major disruption in the past five years and looks to befar worsethan the2022 crisis. Much coverage to date has focused on the gap between Australia’sdomestic requirements, known as Minimum Stockholding Obligations, for roughly 30 days of onshore stored fuel and90 daysof net oil imports required by the International Energy Agency through an agreement. This misses the point. At the turn of the century, domestic oil wells were still producing large volumes for the nation’s eight refineries to process. Because the IEA’s 90-day requirement is fornet importsand Australia was producing most of its own fuel, the nation did well by this metric. Since then, the oil riches of the Bass Strait have largely beenused up, and six refinerieshave closed. Oil from Western Australia’s North West Shelf is mostly exported to large refineries in Singapore and Malaysia, which are much closer than Australia’s east coast. Australia became dependent on imported fuel, meaning it needed much higher stocks to meet its IEA obligations. Criticisms of the current government and its predecessors over fuel reserves aren’t well grounded. The refineries and their storage tanks closed because there wasn’t enough domestic oil to process and they couldn’t compete with bigger producers overseas. Australia’s remaining refineries are only hanging on throughgovernment subsidies. Even so, it could be a smart move to further expand domestic fuel reserves, given how exposed we are to a long and increasingly unreliable supply chain. It will also take some years to shift to more secure alternatives. Diesel storage is particularly important. Australia usestwice as muchdiesel (roughly 90 million litres a day) as petrol (44 million) because long-distance trucks, mine sites and farmers all rely on this fuel. There has been an addition of 300 million litres of diesel storage in the last few years via government and industry co-funding. But doubling storage to 60 days based on current consumption, as the Coalition wants, is unlikely to be necessary. It would make no sense to spend billions building huge tanks when the goal has to be to progressively reduce how reliant we are on importing liquid fuels. Calls toreopen closed refineriesdon’t stack up, as Energy Minister Chris Bowen haspointed out. New South Wales’s Kurnell, South Australia’s Port Stanvac and Victoria’s Altona refineries have already been demolished and replaced with oil import terminals. The exception is Perth’s Kwinana refinery, which closed in 2021 and has being considered as a site to manufacture biofuels. There’s no point in expending the time and money on building new refineries if there’s no domestic crude oil to process. Australia’s proven supplies of crude oil are nowsix years awayfrom depletion. Potential new reserves such as the Taroom Trough in Queensland or WA’sDoradoare unproven. They will take a long time to confirm, would be expensive to extract, and may not produce the right type of crude oil to be converted into the most important fuel, diesel. A new refinery could import crude from overseas, but it would be competing with much larger regional refineries and we would still be reliant on overseas supplies. For these reasons – and more – expanding refinery capacity is unlikely to help. This year’s oil shock may have a long tail. The Strait of Hormuz is not open and damaged facilities will need to be repaired. It makes sense to accelerate the shift to electric transport and machinery wherever possible, rather than overbuilding fuel storage and see the tanks become stranded assets. What authorities must do is make a hard-nosed assessment of how much fuel storage we will actually need, paired with accelerated electrification targets. The great benefit of electrified transport is that the energy to run electric cars, buses, trucks and mine equipment can be made locally using renewables and storage, with backup gas plants. Every new EV cuts demand for petrol or diesel, freeing up scarce supplies for use in areas where electrification is presently harder. Electric cars are now approaching price parity with combustion engine vehicles. Electric buses and electric delivery vans are now common on city streets and the first electric prime moversare arriving. Rapid progress in battery technology means electric trucks are now viable for medium-distance routes such asSydney-Canberra. Longer routes will be harder. Here, biodiesel may have a role. Last year the federal governmentannounceda $1.1 billion plan for low-carbon liquid fuels such as biodiesel, made from fats such as tallow, vegetable oils or even algae. These alternative fuels havelong struggledwith scale and cost. But they may be worthwhile if it means long-distance trucks are able to run on locally-made, low-emissions fuel. For example, Indonesia isabout to shiftto a 50/50 mix of biodiesel and fossil diesel. A new efficiency scheme for commercial and heavy transport could drive the change, as the New Vehicle Efficiency Scheme is doing for cars and light commercial vehicles. So, there’s the plan:

KALMAR CORPORATION, TRADE PRESS RELEASE, 28 APRIL 2026 AT 9.00 (EEST)Kalmar securedan order of electric empty container handlers from Lechman TerminaisKalmar has secured an order from long-term customer Lechman Terminais in Brazil for sixKalmar electric empty container handlers. The order was booked in Kalmar's Q2 2026 order intake with delivery scheduled for Q1 of 2027. The new electric empty container handlers will operate in a container depot in the town of Guarujá, located in the hinterland of the Port of Santos. The equipment is capable of stacking containers seven-high, and features the highest capacity of 400 kWh batteries, ensuring operational continuity beyond a full work shift. Various safety components, such as reverse warning system, safety cameras and fire suppression system as well as high-performance and ergonomically designed EGO Cabin ensure more comfort and safe operations. All equipment includes theMyKalmar INSIGHTperformance management tool with theInspector module, a digital application that streamlines routine inspections of material-handling equipment and allows inspection data to be stored centrally for analysis and reporting purposes. Altamir Lecham, President and Director of Lechman Terminais: “Having Kalmar as our partner provides us with great peace of mind, as their machines are of exceptional quality, ensuring we can operate efficiently and safely. Additionally, we are taking a significant step toward reducing our CO2 emissions, which is important for us and our customers.” Marcelo Macedo Goncalves, Vice President of Kalmar Latin America: “This order marks an important milestone for us as it is the first order of new-generation electric empty container handlers to Latin America. We are proud to continue our partnership with Lechman, and we remain firmly committed to providing the professional after-sales support and training necessary to ensure Lechman succeeds in its electrification journey. With the cost of diesel rising exponentially, and pressure to increase efficiency and reduce emissions, electrification offers a reliable path to continuous operation, mitigating risks posed by current global volatility.”Further information for the press: Marcelo Macedo Goncalves, Vice President of Kalmar Latin America,marcelo.goncalves@kalmarglobal.com Aino-Leena Juutinen, Director, Marketing and Communications, Counter Balanced, Kalmar, tel. +358445353030,aino-leena.juutinen@kalmarglobal.comKalmar (Nasdaq Helsinki: KALMAR) is moving goods in critical supply chains around the world, with the vision to be the forerunner in sustainable material handling equipment and services. The company offers a wide range of industry shaping heavy material handling equipment and services to ports and terminals, distribution centres, manufacturing and heavy logistics. Headquartered in Helsinki, Finland, Kalmar operates globally in over 120 countries and employs approximately 5,300 people. In 2025, the company's sales totalled approximately EUR 1.7 billion.www.kalmarglobal.com Attachment

By:Frigyes KarinthyApril 28, 2026 AI illustration for HILOBROW Frigyes Karinthy’sVoyage to Faremido: Gulliver’s Fifth Voyagewas published in 1916, in Hungarian. Jonathan Swift’s Lemuel Gulliver signs on as a surgeon on a British ship, only to be torpedoed, then picked up by a UFO and transported to Faremido, a planet ruled by intelligent, utterly benevolent machine-folk. In this excerpt, Gulliver accepts an injection of their own brain-matter — quicksilver and minerals — into his head. HiLoBooks is pleased toserialize the storyfor HILOBROW’s readers. ALL INSTALLMENTS:1|2|3|4|5. *** CHAPTER EIGHT The author excuses himself for providing only a sketchy account of his momentous voyage — His master takes the author to a mountain-top, where he is startled by amazing revelations — The author returns to his country and finds his family in good health I could have filled several volumes and composed a hundred symphonies about all that I learned in Faremido; but it has all boiled down to this brief sketch which I am hardly likely to touch again. The lesson which I learned there in wind and storm, in the disembodied music of heat and electricity, I could never explain in its final truth here on Earth. For the only language, in which I could express myself, would be a strange and unintelligible stammer. We call it the mystique of music. We guess and sense only as much of it as a sleeper of the speech of those who stand near his bed. Let the memory of my voyage to Faremido, told in human words, remain just a confused and incoherent fragment, a modest signal, a blackened piece of meteorite in a museum — to proclaim to those who dare believe it that once a human being visited the shores of that distant star. Let me jot down in a few words, rather for myself than for anybody else, an account of my last day in Faremido, and how I returned to Earth. One day Midore, my master, took me to a lofty mountain and made me sit down beside him. Wherever I looked, an endless ocean stretched into infinity; an ocean without a horizon, merging all around us into the sky as if the mountain itself, on which we sat, rose from infinite space. There, close to my master, I felt once again as I felt the first time when I saw him on the soil of Faremido, the delight of endless beauty; the ecstasy the artist feels when he has sculpted his beloved, a creature of flesh and blood, into marble far more enduring than flesh and blood and far more worthy of her beauty. And now I was filled with a strange, by no means tormenting but rather agreeable sadness. I thought of all Midore had told me of Organic Life as a disease, and I felt no longer inclined to argue with him. I recalled that confused and impossible panorama of misery, suffering, sickness, murder, death-rattles and dying, blood and hate, horror and gloom, evasions and lies, conflicting and evil desires which all human knowledge termed the History of Life. After all this I looked into Midore’s face which, according to our terrestrial knowledge, was shaped of dead and lifeless matter, gold and cold stones — and yet it was the embodiment of the finest rhythm, the most purposeful movement, the most dazzling light, the purest warmth and the sweetest sound. I could not help feeling clearly that I (and with me all human intellect) was wrong. I began to sob. Haltingly and stammeringly I told Midore of my doubts and of my conversion. I begged him on my bended knees to rescue me from my valueless and stupid life which was only a sickness and burden both for others and for myself. I cried desperately that once diseased life had perished on Earth, and the true law of Existence, heat, energy, magnetic force and light, came into their rightful power, I did not want to become like those desiccated, suffering trees along the highway of Faremido. I reminded him that my miserable, sick body also contained pure and precious materials: inorganic elements, carbon and water and sulphur. Let him destroy me, consume me in fire, filter me through an alembic, extract from me all that was worth something and utilize it as he pleased to shape asolasi‘s eyes or mouth or ears; and let him scatter the rest in the winds so that it could never again combine together. Or if this was impossible, could he not add something to my body and wash me in some solution that would petrify and solidify me. (After all, they, thesolasis, were omniscient and could do anything; they had existed for many millions of years, and nature had no longer any secrets for them.) Surely I need not die in torment and misery — as a punishment for having come into this world. Midore smiled and pointed out in his kindly and calm fashion how wrongly I had expressed myself when I said that thesolasishad solved all the secrets of nature. Thesolasishad no need to do this, for they themselves were the secrets of nature or nature herself. True enough, to understand this I would need their intellect which was pure and transparent, consisting of immutable matter and moved by direct forces — so different from my steamy, blood-driven brain, maturing into decomposition and destruction. As for my wish that he should cure my body and utilize it for some purpose, this was very logical and right, and it showed that I was beginning to understand a little of the essence of Being. A cure could be discussed, for it was a simple chemical process; he would have to employ certain reagents, filters and furnaces for the course of oxidation. In its present form, however, my body was not yet ripe for this; if he carried out this procedure now, he would cause me unnecessary pain. Nor was there any need for it — considering that within a short time (which we, humans, called ten or twenty years) this process would automatically start within me, and I would not have to suffer any pain thereby. He would quickly prove to me what confusion and suffering it would cause now. He had a certain liquid with him, which he was proposing to inject into mymedulla oblongata. My intellect would be to some extent purified for a few minutes, and my senses would perceive phenomena somewhat more clearly. Midore produced a glass syringe and pricked my neck. I felt the cool liquid enter my veins. For a few seconds the world grew dark; then I awakened to an even louder and more triumphant music. I can give only a very confused word-picture of all that I experienced emotionally within these few minutes. I heard the music of many different, sharply individual and yet commingling instruments. Midore then demonstrated them to me, one by one, and in these few minutes I saw what no human eyes had been given to see before. I saw heat, thermal energy flowing around me in a multicoloured, wavering stream, lapping over my body; I saw magnetic attraction as the bodies shot out tipped feelers and antennae probing, grasping and moving towards one another. But the most important thing was understanding through my sensations that all I saw with my eyes now had been living within me before, within me and within all human beings, for untold centuries. It was this tangible and simple world which we called inexpressible, metaphysical and superhuman. Though it had been within and around us, only our senses, these dull and imperfect instruments, had not presented the proper images to our intellects. Like someone stumbling in darkness who suddenly sees the sun prostrates himself and calls it god — in the same way the being we call divine was he who, lo and behold, stood right in front of me, and who was merely what I should have become if I had been taken up by the right hands; what I must turn into if I achieved the right conception of myself and cleansed my body of all corruptible elements. I looked into Midore’s eye and realized now that it was this eye which I saw from Earth and called a star; a perfect instrument created by an intellect. And I took his hand, and I felt as I did once in my childhood when I awoke screaming one night because I thought a cold and damp and alien hand had clutched my arm; and when my parents rushed to my cot, they reassured me, and laughed and pointed out that it was my own hand I had lain on in my sleep, and it had become numb. And as I realized all this, a great confusion and uneasiness filled my heart, and I shouted loudly. “Why? why?” I cried, “why did all have to happen as it did? Why did we not understand immediately the clear and simple message of the spheres?” But no one answered, and the effect of the magic liquid slowly started to fade. Around me the music of the elements grew fainter and fainter, and a dim curtain of fog covered my eyes. Then I accepted Midore’s judgment that my body and mind were not yet mature enough to discard them without pain and sadness for the sake of a nobler purpose, a purer harmony. I asked him what to do, and he advised me to return to Earth and lead the human life until up here they would judge me ready to undergo the chemical process Midore had mentioned. He promised that as long as I remained on Earth they would constantly watch me through their magnificent instruments. This might reassure me if, after all I had seen here, I lost heart in my own world. Midore said this because I represented to him, anxious and sceptical, that I could not bear after my time in Faremido the society of men and beasts-the whole breed ofdosireswhich I had learned to loath so deeply after I had observed them through thesolasiinstruments. When I asked how I could get back, my master smiled and said I could leave that entirely to him. That day, with an aching heart and with hopeless sorrow in my soul, I said good-bye to thesolasiswhom I had the good fortune to number among my acquaintances. My master placed me in a machine and gave me a pill to make me sleep and escape the rigours of the long journey. When I recovered from this deep sleep, I found myself on a rocky shore. My master was no longer with me. I looked around and discovered that I was once again on Earth, and the memory of the time spent in Faremido hovered like a distant beautiful dream in time and space. I bowed my head over the hard dust and wept bitterly. The same evening I was found by a Norwegian farmer. I was told that I was in a neutral country, not far from Christiania, and I had no cause to fear any harm until I reached the frontier. Whether I could get home without a passport was highly doubtful — for Britain, at war with Germany, happened to be on bad terms with the Scandinavian states. The Norwegian farmer was much surprised by my total indifference to the development of the World War during the past eighteen months; what territories the belligerent powers had occupied, how many men they had lost, how many they had enslaved, what was the number of those who had perished of the plague, how many planes had been shot down, how many cities bombed, how many generals decorated and how many dismissed from command. I have no intention of boring the reader with the details of my homecoming; nor with the description of how hard it was for me to get used to intercourse with thedosireswhose forms I found intolerable. At first they considered me mad when I winced in terror and disgust from outstretched hands or when living beings were approaching my body. The doctors diagnosed a serious allergy. How could they have known that I had come to consider life as a contagious and repugnant disease; that I felt all contact with it threatened deadly danger? I did not argue with them. I decided to wait peacefully and patiently for the day of liberation, trusting the promise of my kind master who had told me that he would gather me to himself as soon as he considered me worthy of this distinction. Until then I look from time to time with confidence and secret inner joy up at the blue sky. In his kindly warm eye which human beings call the Sun I seem to read sometimes encouragement and a message intended only for me: that he still remembers his promise not to forget me. Measured in terrestrial time, my voyage to Faremido lasted almost a year and a half. I landed in Christiania on January 18, 1916 and reached Redriff two weeks later, on February 2nd. I found my wife and children in good health. *** RADIUM AGE PROTO-SF:“Radium Age” is Josh Glenn’s name for the nascent sf genre’s c. 1900–1935 era, a period which saw the discovery of radioactivity, i.e., the revelation that matter itself is constantly in movement — a fitting metaphor for the first decades of the 20th century, during which old scientific, religious, political, and social certainties were shattered.More info here. SERIALIZED BY HILOBOOKS:James Parker’sCocky the Fox| Annalee Newitz’s“The Great Oxygen Race”| Matthew Battles’s“Imago”|& many more original and reissued novels and stories.

Over the last two months, nations have scrambled to shore up oil supplies as the Iran war prevented oil tankers moving through the Strait of Hormuz. This, according to someglobal analysts, wouldlead to a downturnfor clean technology exports from China, the world’s top producer of solar, wind, batteries and electric vehicles. They predicted the rush to secure fuel for cars and trucks combined with China’s manufacturing oversupply, collapsing prices and trade barriers would trigger a sharp fall in cleantech exports and a slowdown in global deployment. New datafrom energy thinktank Ember shows the exact opposite has happened. China’s solar exports doubled in a single month, rising to a new record of 68 gigawatts in March. Fifty countries broke records for imports of Chinese solar panels. Demand was particularly high in countries hardest hit by the oil crunch, such as India and the Philippines. Exports of batteries and EVs alsojumped 38%in a month. Nations aren’t just focused on oil. They’re securing more reliable energy supplies to avoid the next disruption. The pain from soaring oil and gas prices is being felt most acutely in developing nations. It should be no surprise many of these countries are moving fastest to seek alternatives. Demand for solar in many African nations hasrisen rapidlysince 2024. But in March, demand across the continent rose 176% month on month to reach 10 GW, while demand in Asia rose to 39 GW. Thetop importerswere India (11.3 GW) and Indonesia (6.2 GW), two nations long reliant on coal. Some of this demand will fall back, as China’s changes to tax rebatesthis monthwill add 9% to the cost of solar panels. But this doesn’t take away from the bigger picture. In only a few years, China has come todominate the mass productionof almost all clean technologies across solar (80%), wind (70%), battery cells (80%), battery systems (80%), EVs (70%) and hydrogen electrolysers (58%). In newer industries such as heavy electric trucks, market share is over 90%. This success has come with the problem ofovercapacity. Firms can produce much more solar than the world is buying. Authorities areflagging the needfor industry consolidation. For other cleantech producers, China’s record exports look threatening. But from a climate perspective, overcapacity isn’t so much a bug as a feature. This is because ofWright’s Law– the rule that for every doubling of cumulative production, the cost per unit falls by a predictable percentage. When production is concentrated in high-volume hubs as in China, this law translates to rapid cost declines globally. The effect is even stronger because China is installing solar atworld-beating rates. Record solar exports aren’t a blip. Growth has beenconsistently strongsince 2023. There’s no sign of a long-term slump in demand for cheap solar and clean tech. As the International Energy Agency points out, this year’s oil crisis islikely to acceleratethe rush for clean tech. In coming months, shipments of solar panels will be unloaded from China’s cargo ships and added to power grids or as standalone energy sources everywhere from South America to West Africa. Once online, cheap daytime solar will reduce demand for pricier power from coal and gas plants. This is exactly what happened in Pakistan, where an unreliable grid droveenormous solar uptakein recent years – and less demand for gas. Solar panels usually displace coal and gas, given thermal power plants tend to burn these fossil fuels. But EVs directly displace oil. This is why it’s significant that exports of EVs and batteries are nowmuch more valuableto China than solar panels. Solar produces cheap, abundant power. Batteries allow it to be used later. These technologies are useful first to clean up electricity generation and boost energy security. But these two technologies can unlock much more. They can make it possible to electrify polluting sectors long considered “hard to abate”. Electric options for heavy industry are multiplying.Electric arc furnacesare now replacing coal‑fired blast furnaces in steelmaking. High‑temperatureelectric heat pumpsand electric boilers are replacing gas in some chemical and food‑processing plants, while heavy dutybattery‑electric haul trucksare being trialled in mining and construction. These technologies are still at an early stage. They’re often more expensive up-front. But the selling point is the fact they are cheaper to run – as long as electricity is fairly cheap. This is exactly the outcomesolar and batterycombinations deliver. Last month, Australia importednearly 1 GW of solarfrom China – a new monthly record. This quiet surge happenedeven asleaders debated over whether to drill for more oil in Queensland or expand domestic fuel reserves. The facts on the ground favour clean tech. Per capita, sun-drenched Australia has themost rooftop solarin the world. Battery storage is growing very fast. The main power grid is now at50% renewables. Uptake of EVs is surging after a slow start. The next big thing will be clean tech for heavy industry and mining. Some mine sitesalready getmost of their power from renewables, while electrified fleetsare developing. China’s export boom shows cleantech is becoming the new engine of the global energy system. The scramble for oil is a stopgap measure. Higher oil prices will only spur on the search for alternatives –just as they didduring the first oil shocks over 50 years ago. This time, though, the oil shock has hit in the midst of thefastest energy transitionin human history.

"Abbiamo intercettato un trend in crescita: i principali armatori stanno inserendo in flotta navi alimentate a Gnl e questo genera un’esigenza molto concreta da soddisfare per il comparto". Simone Demarchi, ad di Axpo Italia, sintetizza così il momento dello small scale Lng, che nel Mediterraneo sta passando dalla fase sperimentale al mercato, strutturandosi come una filiera industriale, trainata dagli investimenti delle compagnie navali e da una spinta crescente verso la sostenibilità, alla luce del quadro regolatorio europeo e internazionale. In questo contesto, anche le linee guida del ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti per il bunkeraggio ship-to-ship (approvvigionamento alle navi) hanno segnato un passaggio importante. "Favoriscono la diffusione di queste operazioni nei principali scali nazionali", osserva l’ad. Il Mediterraneo si configura così come uno dei principali laboratori di sviluppo, con Italia e Spagna in posizione avanzata. "Questi due Paesi hanno un ruolo strategico nello sviluppo dello small scale Lng e possono giocare da protagonisti", sottolinea Demarchi. Axpo si è mossa in anticipo. Negli ultimi mesi ha messo in campo asset e operazioni concrete, a partire dalla nave Green Pearl, progettata per il bunkeraggio small scale e capace di operare sia ship-to-ship sia ship-to-truck (rifornimento da nave ad autocisterna), una soluzione ancora unica in Europa. L’unità, con una capacità di 7.500 metri cubi, è stata noleggiata per dieci anni. "Opera nel Mediterraneo, con principale focus sui porti italiani", puntualizza Demarchi. La combinazione tra ship-to-ship e ship-to-truck consente di accorciare la filiera e ampliare gli usi del Gnl anche fuori dal marittimo. "Ci sono diverse aree del Centro-Sud Italia ancora non collegate direttamente alla rete gas e costrette ad approvvigionarsi tramite autocisterne dalla Francia e dal Nord Europa, con impatti evidenti su costi e sostenibilità. L’innovazione portata da Green Pearl contribuisce ad accorciare questo percorso". Per Axpo, i primi risultati operativi sono già visibili. All’inizio di dicembre è stato effettuato nel porto di Genova il primo rifornimento di Gnl su un traghetto passeggeri in servizio regolare, la GNV Virgo. "Da allora, le operazioni si sono consolidate, arrivando a una frequenza che in alcuni casi raggiunge una ogni due giorni". Il sistema sta iniziando a strutturarsi lungo tutta la filiera. A inizio marzo il terminale OLT Offshore Lng Toscana, a largo di Livorno, ha ricevuto il primo carico small scale, pari a 4.000 metri cubi, consegnato dalla nave Green Zeebrugge operata da Axpo, segnando l’avvio operativo del servizio in Italia, con piccole navi metaniere in grado di rifornire unità a Gnl o alimentare i depositi costieri. In Italia, Genova resta il punto di partenza, anche per il valore simbolico della città, dove è iniziata l’attività del gruppo oltre 25 anni fa. "Qui abbiamo trovato una comunità di intenti con Autorità portuale e Capitaneria", spiega Demarchi. Ma il modello è distribuito e guarda già ad altri scali come Napoli e Civitavecchia. "Stiamo completando analisi e iter autorizzativi: contiamo di essere operativi nelle prossime settimane". Sul fronte internazionale, la strategia si estende lungo il Mediterraneo. Sempre a marzo Axpo, insieme a Enagás, ha avviato l’operatività della nave Alisios Lng, con una capacità di 12.500 metri cubi, destinata a rafforzare il bunkeraggio nel sud della Penisola Iberica. "Gli investimenti si concentrano nel Mediterraneo, dove troviamo contesti aperti e ricettivi, ma guardiamo anche a nuove aree extra Ue", annuncia Demarchi. Sul fronte della domanda, i segnali sono chiari: il Gnl resta oggi il combustibile alternativo più maturo per il trasporto marittimo. La sfida sarà integrare il bio-Gnl, ancora limitato dalla disponibilità. "Stiamo lavorando anche in Italia allo sviluppo di impianti di biometano, ma la strada è ancora lunga". A fare la differenza è il contesto: "Servono infrastrutture permeabili all’innovazione, ma soprattutto processi autorizzativi rapidi e un approccio collaborativo". Nel medio-lungo periodo il Gnl dovrà confrontarsi con elettrificazione e idrogeno. "Oggi queste soluzioni presentano ancora criticità legate ai costi, alle condizioni di trasporto, alla sicurezza e alla disponibilità. Senza un significativo salto tecnologico, è difficile che possano sostituire il Gnl, che lungo l’intera filiera mantiene oggi un rapporto costi-benefici ambientali più favorevole rispetto alle alternative". Lo sguardo si spinge al 2030. "Lo sviluppo del Gnl e del bio-Gnl rappresenta una leva strategica per rafforzare la competitività del sistema portuale nazionale e consolidare il ruolo dell’Italia come piattaforma energetica nel Mediterraneo".

Nel sistema energetico sta cambiando una variabile chiave: non solo dove si produce il gas, ma come viene distribuito. È su questo terreno che prende forma lo small scale Lng, la distribuzione di gas naturale liquefatto su piccola scala, che da segmento marginale sta evolvendo in una filiera industriale. Il punto di forza è la modularità: minori volumi, maggiore flessibilità, capacità di servire porti, industrie e aree non metanizzate. L’interesse per lo small scale Lng è legato a tre fattori. Il primo è la sicurezza energetica: dopo la crisi del gas del 2022, seguita alla guerra in Ucraina, l’Europa ha aumentato il ricorso al Gnl, che oggi copre circa il 40% delle importazioni, provenienti in larga parte da Stati Uniti e Qatar. Il secondo è regolatorio: le norme europee e internazionali, da FuelEU Maritime all’estensione dell’Ets al trasporto marittimo, spingono verso combustibili a minori emissioni. Il terzo è tecnologico: il Gnl è una soluzione disponibile su scala industriale ed è compatibile con il bio-Gnl. In questo contesto, lo small scale Lng sta uscendo dalla dimensione di nicchia, con la prospettiva - secondo le stime di Grand View Research, società di analisi americana - di passare da circa 17 miliardi nel 2025 a quasi 50 miliardi di dollari al 2033 solo in Europa, con tassi di crescita a doppia cifra. A guidare questa crescita è il settore marittimo. Lo evidenzia Dnv: la flotta mondiale di navi alimentate a Gnl ha raggiunto le 648 unità a fine 2024 ed è destinata a crescere rapidamente. Oggi circa il 50% delle nuove navi a combustibili alternativi utilizza il Gnl, confermando il ruolo “ponte” di questo vettore nella transizione del trasporto marittimo. A questo trend si affiancano i primi segnali operativi: nei porti italiani sono già state avviate operazioni regolari di bunkeraggio, con frequenze che in alcuni casi arrivano a una ogni due giorni. Questo trend sta spingendo lo sviluppo del bunkeraggio e, più in generale, il salto di scala dello small scale Lng, che per crescere deve poter contare su depositi costieri, navi dedicate e una logistica integrata, collegata ai terminali di rigassificazione - punto di ingresso del gas nella filiera - da cui prende avvio la distribuzione su piccola scala. Su questa base si innestano soluzioni come ship-to-ship e ship-to-truck, che consentono di rifornire non solo le navi ma anche le autocisterne, estendendo l’utilizzo del Gnl oltre il comparto marittimo. È su questo terreno - disponibilità di infrastrutture, operatività nei porti e capacità di distribuzione - che si misura il grado di maturità dei mercati. In Italia, il quadro è ancora sbilanciato. Come mostrano i dati di Bip Consulting, nel 2024 la domanda complessiva di Gnl ha raggiunto circa 208mila tonnellate, ma resta fortemente concentrata nell’autotrazione, che rappresenta oltre l’80% dei consumi, con più di 5.000 mezzi e circa 180 stazioni di rifornimento, soprattutto nel Centro-Nord. Il comparto navale, invece, è ancora marginale ma è quello destinato a crescere di più: gli scenari indicano che, con lo sviluppo delle infrastrutture e condizioni di mercato favorevoli, i consumi potrebbero aumentare rapidamente nei prossimi tre anni, trainando l’espansione complessiva del mercato. Grafico a cura di Silvano Di Meo I nodi restano su due piani, strettamente intrecciati. Da un lato, la complessità burocratica - tra iter autorizzativi multilivello e concessioni demaniali per l’utilizzo di aree e banchine portuali - continua a rappresentare più un ostacolo amministrativo che tecnico. Dall’altro, questi ritardi si riflettono sul piano infrastrutturale: ad oggi sono operativi solo due depositi costieri, snodi in cui il gas, dopo l’importazione attraverso i terminali di rigassificazione, viene stoccato e ridistribuito su scala ridotta. Sono quelli di Ravenna - unico punto di ritiro di Gnl a servizio della penisola - e di Oristano, che serve esclusivamente la Sardegna e resta un laboratorio per le reti isolate. Altri progetti sono stati presentati, alcuni risultano autorizzati, ma non ancora realizzati. Sul fronte del bunkeraggio, passaggi decisivi sono stati compiuti con le linee guida per le operazioni ship-to-ship di Gnl e bio-Gnl pubblicate dal ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti nel maggio 2025. Il documento introduce procedure operative standard, definisce i requisiti di sicurezza e chiarisce il ruolo delle autorità portuali. Il crescente interesse è stato confermato anche dagli esiti delle prime aste dedicate allo small scale Lng, svoltesi tra ottobre e dicembre 2025, che hanno visto l’allocazione di 15 slot, rendendo possibile l’utilizzo su scala commerciale del Gnl anche nei segmenti più nuovi. A rafforzare la filiera contribuiscono anche infrastrutture di rigassificazione galleggiante come il terminale Fsru Toscana di Olt Offshore Lng, controllato da Snam. L’impianto, al largo di Livorno, rappresenta un’infrastruttura storica per l’import e oggi si sta affermando come uno dei primi snodi operativi in grado di collegare la grande importazione alla distribuzione su piccola scala. Il quadro, però, è più ampio. L’Italia dispone di una rete di terminali di rigassificazione - onshore, offshore e Fsru - che negli ultimi anni ha rafforzato la capacità di importazione. Il passaggio decisivo è trasformare questa dotazione in una filiera logistica diffusa, capace di alimentare porti, trasporti e industrie. È qui che si gioca la partita dello small scale Lng: non più solo importare gas, ma portarlo dove serve davvero.