Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

The Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners has approved a $3.4 billion annual budget for fiscal 2026-2027 for the Port of Los Angeles. The increase comes as the port, which along with neighboring Long Beach comprises the busiest U.S. container gateway, is forecasting a 7% decline in box volumes, to 9.3 million twenty foot equivalent units (TEUs) in fiscal 2026-2027. The San Pedro Bay complex has keenly felt the effects of the Trump administration’s trade war with China, with ongoing tariffs and other measures pushing importers to increasingly seek alternative maritime routes into North America through Mexico and Canada. China has also sought out new trade agreements in Africa and boosted business with Europe, as it makes plans to sustain its massive export economy, the world’s largest. China’s share of all containerized imports through Los Angeles has fallen to about 40% in 2026, down from 53.4% in 2025 and 61% in 2020. Port management cited continued volatility in global trade and uncertainty about trade policy as contributing factors to a more cautious cargo volume outlook. The hub is owned and operated by the City of Los Angeles through its Harbor Department. Increased investments in operational and community public-access infrastructure are covered in the budget, as well as support for sustainability and technology programs. “The passage of this budget reflects the strength and forward-looking vision of the Port of Los Angeles. We’re enhancing our infrastructure, advancing our sustainability initiatives, and ensuring we keep the port competitive in the global economy,” said Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, in a statement. Bass, who has championed environmental investments that help the port meet water and air quality requirements, and advocated for the port’s economic role, thanked Executive Director Gene Seroka and Commission President Lucille Roybal-Allard for their leadership. The budget increase totals $665 million over FY2025-2026, mostly on a 31% expansion for capital improvements. But it also includes higher subsidies for the Port’s Clean Truck Fund Rate and cost-of-living increases for staff salary and benefits as the port accounts for outside inflationary pressures. Projected operating revenues of $826 million represent a 26% increase y/y, with shipping services accounting for 65% of that. Operating expenses are projected to rise by 6% to $452 million. Capital improvement spending will set a 10-year mark, and center on container terminal modernization and transportation improvements in and out of the port. Construction has started on the $74 million rail expansion at Berths 302-305 and $130 million SR 47/Vincent Thomas Bridge interchange reconfiguration. A request for proposals for Pier 500 at Terminal Island, the first new container terminal in decades, was issued in late 2025. The 200-acre terminal will feature two new berths and 3,000 linear feet of new wharf designed for larger next-generation container ships in natural deep water. Expansions are planned at cargo terminals operated by Fenix Marine Services and LATiL, a unit of Mediterranean Shipping Co., and a new cruise facility to replace and expand existing operations was announced earlier this year. Read more articles by Stuart Chirlshere. Related coverage: Long Beach awards $54M in small business contracts Conservative network has law protecting U.S.-flag shipping in its sights For 1st time, U.S. approves controversial LNG production ship Port Houston’s hurricane playbook: Safety first, cargo moving fast Supply Chain AI Symposium Past the hype. Join operators, founders, and enterprise leaders figuring out how to deploy AI in supply chain. F3: Future of Freight Festival Industry-defining keynotes, rapid-fire technology demos, and industry leaders networking in experiences across Chattanooga - plus the inaugural F3 Awards Dinner featuring the FreightTech and Shipper of Choice reveals. Past the hype. Join operators, founders, and enterprise leaders figuring out how to deploy AI in supply chain. Industry-defining keynotes, rapid-fire technology demos, and industry leaders networking in experiences across Chattanooga - plus the inaugural F3 Awards Dinner featuring the FreightTech and Shipper of Choice reveals.

The supply boat sank after hitting a landing craft and search and rescue operations are ongoing June 12, 2026 A supply boat sank after it collided with a landing craft ofSingapore’sPasir Panjang Terminal. The accident happened at around 9:30am local time on 12 June according to theMaritime & Port Authority of Singapore (MPA)with craft from the MPA, Police Coast Guard (PCG), and SCDF Marine Division responding for search and rescue operations. MPA said that the Police Coast Guard recovered three bodies believed to be deceased crew members of the supply boat. “Search and rescue operations, including diving operations, are ongoing to determine if there are other crew members from the supply boat missing,” the port authority said. The landing craft was reported to be stable following the collision with no injuries to its crew. Pasir Panjang Terminal is one of Singapore’s main container terminals and MPA said port operations were unaffected with navigational broadcasts for vessels to stay clear of the incident area. Related:Container ship sinks in Singapore Strait MPA said the incident was being investigated. Read more about: Marcus Hand Editor Marcus Hand is the editor of Seatrade Maritime News and a dedicated maritime journalist with over two decades of experience covering the shipping industry in Asia. Marcus is also an experienced industry commentator and has chaired many conferences and round tables. Before joining Seatrade at the beginning of 2010, Marcus worked for the shipping industry journal Lloyd's List for a decade and before that the Singapore Business Times covering shipping and aviation. In November 2022, Marcus was announced as a member of the Board of Advisors to the Singapore Journal of Maritime Talent and Technology (SJMTT) to help bring together thought leadership around the key areas of talent and technology. Marcus is the founder of theSeatrade Maritime Podcastthat delivers commentary, opinions and conversations on shipping's most important topics. Marcus Hand regularly moderates at international maritime events. Below you’ll find a list of selected past conferences and webinars. Wind-Assisted Propulsion: Are we ready? at Seatrade Maritime Crew Connect Global 2024 IMPA 2024 SingaporeMaritime Procurement and Sustainability Panel, November 2024 Goodbye Globalization? Red Sea Impacts Reviewed,EGN Singapore (Executives' Global Network)webinar, February 2024 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum atSea Asia 2023 Sustainable Finance, Shipping & Technology at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2022 Building & Operating Dual-Fuel Vessels, February 2022 Shipping’s Decarbonisation Challenge – The Role of Technology and Digitalisation at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2021 The Challenge Faced by Ship Registries in a Digital and Post-Pandemic Era, October 2020 The Future of Transhipment Hubs Post-Pandemic, November 2020 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum at Sea Asia 2019 Marcus Hand regularly guests on mainstream media talking about maritime and shipping news stories. Below you'll find a list of selected appearances KBS World Radio -Korea24,May 2026 BBC News -Hindi Service,April 2026 RNZ -First Up, April 2026

inGeneral Energy News12/06/2026 The number of new carbon capture and storage (CCS) project announcements in Europe has fallen sharply in the last three years. A string of cancellations in 2025 underscores the economic and technical hurdles that CCS projects face in reaching final investment decision. IEEFA expects to see continued weakness in new project announcements and more cancellations. This raises questions about whether CCS can deliver at the scale European decarbonisation targets require. Europe’s pipeline of potential CCS projects significantly increased between 2018 and 2023, when 317 projects supporting capture, transport and storage were announced. EU policies such as the European Climate Law — which makes climate neutrality by 2050 legally binding — and Fit for 55 supported this boom in activity. The policies advocate for increased use of CCS to support EU climate neutrality. This was coupled with a significant rise in the price of carbon across Europe at the time, namely through the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), which moved from €5–10 in 2017 to peaks above €100 in 2023. This made purchasing ETS emission allowances increasingly expensive and provided a clear economic incentive for polluters to avoid these rising costs with CCS. In addition, a series of CCS public funding and state support mechanisms were announced from 2018, including the EU Innovation Fund, Important Projects of Common European Interest and Carbon Contracts for Difference, as well as national subsidy schemes in the UK, Norway, the Netherlands and Denmark. The introduction of hub-and-spoke industrial clusters from early 2020 removed early CCS project barriers by enabling carbon capture projects to share pipelines and storage hubs. Around this time, CCS became central to blue hydrogen production strategies, and regulatory clarity started to improve. The penny dropsMore recently there has been a marked decline in new European CCS project announcements, which peaked at 100 in 2021 and fell to 24 in 2025. While project numbers are a gauge of market activity, the proposed capture volumes are the most important indicator as they highlight the potential carbon reduction across Europe. Proposed capture volumes from newly announced projects fell from a peak of 52 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO2) in 2021 to 7MtCO2 in 2025. Cumulative proposed capture volumes were 201MtCO2 from more than 400 potential projects as of 2025. Combined EU and UK capture and storage targets are 80MtCO2 by 2030 and 522MtCO2 by 2050. While there are theoretically sufficient projects in the pipeline to meet the 2030 target, the reality is that projects take many years to progress from announcement to operation given the economic, technical and legislative hurdles. The volume of carbon capture capacity cancelled in Europe in 2025 exceeded that reaching final investment decision: 5.4MtCO2 of capture-related projects were cancelled, while only 4.2MtCO2 of projects received investment approval. Of the 2025 cancelled projects, blue hydrogen represented the largest share of capture volume at 71%, followed by a refining project at 20%. The balance was from a waste-to-energy plant. Four hydrogen projects were cancelled, most notably the BP-owned H2Teesside Phase 1 & 2 in the UK, which accounted for 2MtCO2, and the Equinor-backed H2M Eemshaven project in the Netherlands, with 1.8MtCO2. The companies behind these projects put the cancellations down to weak hydrogen demand, site planning challenges and funding uncertainties. Plans for carbon capture at the UK’s Prax Lindsey refining project collapsed as the parent company went into administration. Similar plans at Denmark’s Amager Resource Centre energy-from-waste project were also cancelled due to the withdrawal of E.ON, the project’s key build, own and operate partner. While the official statements on the 2025 project cancellations do not reference economic and technical difficulties, IEEFA suspects that these fundamental challenges of CCS projects formed part of the decision-making process. The technology readiness level of capture processes and operation across the European CCS project pipeline ranges from five (large prototype) to nine (early adoption) out of 11 (mature) across different industry sectors. As such, all projects remain technically challenging and at risk of delays, partial capture rates relative to 90–95% benchmarks, or outright capture failure. Any deviation from project schedule or capture rates will increase costs, which are already high. CO2 capture, transport and storage costs can range from $133 per tonne for biofuel projects to $244 per tonne for chemical plant operations. This is considerably higher than current EU and UK ETS prices of $91 and $52y respectively. The gap in the cost of installing and operating CCS relative to ETS prices means polluters have little incentive to deploy CCS. Bridging this gap will require state subsidy, burdening governments at a time of increased fiscal tightening. Given the technical and economic challenges facing CCS as a decarbonisation option, a recovery in Europe’s CCS pipeline looks unlikely any time soon.Source: Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis

inGeneral Energy News12/06/2026 The European Commission has laid out its key priorities for the upcoming review of the Emissions Trading System, eyeing a predictable carbon price, strengthening investment and ensuring an even playing field for sectors covered by the cap-and-trade scheme, according to a document seen by Platts, part of S&P Global Energy. The project brief was circulated ahead of a commission orientation meeting taking place June 10. It highlighted three core objectives for the review, including improving support for Europe’s industrial and clean tech sectors in the 2030s. “The review will preserve the strength of the carbon market and its price signal as a driver for investments,” the EC said, adding that it will “adapt its design and introduce targeted simplifications to reduce administrative burden and make the system more effective,” including simpler monitoring, reporting and verification of maritime emissions and simplified reporting for air carriers. The draft also said that the review will align the ETS with the 2040 and 2050 climate targets, allowing “for a more gradual decarbonization pathway.” Executive Vice-President of the European Commission for Cohesion and Reforms Raffaele Fitto said the orientation talks were constructive, with the EC now working toward the July 15 deadline for the ETS review. “The discussion and the contributions were very, very positive and important for this very crucial goal of July 15,” Fitto said at a press conference following the meeting. Carbon removal inclusion in the ETS was also part of the discussion, alongside a review of the Market Stability Reserve, which governs the supply-and-demand dynamics of EU Allowances. Free allocationsStrengthening investment in green energy was another core priority, the document showed. The commission said the review will “ensure that substantial ETS revenues are invested in innovation, clean tech and industrial decarbonization in a cost-effective manner,” adding that it would look to extend free allocations “while clearly linking it to much-needed investments inside Europe.” It said that the Innovation Fund will continue to support first commercial applications in technology, supplemented by the Industrial Decarbonization Bank with Eur100 billion ($115 billion) in funding within the governance of the future Competitive Fund. The ETS Investment Booster will help kick-start investments, the commission said, adding that the booster will be available before 2030 “to ensure timely supply.” Finally, the EC said the review will need to ensure member states are compelled to spend more of their national ETS revenues on investments in decarbonization of the ETS-covered sectors. “Specific mechanisms ensuring continued solidarity with lower-income Member States, such as the redistribution of 10% of auctioning revenues, the Modernization Fund, and guaranteed access to the ETS Investment Booster, will continue to assist lower-income Member States in modernizing their energy system and accelerating industrial transformation,” said the commission. The EU’s carbon market has emerged as the unlikely flashpoint in Europe’s industrial competitiveness debate, with political pressure mounting throughout 2026 over its impact on heavy industry and manufacturing. This political pushback dragged EU carbon prices down by almost Eur30/mtCO2e ($34.93/mtCO2e) in mid-March since mid-January, when prices were near Eur93/mtCO2e. But values have recovered since March after the commission confirmed it will address these concerns in its ETS review proposal in July, which will examine critical aspects of the carbon market architecture, including the trajectory of free allowances to energy-intensive industries, supply-and-demand mechanisms, and sectoral expansions. AviationThe commission further said that the review should ensure that all sectors under the ETS contribute fairly to the EU’s climate targets. “This includes applying an effective carbon price signal to the EU’s fair share of aviation emissions for extra-European flights,” said the EC. The scope of aviation under the EU ETS, including the option of extending coverage to departing international flights, has been featured in previous EC-stakeholder engagements. While the industry opposes such an expansion, citing administrative hurdles and overlapping obligations, others have argued that most aviation emissions linked to Europe remain outside the ETS and that reliance on CORSIA is inadequate. The Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, or CORSIA, is the UN’s global market-based carbon credit scheme, managed by the International Civil Aviation Organization and is aimed at reducing emissions from international aviation. Platts last assessed the CEC price for CORSIA-eligible credits at at $9.90/mtCO2e on June 9, the lowest level since June 2024. Meanwhile, EU Allowance prices are trading at significantly higher levels, with the latest Platts assessment for the nearest-December benchmark at Eur76.10/mtCO2e ($87.92/mtCO2e) on June 9.Source:Platts

Study with Core Power explores feasibility and readiness for nuclear-powered feeder ships at the Port of Rotterdam. June 11, 2026 The main barriers to the adoption ofnuclear-poweredship port calls are regulatory alignment, governance, risk management integration and public acceptance, according to a new joint study fromLloyd’s Register, Core Power,Maersk, and thePort of Rotterdam. The study looked at a scenario where a high-level nuclear ship design carried out a port stay at an EU port, and its findings are aimed at informing decision making by EU ports and authorities. The partners’ desktop study found categories of barriers that apply to ports across the EU, including a lack of specific provision for nuclear ships in existing regulations, limited integration between maritime and nuclear safety regimes, and a lack of guidance for ports on how to interpret nuclear licensing, insurance and liability for visiting nuclear ships. The main output of the study is a roadmap of activities to overcome barriers to nuclear ship adoption, aimed at EU ports and authorities. “The assessment demonstrates that nuclear ships can be evaluated using the same safety themes and processes already applied to other high-risk maritime activities. Where gaps exist, they are typically due to a lack of guidance rather than technical incompatibilities,” said the report. Related:Exmar commissions first ammonia-powered deepsea vessel Near-term activities on the roadmap — those that should begin within the next five years if they haven’t already — are loosely grouped as development of nuclear ship designs and conducting risk assessments, publishing and communication of risk management activities, development of guidance for nautical safety and port security, and collaborative updates to international codes at IMO and IAEA, or development of new international codes. Addressing public perceptions of nuclear power are a priority, as early communication would make it easier to address regulatory, liability, and legal gaps. Port specific standards may need reviewing, the report said, such as Rotterdam’s temperature restriction for discharged cooling water. The medium-term activities are those that follow on from near-term activities and need to be in place before commissioning of the first nuclear-powered ship. They are development of public engagement strategies; producing recommendations for liability, training, and security in port; establishing measures for safety and security in ports; and national implementation standards. International and national guidance will be required for a wide range of activities, including emergency response, berthing, port-related safety aspects, operational procedures in port, and training of ship and port personnel to handle normal and emergency operations, said the report. Development of such guidance will require the inputs from the near-term activities on nuclear ship design and operation. Related:Partners ink MoU to develop wind-powered MR tanker design Liability and insurance frameworks for nuclear shipping will also require a certain level of understanding of technical and operational risks, and will therefore be a medium-term issue. Operation of the first nuclear-powered ships will require multilateral agreement between nations to accept nuclear operating licenses; valid insurance for ship and ports; marine regulatory approvals from class, flag and coastal states; certified and trained ship and port operators; and permits to enter ports with required preparations are in place. In the long-term, required activities will be the refining of regulations and policies in-line with technology development, and the establishment of mutual recognition of nuclear ship licenses at the national level. Ole Graa Jakobsen, head of fleet technology, A.P. Moller-Maersk said: “Civil commercial nuclear propulsion presents a number of significant challenges, including safety, waste management, regulatory alignment and public acceptance across regions. This study does not represent a decision to pursue nuclear propulsion, but contributes to further understanding of what would be required for ports and authorities to assess such vessels in a structured and responsible way. We continue to monitor and assess this technology alongside other low-emission solutions.” Related:Greek tycoon Procopiou takes aim at IMO Mikal Bøe, CEO of Core Power, said: “An obvious key to the success of civil maritime nuclear propulsion is the trusted confidence of port cities and their populations in ship calls by nuclear powered merchant ships. “Together with Rotterdam, LR and Maersk we've identified a port safety framework and created a credible starting point for assessments by the IMO as it revises the Safety Code for Nuclear Ships and for the IAEA as it launches its flagship ATLAS program this summer. We've highlighted where further work is needed, including modernised port guidance, inter-agency regulatory alignment, nuclear-specific safety, and security requirements and best in class emergency preparedness to build public trust.” Harbour master of the Port of Rotterdam, René de Vries said: “Ports need to understand how emerging energy and shipping technologies may interact with future port operations and industrial systems. This study represents an initial case-study assessment intended to better understand the regulatory, operational and safety considerations associated with nuclear-powered commercial shipping within a European port context.” Meg Albrecht, senior engineer - nuclear technology and alternative fuels, Lloyd’s Register, said: “The maritime energy transition will require the industry to examine a range of future fuel and propulsion pathways. This work contributes to a broader understanding of the regulatory and operational considerations associated with nuclear-powered vessels and helps establish a structured basis for further discussion and analysis.” The full reportEnabling Nuclear-Powered Feeder Ships: A Joint Development Project on Port Call Feasibility and Regulatory Pathwaysis available to download from the Core Power website. Read more about: Gary Howard Middle East correspondent Gary Howard is the Middle East Correspondent for Seatrade Maritime News and has written for Seatrade Cruise, Seatrade Maritime Review and was News Editor at Lloyd’s List. Gary’s maritime career started after catching the shipping bug during a research assignment for the offshore industry. Working out of Seatrade's head office in the UK, he also produces and contributes to conference programmes for Seatrade events including CMA Shipping, Seatrade Maritime Logistics Middle East and Marintec. Gary’s favourite topics within the maritime industry are decarbonisation and wind-assisted propulsion; he particularly enjoys reporting from industry events. Gary Howard regularly moderates at international maritime events. Below you’ll find a list of selected past conferences and webinars. Ports of Refuge: Strengthening Maritime Resilience, at Seatrade Maritime Logistics Middle East 2025 Debunking LEO and Cloud for Maritime Industry, December 2022 (watch on-demand recording) Making Data Work for Shipping at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021 Is the Zero-Carbon Future a Slow Shipping Future?at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021 Is Ship Finance Transforming Faster than Shipping?at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021

The latest news and commentary on how the US/Israel-Iran conflict is affecting the global maritime industry and shipping markets. Three Indian seafarers are missing after US forces disabled a Palau-flagged tanker in the Gulf of Oman June 11, 2026 The Palau-flagged tankerSettebello’sengine room was struck byUSforces on 10 June leaving threeIndianseafarers missing. US Central Command said that US aircraft fired precision munitions into the ship's engine room "after the crew repeatedly failed to comply with directions from American forces." India’s Ministry of External Affairs said that theSettebellohad 24 Indian crew onboard and 21 seafarers had been rescued and three were missing. It said the Indian Embassy inOmanwas coordinating with Omani authorities on the Search and Rescue operation. The attack was condemned by both India and theInternational Maritime Organization (IMO)Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez although in both cases stopped short of naming the US as the party that struck the vessel. “I strongly condemn any act from any party that endangers the lives of seafarers and the safety of international shipping. This is simply unacceptable. My thoughts are with the families of the three missing seafarers and with all those awaiting news of the crew members.” Related:Iran claims it hit two ships, declares Strait of Hormuz closed India’s Ministry of External Affairs said: "We condemn the attack on the commercial vesselSettebellooff the coast of Oman. “The continuing incidents of attacks on shipping the region are deeply worrisome and a direct result of the ongoing conflict in the region.” The 1997-built tanker is operated and managed by IOS Marine – FTZ in theUAE. On 8 June US forces fired on the engine room of the oil products tankerMarivexto disable it, causing a fire on the vessel. The Omani Navy rescued 24 Indian seafarers on board the tanker. US Central Command said it disabled the empty tanker for violating its blockade and attempting to sail to an Iranian port. Read more about: Marcus Hand Editor Marcus Hand is the editor of Seatrade Maritime News and a dedicated maritime journalist with over two decades of experience covering the shipping industry in Asia. Marcus is also an experienced industry commentator and has chaired many conferences and round tables. Before joining Seatrade at the beginning of 2010, Marcus worked for the shipping industry journal Lloyd's List for a decade and before that the Singapore Business Times covering shipping and aviation. In November 2022, Marcus was announced as a member of the Board of Advisors to the Singapore Journal of Maritime Talent and Technology (SJMTT) to help bring together thought leadership around the key areas of talent and technology. Marcus is the founder of theSeatrade Maritime Podcastthat delivers commentary, opinions and conversations on shipping's most important topics. Marcus Hand regularly moderates at international maritime events. Below you’ll find a list of selected past conferences and webinars. Wind-Assisted Propulsion: Are we ready? at Seatrade Maritime Crew Connect Global 2024 IMPA 2024 SingaporeMaritime Procurement and Sustainability Panel, November 2024 Goodbye Globalization? Red Sea Impacts Reviewed,EGN Singapore (Executives' Global Network)webinar, February 2024 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum atSea Asia 2023 Sustainable Finance, Shipping & Technology at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2022 Building & Operating Dual-Fuel Vessels, February 2022 Shipping’s Decarbonisation Challenge – The Role of Technology and Digitalisation at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2021 The Challenge Faced by Ship Registries in a Digital and Post-Pandemic Era, October 2020 The Future of Transhipment Hubs Post-Pandemic, November 2020 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum at Sea Asia 2019 Marcus Hand regularly guests on mainstream media talking about maritime and shipping news stories. Below you'll find a list of selected appearances KBS World Radio -Korea24,May 2026 BBC News -Hindi Service,April 2026 RNZ -First Up, April 2026

The latest news and commentary on how the US/Israel-Iran conflict is affecting the global maritime industry and shipping markets. IRGC declares the waterway closed to all ships, including tankers and commercial vessels. June 10, 2026 The IRGC Navy has declared the Strait of Hormuz closed and announced it hit two ships attempting to “illegally pass through the Strait of Hormuz,” according to the Mehr News Agency. Details of the vessels and any damage caused were not immediately available. In a statement, IRGC headquarters said “from this moment on, due to insecurity in the region, the Strait of Hormuz is declared closed to the traffic of any type of vessel, including oil tankers and commercial vessels, and any traffic will be affected.” USCentral Command posted on X claiming that the Strait remains open and vessels continue to transit. It also refuted claims that Iran had attacked a US warship in the Strait. The announcements come as the US launched new strikes in Iran late on 10 June, the latest step in the deterioration of a ceasefire signed in April. In a statement released at 9pm ET on 10 June, US Central Command said: "US Marine Corps, Air Force, and Navy assets fired precision munitions on Iranian targets that posed a threat to US forces and international commercial ships transiting regional waters." It said that the latest strikes were complete. Related:India and the IMO condemn attack on tanker Settebello On Tuesday, a US military helicopter was downed in the region in an attack blamed on Iran, although Iran has not taken responsibility. The US said its latest “self defense strikes” were a response to “Iran’s unwarranted and continued aggression.” On June 9, The Palau-flagged tankerSettebellowas attacked by US forcesleading to a fire onboard and three seafarers missing, and on 8 June fired upon product tankerMarivexleading to afire onboard and the rescue of 24 crewby the Omani Navy. IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez expressed deep concern and strongly condemned the attack on theSettebello. “I strongly condemn any act from any party that endangers the lives of seafarers and the safety of international shipping. This is simply unacceptable. My thoughts are with the families of the three missing seafarers and with all those awaiting news of the crew members.” Read more about: Gary Howard Middle East correspondent Gary Howard is the Middle East Correspondent for Seatrade Maritime News and has written for Seatrade Cruise, Seatrade Maritime Review and was News Editor at Lloyd’s List. Gary’s maritime career started after catching the shipping bug during a research assignment for the offshore industry. Working out of Seatrade's head office in the UK, he also produces and contributes to conference programmes for Seatrade events including CMA Shipping, Seatrade Maritime Logistics Middle East and Marintec. Gary’s favourite topics within the maritime industry are decarbonisation and wind-assisted propulsion; he particularly enjoys reporting from industry events. Gary Howard regularly moderates at international maritime events. Below you’ll find a list of selected past conferences and webinars. Ports of Refuge: Strengthening Maritime Resilience, at Seatrade Maritime Logistics Middle East 2025 Debunking LEO and Cloud for Maritime Industry, December 2022 (watch on-demand recording) Making Data Work for Shipping at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021 Is the Zero-Carbon Future a Slow Shipping Future?at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021 Is Ship Finance Transforming Faster than Shipping?at Seatrade ShipTech Virtual 2021

inInternational Shipping News11/06/2026 In 2026, LNG has stopped being a pilot fuel in shipping. Roughly 800 LNG-capable vessels are in service and another 600 are on order. Bunkering is available in 222 ports worldwide, supplied by 62 dedicated bunker vessels. At the same time, FuelEU Maritime and the EU Emissions Trading System have turned fuel choice into a compliance question, not just an operational one. For shipowners and charterers weighing fuel options, the honest 2026 read is this: LNG is a mature fuel with real near-term compliance value, and its long-term value depends on methane-slip control and the shift to bio-LNG and e-methane.Where LNG stands in 2026 The LNG-fueled fleet is no longer experimental. DNV’s 2025 orderbook data show LNG representing 58% of alternative-fuel container tonnage contracted in 2025. SEA-LNG’s 2026 infrastructure review counts 222 ports with bunkering availability and 38 additional bunker vessels on order. Three clusters carry most of the activity: Adoption is led by deep-sea container lines, ferries, ro-pax, cruise, and selected tanker segments. MSC, CMA CGM, Maersk, and Hapag-Lloyd all operate significant LNG-pathway tonnage. Environmental performance: clear on air, honest on climate Air pollutants: a strong case On local and regional air pollutants, LNG performs well. Sulfur oxides are essentially eliminated. Particulate matter and black carbon are sharply reduced compared with other fuels, and even distillates. NOx reductions vary by engine architecture but can reach an 85% reduction against conventional engines. Black carbon is the least controversial climate-relevant advantage. A 2025 ICCT Arctic assessment found that LNG-fueled vessels accounted for 31% of CO₂ emissions but only 2% of black carbon emissions from EU-regulated ships operating in the Geographic Arctic. That is a significant difference in climate pollutants near ice and snow. Climate: it depends on methane Tank-to-wake CO₂ from LNG combustion is lower than for HFO or MGO because methane carries less carbon per unit of energy. Lifecycle greenhouse gas results, however, depend on engine type and methane slip. ICCT shipping factors show a wide spread: about 5.5 gCH₄/kWh for medium-speed low-pressure Otto engines, 2.5 gCH₄/kWh for slow-speed Otto engines, and 0.2 gCH₄/kWh for high-pressure diesel dual-fuel engines. That spread explains why independent studies and industry assessments reach different conclusions. The honest summary: LNG is a proven fuel, lower on air-pollutants than traditional fuels, whose climate value depends on engine choice, methane-slip control, and the pathway to bio-LNG and e-methane. How LNG fits EU rules: FuelEU and ETS Two EU frameworks now govern the emissions picture for ships calling at EEA ports. FuelEU Maritime applies from 1 January 2025 to ships above 5,000 GT. It sets a well-to-wake GHG intensity standard covering 100% of energy used on intra-EEA voyages, 50% on voyages into or out of the EEA, and 100% at berth. The 2025 target is 2% below a baseline of 91.16 gCO₂e/MJ, tightening to 6% in 2030 and 80% by 2050. Ships that beat the target generate surplus compliance units, which can be banked, borrowed, or pooled across fleets. The EU ETS has applied to maritime since 1 January 2024. CO₂ is counted from 2024; CH₄ and N₂O enter the scope from 2026. Allowance ramps from 40% of 2024 emissions to 70% of 2025 emissions and 100% from 2026 onward. LNG sits favorably under both. Lower direct CO₂ reduces the number of allowances needed under ETS. Under FuelEU, low-slip LNG vessels can run below the intensity target in the early years and generate tradeable surplus. CE Delft’s FuelEU analysis shows that fossil LNG in a low-slip slow-speed dual-fuel engine can meet the 2025 and 2030 targets without renewable blending. From 2026 onward, methane slip becomes a direct cost lever in both systems at once, which is why slip measurement is now the highest-ROI compliance action most LNG operators can take. The deeper mechanics are covered in The Double Dividend and the FuelEU Maritime practical roadmap. Bio-LNG and e-methane: the fuel system matters more than the molecule The strategic argument for LNG is the fuel system, not the molecule. Dual-fuel LNG engines and cryogenic tanks run on bio-LNG and synthetic e-methane without hardware changes. The same infrastructure, bunkering chain, and crew competences apply. Under the EU’s well-to-wake methodology, bio-LNG reaches very low lifecycle intensity, and with RED II manure credits it can even go negative. One vessel running on bio-LNG can generate enough FuelEU surplus to cover several conventional ships in the same pool. Gasum’s cooperation with Viking Line and Wallenius SOL demonstrates the model: bio-LNG-fuelled vessels act as compliance generators, and other operators take the surplus as off-takers. The same pathway is already visible in concrete bunker operations, with Gasum’s core bunkering activity concentrated in the Danish Straits and German ports, which are increasingly serving as alternatives to traditional hubs such as Antwerp and Zeebrugge. An LNG-capable vessel ordered today is a bet on a fuel system, not on fossil gas. Where LNG is being adopted The clearest read on where LNG works commercially comes from the orderbook. DNV’s 2025 data show LNG at 58% of alternative-fuel container tonnage contracted that year, with adoption concentrated in deep-sea container, ferry, ro-pax, cruise, and selected tanker segments. These are the segments with high annual fuel burn and predictable bunkering access. LNG retrofits are major capital projects, not bolt-ons. A widely cited SEA-LNG study put turnkey VLCC LNG retrofit CAPEX at about $30.3 million. Operating economics are mixed in the other direction: LNG avoids scrubbers, meets sulfur rules by default, and lowers ETS allowance demand, while adding cryogenic system maintenance and boil-off management. Fuel prices and the carbon price now sit in the same conversation. At EUA prices around €75, buying the allowances to cover the emissions from one ton of VLSFO or MGO costs roughly $280 on top of the fuel itself. For much of 2025 and 2026, LNG bunker prices have tracked in a similar band to distillates, which is one reason LNG remains on the shortlist for Europe-exposed fleets. How Gasum fits in Gasum operates the largest LNG and bio-LNG bunkering network in the Nordic and ARA region, with more than 1,000 completed bunkering operations through its dedicated vessels Coralius and Kairos, and LNG terminals in Finland, Sweden, and Norway. The same network supplies bio-LNG through the same bunkering infrastructure. For shipowners focused on FuelEU compliance rather than fleet conversion, Gasum’s maritime pooling service offers a commercial route. Vessels operated by Viking Line and Wallenius SOL, together with Gasum’s own bio-LNG-fueled fleet, generate compliance surplus that off-takers can purchase without modifying their ships or fuel plans.Source: Gasum

Redazione AnsaTORINO - Giugno 10,2026 - News (ANSA) - TORINO, 10 GIU - Filiera tracciata, energia 100% rinnovabile, emissioni in calo del 30%. Il bilancio di sostenibilità 2025 conferma i progressi compiuti dalla cioccolateria torinese Guido Gobino sul fronte della filiera, dell'economia circolare e della riduzione dell'impatto ambientale."La sostenibilità ambientale e sociale per noi è una componente es-senziale del modo in cui pensiamo e facciamo impresa. È un impegno concreto, che si traduce in iniziative capaci di restituire valore alle persone e di contribuire attivamente a promuovere una cultura sociale condivisa" afferma Guido Gobino.In un contesto reso più complesso dai cambiamenti climatici, l'azienda ha raggiunto il 100% di tracciabilità della filiera del cacao e continua a puntare sulle materie prime italiane, che rappresentano il 97% del totale. Tra i prodotti simbolo figurano la Nocciola Tonda Gentile Trilobata Igp e il latte delle Alpi.Sul fronte ambientale, nel 2025 le emissioni di CO2 sono diminuite di quasi il 30% rispetto all'anno precedente e di circa il 50% rispetto al 2023. L'azienda copre inoltre il 100% del proprio fabbisogno elettrico con energia proveniente da fonti rinnovabili, grazie anche all'impianto fotovoltaico destinato all'autoconsumo.Prosegue anche il percorso di riduzione della plastica negli imballaggi: oggi rappresenta il 6% del packaging complessivo, mentre cresce l'utilizzo di carta certificata e bioplastiche compostabili. Gli scarti organici vengono recuperati e riutilizzati in agricoltura biologica o trasformati in altri prodotti, mentre parte dei materiali non recuperabili viene destinata a progetti di riuso creativo. Tra le iniziative di economia circolare spicca la collaborazione con Too Good To Go, che nel 2025 ha permesso di salvare oltre 1.100 confezioni di prodotti invenduti. "Lavoriamo da sempre affinché la qualità sia anche una forma di rispetto per le persone, l'ambiente e il territorio", sottolinea Pietro Gobino, responsabile del team sostenibilità.L'azienda conferma infine il proprio impegno sociale sostenendo progetti sul territorio, tra cui la collaborazione con Scarpetta Rossa per il contrasto alla violenza di genere.(ANSA).

In origine società di prodotti e consulenza strategica per porti e logistica intermodale, Circle è cresciuta fino a diventare la società leader di un intero network di software house per la supply chain e si è quotata in borsa su Euronext Growth Milan (ex Aim Italia) nell'ottobre 2018. A guidarla è il presidente e Ceo Luca Abatello. Qual è l'idea che vi ha fatto nascere e qual è il bilancio rispetto agli obiettivi che vi eravate posti? «Oggi sono 14 anni dall'operazione di management buyout da cui siamo nati. Il pensiero iniziale è stato creare un attore verticale specializzato sulla digitalizzazione della supply chain, con un'ambizione europea e mediterranea. Quando siamo partiti eravamo in sei e nel primo anno abbiamo fatturato meno di un milione di euro. L'intuizione della verticalizzazione sulla supply chain nacque dall'analisi che questo settore — logistica, trasporti marittimi — aveva ancora poco sfruttato le opportunità di digitalizzazione. Il secondo pilastro era unire strumenti avanzati di digitalizzazione con una logica di anticipo normativo: abbiamo sempre analizzato future norme e regolamenti, cercando di anticipare trend e opportunità. Faccio due esempi: uno è quello dei problemi dell’Ets che l’Italia ha affrontato troppo tardi; l’altro invece è un'opportunità, il nuovo regolamento 1056, cosiddetto eFTI, che stiamo affrontando col Ministero fin dall'inizio, addirittura indirizzandolo a livello EU; siamo quindi tra i tre paesi a livello comunitario che stanno aiutando l'Europa a scrivere meglio la norma. Il terzo lato era offrire sia un servizio tecnologico sia strumenti di cofinanziamento, aiutando le aziende a sfruttare bandi regionali, nazionali ed europei. Dopo 14 anni, da 6 persone siamo cresciuti a 175. Dal primo milione di euro tra il 2012 e il 2013, siamo arrivati a 25 milioni di euro di fatturato nel 2025. La crescita è avvenuta sia organicamente sia tramite quella che chiamiamo Systematic Merger and Acquisition: scouting di aziende complementari per aspetti tecnologici o geografici. La prima acquisizione è stata nel 2017, l'ultima pochi settimane fa». La quotazione in Borsa è stata una scelta insolita per un'azienda come la vostra. Come mai avete deciso di farlo? «Deriva un po' dalla mia storia personale — sono laureato in economia con MBA alla Bocconi, quindi mi veniva naturale come approccio. Ma soprattutto ritengo che il capitale di rischio sia lo strumento principale per accompagnare la crescita, specialmente per un imprenditore di prima generazione che non ha capitale familiare alle spalle. La quotazione ci ha permesso di fare un salto di qualità nel posizionamento: essere controllati, certificati e revisionati facilita molto i rapporti con le realtà multinazionali. Inoltre avevamo già identificato chiaramente il tema della crescita per acquisizioni, e la quotazione era un meccanismo naturale sia per la raccolta di capitali sia per le opportunità che ne derivano — scambi azionari, stock option per il top management, possibilità per le aziende acquisite di entrare in una società quotata». Per il futuro come vi vedete? Avete già nuove iniziative in cantiere? «Abbiamo aggiornato il piano Connect for Agile Growth al 2029, con l'obiettivo di raddoppiare ancora e raggiungere i 50 milioni di euro. Lo faremo su due assi: un forte utilizzo dell'intelligenza artificiale per risolvere problemi concreti, e una crescita internazionale significativa. Oggi abbiamo più del 20% delle attività all'estero; l'obiettivo è arrivare al 50%. Un tassello importante è il mondo dell'autotrasporto: abbiamo aperto una sede in Romania e ci stiamo muovendo anche in Polonia, che insieme alla Romania sono i due leader europei dell'autotrasporto. Pur avendo sempre puntato sulle componenti più green — ferrovia e Autostrade del mare — bisogna fare i conti con la realtà geopolitica: l'autotrasporto rappresenta ancora l'80% degli spostamenti interni all'Europa». L'intelligenza artificiale è già utilizzata concretamente oggi o è ancora una prospettiva futura? «Assolutamente sì, è una realtà concreta. I due piloni principali sono: primo, gli elementi predittivi che permettono di ripianificare in tempo reale e agire prima che il problema emerga — perché una volta che il problema emerge, i costi esplodono. Secondo, la dematerializzazione totale dei documenti che accompagnano la merce. Siamo stati fra i primi a livello europeo a lanciare la lettera di vettura elettronica. Di qui a luglio 2027, qualunque operatore potrà utilizzare tutto e solo il digitale: quando un agente delle forze dell'ordine fermerà un carico, basterà un QR code per accedere all'intera catena documentale. Il combinato di queste due componenti potrebbe in prospettiva diventare anche una base per la guida autonoma, anche se quella tecnologia oggi non è ancora sufficientemente matura». Quanto permette di risparmiare concretamente la digitalizzazione della supply chain? «Preferisco parlare di quello che abbiamo toccato con mano direttamente con i nostri clienti. Tendenzialmente si raggiunge un risparmio del 20-25% sui costi correlati, con un ritorno sull'investimento nell'arco di 18 mesi — in certi casi anche più rapido. È un ritorno misurabile, concreto, definito a monte del progetto e verificato alla fine». Le imprese italiane sono aperte a questi cambiamenti o restano conservative? Come si confrontano con quelle estere? «Preferisco guardare il bicchiere mezzo pieno: c'è stato un forte miglioramento, soprattutto negli ultimi 12 mesi. I fondi messi a disposizione a fine 2025 hanno fatto sì che gli operatori cominciassero a toccare con mano questi strumenti. Anche chi sembrava più restio ha cavalcato questi aspetti negli ultimi sei mesi. Il feedback è pragmatico — e forse è meglio così, perché ci sono troppe aziende che vendono la tecnologia come panacea senza risultati concreti. Noi preferiamo misurarci su obiettivi reali. Ci sono esempi di eccellenza: i porti della Spezia e di Trieste, l'aeroporto di Malpensa, e negli ultimi mesi anche Genova, Ravenna, Ancona e la Sicilia, nonchè il mondo interportuale hanno fatto passi avanti importanti. Anche il mondo industriale, dopo Covid e l'esplosione dei noli e le guerre, ha capito che un approccio soltanto reattivo non paga più». Come percepite l'Unione europea in questo momento, soprattutto nel mondo dei trasporti? «Non ci giro intorno. In una situazione di permacrisis, credo che l'Ue abbia ancora un ruolo fondamentale come democrazia forte a livello paneuropeo, con piani a medio e lungo termine su temi come il Green e le reti transeuropee. Ma servono due grandi evoluzioni. La prima: essere molto più pragmatici. Il tema del Green è stato affrontato in modo troppo aprioristico, senza tenere conto delle peculiarità dell'industria europea — il caso automotive è un esempio purtroppo non positivo. Qualunque riforma di innovazione deve considerare concretamente l'impatto sull'industria. La seconda, ancora più urgente: superare la regola dell'unanimità e passare alle maggioranze qualificate. Credo che questo sia il momento storico giusto — nessun paese sembra disposto a mettere il veto. I paesi dell'Est, nonostante la pressione della Russia a fianco, hanno capito che solo con una politica economica, industriale e di difesa comune possiamo ottenere risultati significativi, in un contesto mondiale in cui ci confrontiamo con due enormi potenze».