Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

Raddoppia l’utile netto, sostenuto dall’aumento dei volumi container, passando da 11 a 24 milioni di euro Rotterdam – Il terminal Maasvlakte II di Apm Terminals, nel porto di Rotterdam, ha chiuso il 2025 con risultati finanziari record. L’utile netto è più che raddoppiato, passando da 11 a 24 milioni di euro, sostenuto dall’aumento dei volumi container, dall’incremento dei ricavi e dall’entrata a regime della rete Gemini, la joint venture tra Maersk e Hapag-Lloyd. Il fatturato è salito da 189 a 220 milioni di euro, nonostante un avvio d’anno caratterizzato da difficoltà operative legate alla riorganizzazione dei servizi marittimi. Dopo una fase iniziale di rallentamento dovuta alla sostituzione dei collegamenti gestiti da Msc con quelli di Hapag-Lloyd, il terminal ha registrato una forte ripresa, arrivando a movimentare il più alto volume di container della sua storia. Parallelamente sono avanzati i lavori di ampliamento dello scalo, un progetto che, una volta completato, consentirà di raddoppiare la capacità di movimentazione. L’investimento, sostenuto da Maersk con oltre 700 milioni di euro tra capitale e finanziamenti, ha visto nel 2025 il completamento di gran parte delle opere civili e l’arrivo delle prime nuove gru ship-to-shore, mentre la prima fase dell’espansione dovrebbe entrare in funzione entro la fine del 2026. La strategia di sviluppo punta a incrementare la capacità facendo leva sull’automazione, limitando la crescita del personale. Nel frattempo, la forza lavoro è comunque aumentata da 465 a 539 dipendenti per supportare l’espansione delle attività e l’aumento dei volumi operativi. I risultati di Maasvlakte II si inseriscono in un contesto positivo anche per l’intera rete globale di Apm Terminals, che nel 2025 ha registrato una crescita dell’Ebit del 31%, fino a 1,7 miliardi di dollari. L’andamento conferma come l’integrazione della rete Gemini e la domanda sostenuta di traffico container stiano contribuendo a rafforzare le performance dei principali terminal del gruppo.

Trasporto L’azienda giapponese ITOCHU ha stretto un’alleanza con Peninsula Petroleum Limited, uno dei principali fornitori mondiali di carburante navale, dando vita alla joint-venture I&P Marine Ammonia (IPMA), con l’obiettivo di promuovere l’attività di bunkeraggio di ammoniaca nei maggiori porti europei e, in particolare, ad Algeciras, a Rotterdam e ad Anversa-Bruges. Già nel 2023, ITOCHU aveva firmato un memorandum d’intesa con Peninsula per lo sviluppo congiunto di questo tipo di attività, ma ora la collaborazione entra nella sua fase operativa con la nascita di IPMA, tramite cui i due partner intendono accelerare lo sviluppo di una rete di approvvigionamento del combustibile. Peninsula, già fortemente impegnata nel settore dei fuel marittimi alternativi, tra cui GNL, Bio LNG e biocarburanti, ha costruito una solida rete globale di bunkeraggio attraverso partnership strategiche nei principali hub mondiali del settore, compresi quelli europei e del Mediterraneo. L’operazione si inserisce nella strategia globale di ITOCHU, che punta a realizzare una catena di approvvigionamento globale di ammoniaca come combustibile marittimo – insieme ai suoi partner – non solo in Europa, ma anche a Singapore, a Panama, in Medio Oriente, in Giappone e in altre aree del mondo. Attraverso un approccio integrato, che comprende lo sviluppo e la proprietà di grandi portarinfuse e portacontainer alimentate ad ammoniaca, il finanziamento dei progetti, la collaborazione con gli spedizionieri, lo sviluppo di hub per il bunkeraggio di ammoniaca, l’approvvigionamento del combustibile e la partecipazione a progetti di produzione di ammoniaca verde, la corporation nipponica intende realizzare quello che definisce “Integrated Project” e guidare la decarbonizzazione del trasporto marittimo internazionale e la diffusione dell’ammoniaca come combustibile.

Published on 07/07/2026 at 09:06 pm EDT July 8, 2026 ITOCHU Corporation (headquartered in Minato-ku, Tokyo; Keita Ishii, President & COO; hereinafter "ITOCHU") announced today that it has established I&P Marine Ammonia Ltd. (hereinafter "IPMA") jointly with Peninsula Petroleum Limited (hereinafter "Peninsula"),*1a leading global marine fuel supplier, to promote the marine fuel ammonia bunkering (fuel supply) business, mainly at major European ports, and specifically at the ports of Algeciras, Rotterdam, and Antwerp-Bruges (hereinafter the "Major European Ports").From the perspective of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that is being promoted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), it is expected that ammonia will be used globally as a zero-emission fuel. In 2023, ITOCHU signed a memorandum of understanding with Peninsula regarding the joint development of the ammonia bunkering business,*2and the companies have now jointly established IPMA to accelerate the development of a fuel supply framework. IPMA is an important milestone in society's use of ammonia as marine fuel on a global scale, and is also an important step toward the realization of the Integrated Project*3being promoted by ITOCHU and its partner companies.Peninsula is also actively engaged in the field of alternative marine fuels, including LNG, Bio LNG and biofuels, and backed by its extensive global track record, it has built a strong worldwide marine fuels supply network with key counterparties across major bunkering hubs, including in Europe and the Mediterranean region. With its abundant knowledge and experience it is expected to contribute significantly to the development of an ammonia bunkering framework in Europe. Centering on the Major European Ports, which are strategic international maritime logistics hubs, ITOCHU will promote the joint development of the ammonia bunkering business in collaboration with Peninsula and future partner companies.Additionally, ITOCHU is aiming to establish a global ammonia marine fuel supply chain in collaboration with partner companies in Singapore, the Major European Ports, Panama, the Middle East, Japan, and other regions around the world. By advancing these initiatives in an integrated manner, including the development and ownership of ammonia-fueled large bulk carriers and container ships, financing, collaboration with shippers, the development of ammonia bunkering hubs, the procurement of ammonia fuels, and participation in green ammonia production projects, ITOCHU will pursue the realization of the Integrated Project and lead the decarbonization of international shipping and society's use of ammonia fuels.Through these initiatives, ITOCHU will accelerate the development of sustainable energy systems to steadily implement the enhancement of its "contribution to and engagement with the SDGs through business activities," one of the basic policies under its medium-term management plan, "The Brand-new Deal: Profit opportunities are shifting downstream," and to help realize a low-carbon society. Attachments Disclaimer Itochu Corporation published this content onJuly 08, 2026, and is solely responsible for the information contained herein. Distributed viaPublic Technologies (PUBT), unedited and unaltered, onJuly 08, 2026at01:05 UTC.

by Alexander Petrunin The line item that generates the most confused emails to our ocean-freight desk in 2026 is the "ETS surcharge." Shippers see it climb on every EU sailing, they cannot tell how the carrier arrived at the number, and they suspect they are overpaying. Often they are. GetTransport.com books freight on EU trade lanes, so this is the practical read on what changed in 2026, how carriers turn the EU Emissions Trading System into the charge on your invoice, and how a cargo owner actually audits and challenges that line, not a general explainer on carbon pricing. Start with what "100% in 2026" really means, because it is easy to state wrong and a fact-checker will catch it. The EU phased in the surrender obligation by the year the emissions occur: 40% of 2024 emissions, 70% of 2025 emissions, and 100% of emissions from 2026 onward. According to the European Commission's maritime ETS FAQ, that makes 2026 the first calendar year in which every tonne of in-scope emissions must be covered by allowances, with the first 100% surrender due by 30 September 2027. In calendar 2026 the carrier is actually surrendering 70% of last year's emissions while accruing the full 100% liability on this year's. Both are true, and the surcharge you pay now reflects that ramp. Two things. First, coverage reached 100%, so there is no longer a discount on the emissions a carrier has to account for. Second, and less understood, methane and nitrous oxide entered the surrender scope. As Normec Verifavia and the Commission FAQ both note, CH4 and N2O were monitored under the MRV rules since 2024 but only became priced obligations under the ETS from 1 January 2026. They convert into CO2 equivalent using the IPCC factors, where methane counts as 28 and nitrous oxide as 265 times CO2. The practical consequence is specific: this is the change that bites LNG-fuelled vessels, because unburned methane slip is now priced for the first time. If your box moved on a conventional fuel-oil ship, the CH4/N2O uplift should be marginal. Scope is worth pinning down because it drives the audit. The ETS covers cargo and passenger ships of 5,000 gross tonnes and above, with offshore ships joining from 2027, per DNV. On geography, the rule charges 100% of emissions on intra-EU voyages and at berth in EU ports, but only 50% of emissions on a voyage between an EU and a non-EU port. That 50% figure is the single most common billing error, and we come back to it below. The legal obligation to monitor, report and surrender falls on the shipping company, the operator holding the Document of Compliance, not on you the cargo owner. Carriers recover the cost through a surcharge, which is a commercial pass-through rather than a statutory charge. That distinction matters: because it is commercial, it is negotiable, and because it is commercial, it can carry margin. Mechanically the surcharge works like the old bunker recovery charge: a per-container figure, split by size and dry versus reefer, recalculated quarterly against the traded EU Allowance price. On the reference Asia to North Europe lane, Maersk's early-2026 figure circulated at roughly €59 per TEU, but the number resets every quarter and by box type: by mid-2026 carriers on Far East to North Europe were quoting in the range of roughly €73 per TEU at MSC up to the high-€70s or low-€80s at Maersk, with 40-foot dry boxes around double that. We flag all of these as carrier-published, relayed through third parties, so verify the live tariff for your quarter and container type before relying on a hard number. The more revealing figure comes from Searoutes, which modelled a Singapore to Rotterdam sailing and put the actual carrier-level ETS cost at about €45 per TEU against the roughly €59 billed, a gap of around €14 per TEU it characterises as embedded margin. That gap is not a one-off. Transport & Environment's "Profits Uncontained" analysis of more than 560 single journeys across MSC, Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM found carriers charged customers more than their actual ETS cost on roughly 90% of journeys, with per-voyage windfalls that reached into the tens of thousands of euros and, in one extreme Maersk case, over €300,000. That study covered the 2024 40% year, so treat the euro amounts as dated; the transferable finding is the roughly 90% over-recovery rate, which under 100% coverage now applies to a bigger base. Here is the structural problem the article exists to solve. Each carrier uses its own fleet-average carbon-intensity assumptions and its own EUA reference price, so two carriers quote different surcharges for the identical box on the identical lane. Worse, as Searoutes puts it plainly, the surcharge is usually not tied to the specific vessel that physically carried your container. You are billed off a fleet or lane average, not your voyage's real emissions, and without shipment-level vessel data you cannot reconcile what you were charged against what it actually cost. The rule is transparent; the pass-through is not. You cannot recompute a carrier's whole book, but you can check the parts that are verifiable and demand the parts that are not. The sequence we run for shippers: Be clear with yourself about what is and is not checkable. The EUA market price, the 50/100% leg rule, the greenhouse-gas conversion factors, and the published tariff are all verifiable. The actual vessel that carried your box, its real fuel and carbon intensity, and therefore the true ETS cost of your specific shipment are not, unless the carrier discloses them. That asymmetry is the whole game. Three separate 2026 carbon costs land on importers, and blending them leads to double-counting or missed charges. The EU ETS is a per-tonne allowance cost on the voyage, passed through as the ETS surcharge covered here. FuelEU Maritime is a different instrument, a greenhouse-gas-intensity limit on marine fuel with penalties rather than a per-tonne price, and carriers add a separate FuelEU surcharge on top; some bundle the two into one "emissions surcharge," so if yours does, demand they be broken out for audit. We cover that regime in ourFuelEU Maritime guide for ocean-freight buyers. CBAM is not a freight charge at all: it taxes the embedded production emissions in imported goods like steel and aluminium and hits the importer at the commodity level, which we break down in ourEU CBAM importer guide. If you are building a full carbon-cost picture for 2026, ourIMO Net-Zero buyer's guidecovers the global layer that is still taking shape. The 100% coverage attaches to 2026 emissions, which are first surrendered by 30 September 2027. In calendar 2026 carriers surrender 70% of 2025 emissions while accruing the full 100% liability on 2026 emissions, and surcharges are set quarterly against the allowance price, so the line reflects that ramp plus the new methane and nitrous-oxide scope rather than a single clean step to full cost. Because each carrier uses its own fleet-average carbon-intensity assumptions and its own EU Allowance reference price, and the surcharge is usually not tied to the specific vessel that carried your box. Two carriers legitimately quote different numbers for the identical container on the identical lane. That is also why benchmarking against an independent estimate, and asking for vessel-specific data, is the only way to tell margin from cost. The leg coverage percentage. Emissions on a voyage between an EU and a non-EU port are in scope at 50%, while intra-EU voyages and time at berth are at 100%. Being charged 100% on an extra-EU leg such as Shanghai to Rotterdam is a concrete, checkable overcharge. After that, check whether a large greenhouse-gas-scope uplift was applied to a non-LNG sailing. The surcharge is a commercial pass-through, not a regulated tariff, so it is negotiable rather than refundable by right. Independent analysis found carriers over-recovered on roughly 90% of journeys studied, so the realistic play is to benchmark the charged figure, demand vessel-specific data, and use a persistent delta above modelled cost to renegotiate the surcharge or the base rate at contract time.

Marine biofuels are often discussed at the fuel level with options including B24, B30, B100, UCOME, FAME, HVO, Bio-LNG, and Bio-methanol. But as the marine fuels market matures, a more important question may increasingly sit one step upstream: What feedstock is available, certifiable, scalable, and commercially viable? That question is becoming central to bio-bunkering strategy. Vessel readiness, port infrastructure, and emissions regulation all matter. But without reliable access to qualifying feedstocks, marine biofuel growth can quickly run into constraints on pricing, supply, and verification. The latestBio-Bunkering at a Glancereportfrom ResourceWise highlights this dynamic. In June, European used cooking oil markets remained robust while Asian palm oil mill effluent weakened. ARA FAME gained even as parts of the broader biofuels complex softened. At the same time, new trials and announcements point to growing industry interest in multi-feedstock approaches, B100 supply, FAME Distillation Residue, bio-LNG, and other lower-carbon marine fuel pathways. The main takeaway here is that marine biofuels are not simply a fuel story. They are a feedstock story, too. Shipping companies are under growing pressure to meet several requirements: Reduce emissions Comply with regional and global regulations Demonstrate credible progress toward decarbonization Marine biofuels have gained attention because many can serve as drop-in or near-drop-in solutions. This allows shipowners and charterers to reduce emissions without waiting for entirely new vessel fleets or fuel infrastructure. But demand at the vessel level does not automatically translate into supply at the bunker hub. Every marine biofuel pathway depends on an upstream chain of feedstocks, processing capacity, certification, logistics, and documentation. Used cooking oil, waste animal fats, palm oil mill effluent, FAME, HVO inputs, biomethane, bio-methanol, and other low-carbon inputs each bring different commercial and operational considerations. Some are more available in certain regions. Some face stronger competition from road fuels, aviation, chemicals, or power. Some offer attractive emissions profiles but are harder to scale. Others may be technically viable but require more work around quality, traceability, and onboard handling. For buyers, that means the practical question is not simply, "Can we buy bio-bunkers?" Instead, it's "Can we buy the right bio-bunker, in the right location, with the right documentation, at a price that supports our compliance and commercial goals?" Used cooking oil (UCO)has become one of the most important feedstocks in the marine biofuels conversation. UCO-based fuels, including UCOME, are widely referenced across bio-bunkering benchmarks and have played an important role in early market development. However, reliance on UCO also highlights one of the market’s biggest structural challenges: availability. The latest report notes that biofuels for global shipping rely heavily on used cooking oil and points to expectations that UCO availability is approaching projected limits. That matters because marine demand is not developing in isolation. UCO is also sought after by road transport, renewable diesel, biodiesel, and sustainable aviation fuel markets. As a result, marine fuel suppliers and shipowners are beginning to look more seriously at additional waste-based and residue-based feedstocks. This is why multi-feedstock trials are so important. In June, BHP and the Global Center for Maritime Decarbonization announced apilot involving a B100 blend made from used cooking oil and waste animal fats. The project is designed to assess how biofuels from different feedstocks can be blended, handled, and introduced under real-world operating conditions using existing UCO bunkering infrastructure. That kind of trial matters because it moves the market beyond a narrow feedstock base. If marine biofuels are going to scale, the sector will need more flexibility in what qualifies, what can be safely blended, and what can be reliably supplied across major bunkering hubs. The marine fuels market is global, but feedstock economics are highly regional. June's market signals illustrate that point. TheBio-Bunkering at a Glancereportshows robust European UCO prices alongside softer Asian POME. It also highlights ARA FAME gains amid a weaker broader biofuels complex. Those regional differences matter. A shipowner considering bio-bunkering in Rotterdam may face a very different feedstock and incentive environment than one bunkering in Singapore, Hong Kong, Barcelona, or other emerging alternative fuel hubs. This is especially important because bio-bunker pricing is shaped by more than the physical fuels themselves. Buyers must consider multiple factors: Feedstock Availability Certification Value Blending Economics Local Incentives Regional Regulations Logistics Fossil Fuel Pricing/Biofuel Premium Relationship In other words, the same headline fuel category can carry very different economics depending on where and how it is sourced. For fuel buyers, traders, and suppliers, this creates both complexity and opportunity. Companies with better visibility into regional feedstock markets may be better positioned to identify cost-effective supply, manage volatility, and understand where bio-bunker adoption is most commercially realistic. Feedstock availability is only one part of the equation. The other is credibility. As the market grows, marine biofuels will need to demonstrate verifiable greenhouse gas savings, chain of custody, and compliance with recognized sustainability standards. That is particularly important in a sector where buyers may be using biofuels to support emissions reporting, regulatory compliance, customer claims, or book-and-claim models. Marine biofuels are not just competing on price or availability. They are competing on trust. A fuel that cannot be properly documented may have limited value, even if the physical molecule is available. Conversely, a more expensive fuel with stronger certification, traceability, and compliance value may be commercially attractive in the right regulatory or customer context. This is where feedstock strategy and compliance strategy begin to overlap. The feedstock determines the emissions profile. The documentation determines whether that emissions profile can be claimed. The market value depends on both. The marine decarbonization conversation often looks for a single winner. But the latest market signals suggest a more complicated reality. Biodiesel, renewable diesel, bio-LNG, bio-methanol, ethanol, synthetic fuels, ammonia, hydrogen, and other pathways are all developing at different speeds. Within biofuels specifically, the feedstock picture is also broadening: Used cooking oil will remain important. Waste animal fats may help expand supply. POME and other residues will continue to influence regional pricing. FAME Distillation Residue could offer new marine-specific advantages. Biomethane and bio-LNG may benefit from existing LNG infrastructure and mass balancing. Bio-methanol could create another route for operators investing in methanol-capable vessels. No single pathway is likely to solve every commercial, regulatory, and operational challenge. Instead, the market is moving toward optionality. That makesfeedstock market intelligencea strategic requirement. Shipowners, fuel suppliers, traders, and investors need to understand not only which fuels are gaining attention but also which feedstock pathways can support real adoption. The next phase of marine biofuels growth will not be determined only at the port or onboard the vessel. It will be determined throughout the upstream value chain. Feedstock availability, certification, regional pricing, logistics, and demand from other sectors will all influence how quickly marine biofuels can scale and where they make the most commercial sense. For market participants, the implication is clear: understanding marine biofuels requires understanding the feedstocks behind them. As the sector moves from early adoption to more serious commercial deployment, the companies with the strongest visibility into feedstock markets will be better equipped to manage risk, capture opportunity, and make informed decisions in a more complex marine fuels landscape. ResourceWise’sBio-Bunkering at a Glancereport provides a monthly view of the market signals shaping marine biofuel adoption, including bunker sales and regional pricing, feedstock benchmarks, compliance costs, and industry announcements.

Al via il nuovo servizio intermodale Melzo–Rotterdam Europoort, uno dei principali hub logistici della supply chain europea e globale Milano – Hannibal, il Multimodal Transport Operator del gruppo Contship, prosegue nell’espansione della propria rete intermodale in Europa annunciando il lancio di un nuovo collegamento tra il terminal inland del gruppo di Melzo – Rhm, Rail Hub Milano – e il terminal Europoort Rotterdam, uno dei più importanti snodi logistici europei per la supply internazionale e piattaforma ferroviaria e marittima altamente integrata. La combinazione di collegamenti ferroviari, servizi short sea e connessioni deep sea, fa di Europoort Rotterdam un hub multimodale di primaria importanza per l’accesso ai principali corridoi logistici europei e consente di gestire flussi containerizzati e convenzionali, fungendo da punto di consolidamento e distribuzione per i traffici diretti verso il Benelux, la Germania, il Regno Unito e i principali mercati del Nord Europa. Il gruppo completa così la copertura operativa dei terminal del porto di Rotterdam, dove oggi Contship, attraverso la società Hannibal, è attivo capillarmente su tutte le principali infrastrutture: Moerdijk, Rsc Botlek e infine Europoort. Questa configurazione consente di offrire ai clienti una più ampia diversificazione delle connessioni disponibili per i servizi di rilancio verso il Regno Unito e la Scandinavia, consolidando il ruolo di Hannibal e di Rhm come gateway ferroviario verso il Nord Europa. La nuova connessione, attiva dall’8 luglio, garantisce inoltre maggiore flessibilità operativa grazie alla disponibilità di soluzioni sia lo-lo (lift-on/lift-off) sia ro-ro (roll-on/roll-off), integrando differenti esigenze di trasporto per tutti i caricatori europei. Il collegamento, destinato a semitrailer, container e casse mobili – sarà gestito come uno shuttle ferroviario aperto. Con 6 treni settimanali, potrà trasportare fino a 38 unità di carico. Nel dettaglio, le partenze dall’Italia sono previste nei giorni di lunedì, mercoledì e venerdì da Melzo e martedì, giovedì e domenica da Europoort, con un transit time di circa 24 ore. Una connessione che prevede una partnership con l’operatore SBB, a cui è affidata la trazione del treno. Con l’avvio del nuovo servizio, le circolazioni ferroviarie settimanali tra Melzo e l’Olanda passano a 36, confermando l’impegno di Hannibal nel potenziamento dei corridoi intermodali europei e nel fornire soluzioni logistiche sempre più efficienti, affidabili e sostenibili.

Por Redacción PortalPortuario @PortalPortuario El World Container Index (WCI) de Drewry registró un aumento de 9% esta semana, situándose en USD 4.530 por contenedor de 40 pies, lo que se debería al incremento de las tarifas en las rutas comerciales transpacífica y Asia-Europa. En la ruta transpacífica, las tarifas spot continuaron fortaleciéndose, ya que las de Shanghái a Nueva York subieron un 11% hasta los 7.902 dólares por contenedor de 40 pies, mientras que las de Shanghái a Los Ángeles se incrementaron un 10% hasta los 6.349 dólares por contenedor de 40 pies. “Las navieras siguen anunciando incrementos generales de tarifas (GRI) y recargos por temporada alta (PSS) para julio en previsión de fuertes volúmenes de carga; por ejemplo, HMM introducirá un PSS de 3000 dólares por contenedor de 40 pies a partir del 15 de julio. Drewry prevé que las tarifas sigan subiendo en las próximas semanas”, precisó la consultora. En la ruta Asia-Europa, las tarifas spot aumentaron esta semana a medida que las navieras implementaron tarifas Freight All Kinds (FAK) más altas y recargos PSS en medio de una sólida demanda de temporada alta. Las tarifas de flete de Shanghái a Génova subieron un 10% hasta los 6.360 dólares por contenedor de 40 pies, mientras que las de Shanghái a Rotterdam se incrementaron un 7% hasta los 4.682 dólares por contenedor de 40 pies. “El mercado de fletes de contenedores Este-Oeste se ha mantenido resiliente este año, respaldado por una demanda anticipada de la temporada alta y costos de envío más elevados derivados de las perturbaciones geopolíticas. El acuerdo interino entre Estados Unidos e Irán ha facilitado la reapertura del estrecho de Ormuz, y el tráfico de barcos se está recuperando tras la evacuación de los buques varados y la designación de rutas de tránsito autorizadas”, comunicó Drewry. “Sin embargo, los riesgos de seguridad siguen siendo elevados tras la suspensión de las operaciones de escolta de buques a raíz de un ataque contra un portacontenedores cerca de Omán. Como resultado, las tensiones geopolíticas en curso en Oriente Medio continúan sustentando la incertidumbre del mercado”, complementó.

Incontri dedicati alla strategia europea dei porti, alla transizione energetica e alla competitività Nella foto da sinistra Isabelle Ryckbost (SG ESPO), Annalisa Tardino (Pres. AdSP MSOcc), Ansis Zeltiņš (Pres. ESPO) Si sono svolte a Bruxelles, il 30 giugno e il 1° luglio, le riunioni dell’ESPO – European Sea Ports Organisation, che hanno visto la partecipazione della delegata di Assoporti, Annalisa Tardino, Presidente dell’Autorità di Sistema Portuale del Mare di Sicilia Occidentale, in rappresentanza del sistema portuale italiano. Il programma dei lavori si è aperto con il Port Business Platform, momento di confronto riservato ai vertici delle autorità portuali europee, dedicato quest’anno al tema della condivisione dell’energia nei porti (energy sharing) e allo sviluppo di smart grid portuali, con la presentazione delle esperienze dei porti di Bilbao, Oslo, Brema e Rotterdam. Il dibattito ha approfondito i diversi modelli organizzativi e gestionali adottati nei principali scali europei per favorire l’autoproduzione, la condivisione e l’ottimizzazione dei consumi energetici nelle aree portuali. Il giorno successivo si è riunito l’Executive Committee di ESPO, che ha affrontato alcuni dei principali dossier europei di interesse strategico per il settore portuale. Tra i temi al centro dell’incontro figurano l’evoluzione della Strategia europea per i porti, la definizione della posizione di ESPO in vista dell’avvio dell’esame parlamentare europeo, la revisione del sistema EU ETS applicato al trasporto marittimo, con particolare attenzione agli effetti sulla competitività dei porti europei e al rischio di rilocalizzazione dei traffici, nonché il nuovo Quadro Finanziario Pluriennale 2028-2034, con un focus sulle future opportunità di finanziamento per le infrastrutture portuali attraverso strumenti quali il Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) e il futuro European Competitiveness Fund. La partecipazione di Assoporti ai lavori di ESPO conferma il costante impegno dell’Associazione nel seguire l’evoluzione delle politiche europee che incidono sul futuro dei porti italiani, contribuendo al confronto con le istituzioni dell’Unione europea e con gli altri sistemi portuali del continente. Al termine delle riunioni, la Presidente Annalisa Tardino ha dichiarato: “Il confronto con i porti europei rappresenta un’opportunità fondamentale per condividere esperienze e contribuire alla definizione delle politiche comunitarie che guideranno lo sviluppo del settore nei prossimi anni. La transizione energetica, la competitività del sistema portuale europeo e l’accesso ai finanziamenti strategici costituiscono sfide decisive, rispetto alle quali i porti italiani intendono continuare a svolgere un ruolo attivo e propositivo. L’estensione dell’ETS al trasporto marittimo rappresenta oggi uno dei principali elementi di pressione per il sistema portuale e logistico nazionale. L’attuale normativa, infatti, applica il costo delle emissioni delle navi con criteri che non tengono sufficientemente conto delle diverse caratteristiche dei vari segmenti del settore. Il risultato è un’alterazione degli equilibri competitivi, sia tra le diverse modalità di trasporto sia nei confronti dei Paesi terzi, con il rischio di spostare traffici e investimenti verso scali esterni all’Unione europea. Le maggiori criticità riguardano il transhipment, le Autostrade del Mare e i collegamenti con le isole maggiori, settori nei quali l’assenza di correttivi specifici potrebbe produrre effetti difficilmente reversibili. A Bruxelles abbiamo portato le richieste di tutte le AdSP: l’Italia dovrà inserirsi in un quadro unitario attuale per far fronte alla competitività”. Dal canto suo, il Presidente Roberto Petri, ha ricordato che, “Assoporti continuerà a seguire da vicino l’evoluzione dei dossier europei, mantenendo un costante raccordo con ESPO e con le istituzioni nazionali ed europee per valorizzare il ruolo strategico del sistema portuale italiano nel quadro delle politiche dell’Unione europea”.

The laboratory will serve domestic and international customers operating in China, and across the wider Asia-Pacific region. IMAGE: Medical test tools in a lab. Getty Images. Fuel testing company Veritas Petroleum Services (VPS) has opened a new marine fuel testing laboratory in Shanghai, China. The laboratory will provide marine fuel quality testing services, including methanol testing. "The Shanghai Laboratory will provide fuel quality testing for bunker fuels, including methanol," said Dr. Malcolm Cooper, CEO of VPS. VPS said the facility is expected to reduce testing turnaround times for customers. The laboratory aims to provide independent analysis and technical expertise to vessel owners, operators, charterers and fuel suppliers, to support fuel quality management and regulatory compliance, the company said. VPS currently operates laboratories in Rotterdam, Singapore, Fujairah, Houston, and Manchester. The company said it opened the Shanghai laboratory as it emerged as one of the fastest-growing marine bunkering hubs and is expected to play a key role in the future supply of both conventional marine fuels and low- to zero-carbon fuels. By Gautamee Hazarika Please get in touch with comments or additional info to news@engine.online

Rotterdam B100 over $100/mt costlier than HSFO Rotterdam LBM discounts to LSMGO widen B100 premium over LSMGO drops to $39/mt in Singapore All bunker prices described in the text below have been adjusted for calorific content to make them VLSFO-equivalent. They have estimated EU-EU voyage compliance costs included for Rotterdam, and nonEU-EU compliance costs included for Singapore. These account for EU ETS costs and FuelEU Maritime penalties, and the average price of compliance surpluses we have picked up from the FuelEU pooling market over the past week. Rotterdam B100's premium over HSFO has widened by a further $35/mt to $103/mt over the past week. On the other hand, its discounts to VLSFO and LSMGO have widened by $8/mt and $25/mt to $26/mt and $266/mt, respectively. Singapore's B100 has dropped slightly relative to conventional fuels. Its premiums over HSFO, VLSFO and LSMGO have narrowed by $16-25/mt over the past week to $39-408/mt. LNG premiums over liquefied biomethane (LBM) in Rotterdam have widened by $15/mt to $440-447/mt. Rotterdam's LBM discounts to LSMGO have widened by $56-58/mt to $595-796/mt, depending on the engine type. Liquid fuels Rotterdam's HSFO price has fallen by $41/mt over the past week. Its VLSFO has edged up by $2/mt, while its LSMGO price has increased by $19/mt. The port's B100 has edged down by $7/mt. Dutch ZRE A ticket prices have remained unchanged for a third consecutive week amid a "lack of reported trades," Prima Markets has noted. Singapore's conventional fuel prices have declined by $36-45/mt over the past week, while its B100 benchmark has fallen by a larger $61/mt. The port's monthly B100 sales doubled from 6,500 mt in April to 13,000 mt in May, according to preliminary data from the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore. Liquid gases Rotterdam's LNG prices have declined by $23-24/mt in the past week, driven largely by a 7% decline in LNG bunker premiums, which dropped from $134/mt to $125/mt. The front-month Dutch TTF Natural Gas contract has fallen by 2%, adding further downward pressure to LNG bunker prices. Rotterdam’s LBM prices have fallen by $37-39/mt. Singapore's LNG prices have edged up by $8-9/mt. Resurging tensions in the Middle East, a Qatari gas facility explosion and rising LNG demand in Asia have added upward pressure on the prices. LNG sales in Singapore jumped from 42,000 mt in April to a record 70,000 mt in May. By Konica Bhatt Please get in touch with comments or additional info to news@engine.online

At a Dutchshipyarda newbuild was launched for Carisbrooke Shipping of Cowes, Isle of Wight. The Royal T Shipyards at their Harlingen yard is where the MV Heleen C, a 7,720 dwt general cargo vessel, took to the waters last Friday. The vessel represents the second launch this year within Carisbrooke’s ongoing fleet renewal programme,following the delivery of MC Greta C, another of the same LABRAX series, which enables increasing carrying capacity while maintaining operational reliability and efficiency. The lead ship, MV Jill C, was launched last year, which also uses the latest in diesel-electric technology. As Afloat reported, MV Greta C became the 100th newbuild since the shipowners' foundation. Currently the company operates more than 20 modern dry cargo and multi-purpose vessels from the head office in Cowes and also Rotterdam. The latest Labrax is designed for European trading and features advanced environmentally friendly technology, including diesel-electric propulsion, cold ironing capability, and an innovative energy management system. With an optimised hull design and improved fuel efficiency, the MV Helleen C reflects Carisbrooke Shipping’s continued commitment to sustainability, operational performance, and innovation within the maritime industry. Email The Author Jehan Ashmore is a marine correspondent, researcher and photographer, specialising in Irish ports, shipping and the ferry sector serving the UK and directly to mainland Europe. Jehan also occasionally writes a column, 'Maritime' Dalkey for the (Dalkey Community Council Newsletter) in addition to contributing to UK marine periodicals. Read more articles by Jehan Ashmore > The Afloat daily newsletter highlights the best of our editors' picks, as well as the latest content from other popular sections of our website. View Previous Editions Here We will only ever use your details to send you our enews and never pass them onto third parties. More people are reading Afloat.ie than ever thanks to the power of the internet but we're in stormy seas because advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. Unlike many news sites, we haven't put up a paywall because we want to keep our marine journalism open. Afloat.ie is Ireland's only full-time marine journalism team and it takes time, money and hard work to produce our content. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. If everyone chipped in, we can enhance our coverage and our future would be more secure. You can help us through a small donation. Thank you. Afloat will be focusing on news and developments of shipyards with newbuilds taking shape on either slipways and building halls. The common practice of shipbuilding using modular construction, requires several yards make specific block sections that are towed to a single designated yard and joined together to complete the ship before been launched or floated out. In addition, outfitting quays is where internal work on electrical and passenger facilities is installed (or upgraded if the ship is already in service). This work may involve newbuilds towed to another specialist yard, before the newbuild is completed as a new ship or of the same class, designed from the shipyard 'in-house' or from a naval architect consultancy. Shipyards also carry out repair and maintenance, overhaul, refit, survey, and conversion, for example, the addition or removal of cabins within a superstructure. All this requires ships to enter graving /dry-docks or floating drydocks, to enable access to the entire vessel out of the water. Asides from shipbuilding, marine engineering projects such as offshore installations take place and others have diversified in the construction of offshore renewable projects, from wind-turbines and related tower structures. When ships are decommissioned and need to be disposed of, some yards have recycling facilities to segregate materials, though other vessels are run ashore, i.e. 'beached' and broken up there on site. The scrapped metal can be sold and made into other items. Copyright © 2026 Baily Publications LtdTerms and Conditions This publication supports the work of thePress Council of Ireland and Office of the Press Ombudsman, and our staff operate within the Code of Practice of the Press Council. You can obtain a copy of the Code of Practice, or contact the Press Ombudsman's Office, at 01-6489130, email[email protected]

Search across reports, market insights, and blog stories. Shipping companies face mounting difficultiesin adopting low-carbon fuels due to an uncertain and fragmented regulatory landscape, according to the top marine executive of Finnish technology group Wartsila. The assessment follows the International Maritime Organization's failure to adopt a global decarbonization framework, as reported by Platts, part of S&P Global Energy. The UN agency voted in October 2025 to postpone discussions on the adoption of a Net-Zero Framework by one year, and an increasing number of member states are calling for revisions to achieve consensus. The framework was originally intended to impose a cost on greenhouse gas emissions from ship operations starting in 2028, but the current President of the United States has strongly opposed the carbon pricing element, arguing it could lead to inflation. Wartsila Marine President Roger Holm commented that shipping companies could struggle financially to transition to sustainable fuels and to incentivize greater production without a carbon pricing mechanism. Low-carbon fuels are more expensive due to limited availability. According to the Platts bunker cost calculator, May's average delivered bunker prices for very low sulfur fuel oil in Rotterdam were $18.56 per gigajoule, compared with $27.39 per gigajoule for B30 (30% used cooking oil methyl ester and 70% very low sulfur fuel oil) and $35.90 per gigajoule for bio-LNG. Holm indicated that without a cost on carbon, companies cannot afford to decarbonize and that a way must be found to bridge the gap gradually. The IMO delay has created more uncertainty for shipowners, who do not know when a global regulation will be in place and are increasingly forced to contend with regional regulations. Holm emphasized that predictability is key, but shipowners must live with uncertainty because they do not know exactly when regulation will come into effect. The European Union has extended its Emissions Trading System to cover shipping since 2024 and introduced FuelEU Maritime rules on marine energy's greenhouse gas intensity since 2025. TheUnited Kingdom has proposedcovering international maritime transportation in its ETS from 2028, with UK domestic maritime emissions to be covered from July 2026. Djibouti and Gabon have started charging ship operators for their emissions, and China, the world's largest seaborne trading nation, has been exploring maritime decarbonization rules. Holm expressed hope for a single global regulation, noting that the current path of regional regulations is the worst possible situation for shipowners. Because a ship's lifespan can exceed 20 years, Holm advised shipowners to seek maximum flexibility in fuel propulsion technologies while improving energy efficiency amid regulatory challenges. For example, a shipowner could choose to build a dual-fuel vessel capable of running on LNG and conventional fuels while preparing it for future conversion to methanol during the newbuild design stage. This flexibility could help when one alternative fuel becomes more available and cheaper as a compliance option. Holm described flexibility as a relatively cheap insurance for changing fuel during a vessel's lifetime. Shipowners can also save fuel expenses by adopting energy-saving equipment such as gate rudders or supplementary batteries, which could be financially prudent regardless of fuel choice. Wartsila, one of the world's largest makers of four-stroke engines used on cruise ships, offshore supply vessels, and other ships in shortsea trades or smaller, has planned to expand its engine production capacity by 35% from the 2025 level by the end of the first quarter of 2028, followed by an additional 30% expansion in the first quarter of 2029. Holm said this expansion is about the company's capabilities to further accelerate development of engines running on green fuel, adding that while the technology and engines exist, predictability of regulations and availability of green fuels are lacking. Making Data-Driven Decisions to Grow Your Business A Quick Overview of Market Performance Understanding the Current State of The Market and its Prospects Finding New Products to Diversify Your Business Choosing the Best Countries to Establish Your Sustainable Supply Chain Choosing the Best Countries to Boost Your Export The Latest Trends and Insights into The Industry The Largest Import Supplying Countries The Largest Destinations for Exports The Largest Producers on The Market and Their Profiles The Largest Markets And Their Profiles Instant access. No credit card needed. Online access to 2M+ reports, dashboards, and tables. Trusted by Fortune 500 teams.

La Regione Piemonte approva l'aggiornamento del Piano regionale di qualità dell'aria e avvia nuove misure anti smog, con interventi innovativi che consentono di raggiungere l'equilibrio emissivo. E' quindi la prima Regione tra quelle del Bacino Padano, che comprende anche Lombardia, Veneto e Emilia Romagna, a cancellare il blocco strutturale delle auto Diesel Euro 5, nei mesi da ottobre ad aprile, nell'area metropolitana di Torino e a Novara. Il decreto, approvato dal governo nel luglio 2025 per le Regioni del Bacino padano, prevedeva infatti l'entrata in vigore da ottobre 2026 del blocco per i veicoli Diesel Euro 5 nei centri urbani con piu di 100 mila abitanti, quindi in Piemonte avrebbe coinvolto l'area metropolitana di Torino e Novara. Il blocco sarebbe scattato in assenza di misure compensative che la Regione Piemonte ha invece individuato grazie al lavoro della Struttura speciale avviata lo scorso anno e composta dalle direzioni regionali interessate, Arpa, Ires, Province e Citta Metropolitana di Torino, Politecnico di Torino, Universita di Torino e del Piemonte Orientale, enti di formazione e ricerca universitaria. La Struttura speciale in questi mesi ha analizzato e individuato una serie di interventi finalizzati all'abbattimento degli inquinanti con un'azione coordinata che si sviluppa su piu fronti: la mobilita, con incentivi per l'utilizzo di biocarburanti sui mezzi per il trasporto pubblico e per le auto private; sistemi di regolazione del traffico basati sull'intelligenza artificiale, interventi di rigenerazione urbana e potenziamento della mobilita pulita; l'agricoltura con la diffusione di colture che riducono la diffusione di gas e ammoniaca nell'aria, e l'energia, con incentivi per la manutenzione degli impianti di riscaldamento vetusti, l'installazione di quelli nuovi e meno inquinanti e con interventi di efficentamento energetico degli immobili e riduzione dei consumi.La Regione incentiva, con una misura da 14 milioni di euro, l'uso dei biocarburanti HVO sui mezzi del trasporto pubblico e per le auto private Diesel Euro 5 e 6 (oltre 300 mila veicoli potenziali, di cui 270 mila auto private) prevedendo un incentivo annuo tra i 50 e i 100 euro sul prezzo del carburante grazie all'uso di carte bio-carburante. Grazie a un accordo con le compagnie petrolifere la quota di biocarburante disponibile sulla rete di distribuzione crescera nei prossimi anni fino al 150 per cento, passando da subito dagli attuali 80-90 a circa 130-140 milioni di tonnellate/anno. L'avvio della misura è previsto nell'inverno 2026. Il Piemonte e la prima Regione italiana a introdurre un incentivo per l'utilizzo dei biocarburanti HVO, sia per i mezzi del trasporto pubblico locale sia per le auto private diesel. Una misura, da 14 milioni di euro, che si integra con quelle strutturali e punta a tagliare da subito le emissioni di CO2, NOx e polveri sottili, senza attendere i tempi lunghi del rinnovo dei parchi veicolari: l'Hov gia alla pompa puo essere utilizzato nei motori diesel in circolazione. Una scelta che permette di coniugare la tutela dell'ambiente e lo sviluppo delle fonti rinnovabili con la sostenibilita economica per le famiglie. Altri 44 milioni sono destinati a diversi bandi che hanno il comune obiettivo di rendere le citta piu pulite e piu sostenibili. Si tratta in particolare di 14 milioni assegnati alla Regione dal Ministero dell'Ambiente e di 30 milioni di fondi Fesr, che in linea con un utilizzo innovativo e trasversale delle risorse europee avviato da questa amministrazione regionale, vengono destinati a misure a favore per la qualita dell'aria. In particolare sono previste misure di promozione del car sharing, incentivi per l'uso della bicicletta o dei mezzi pubblici nei tragitti casa-lavoro e per la realizzazione di velostazioni, sicure e protette dagli agenti atmosferici. Nello stesso ambito sono all'avvio attivita sperimentali, approfondite con Universita di Torino e UPO, come la pulizia dell'aria, con cubi filtranti modulari, alimentati da fonti rinnovabili, in grado di abbattere polveri e ossidi di azoto in aree ad alta concentrazione di traffico o nei luoghi sensibili, come ad esempio scuole e ospedali. Si tratta di tecniche gia adottate in alcune citta europee: a Stoccarda e Monaco, grazie a finanziamento del Ministero per l'Ambiente della Baviera; a Rotterdam in Olanda, a Seoul in Corea del Sud, in Brasile, Cina ed India. In campo anche sistemi di nebulizzazione d'acqua che catturano particolato e favoriscono l'assorbimento di gas inquinanti, come avviene in numerose citta asiatiche particolarmente inquinate come Pechino, Dehli, Seul e Tokio. E' poi prevista la sperimentazione di materiali innovativi, come le vernici e i rivestimenti fotocatalitici per strutture stradali, come ad esempio gli elementi di arredo urbano, le barriere antirumore, i new jersey che diventano cosi in grado di catturare gli inquinanti nell'aria e polverizzarli portandoli al suolo, da cui possono poi essere lavati. Grazie al Bando Citta rigenerative sono potenziati gli interventi di pedonalizzazione delle aree urbane, l'avvio di nuove Zone 30 e gli interventi di forestazione urbana. A questo si aggiungono le risorse, 11,5 milioni di euro, per l'applicazione dell'intelligenza artificiale ai sistemi di infomobilita, per la gestione del traffico in tempo reale e la modulazione dinamica dei limiti di velocita per migliorare la fluidita dei flussi, riducendo emissioni e incidenti. Le sperimentazioni partiranno nell'area urbana di Torino in autunno.

Search across reports, market insights, and blog stories. ThePort of Rotterdam Authorityhas issued a formal response to a demand letter from Advocates for the Future (AftF). The authority stated that it reinforces the necessity of transitioning to a climate-neutral port by 2050 and outlined its active efforts to achieve this goal in partnership with companies and governments. According to thePort Authority, the transition is a priority, but it cannot comply with AftF's demand to force companies to limit fossil fuel activities in Rotterdam. The authority explained that such a demand is not aligned with current European and Dutch climate policy and falls outside its official role. It also argued that this approach would be an ineffective way to reduce worldwide CO2 emissions. The Port Authority expressed concern that ceasing fossil fuel activities in Rotterdam could have major consequences, including risks to the security of energy supply and the competitive position of European industry. The authority stated that it believes it has a social responsibility to contribute to the objectives of the 2015 Paris Agreement. Climate neutrality and circularity are among four strategic focal points in its corporate strategy, and reducing CO2 emissions plays a major role in its decisions and projects. The Port Authority was founded to strengthen the position of Rotterdam's port and industrial area in the interests of the Netherlands and Europe. It leases sites to companies and develops port infrastructure. In this capacity, the authority has taken action for years to stimulate CO2 emission reductions by companies in the port and beyond, including by developing necessary infrastructure and attracting sustainable businesses. The authority noted that tackling climate change requires a completely new global system for energy and raw materials. Companies worldwide, including those in the port, must make major investments in adapting production, building new plants, and developing new production chains. Over time, the use of fossil energy and fuels will decline. The Port Authority is implementing a wide-ranging transition programme established after the Paris Agreement, with various projects already implemented or ongoing. However, the authority is currently observing that companies are postponing sustainability investments and suspending construction projects due to an unfavorable investment climate and a lack of demand for sustainable products. The authority stated that its influence over this situation is extremely limited. Governments determine the pace and method of greenhouse gas reduction in the transition. This requires complex deliberations involving factors beyond emission reduction, such as security of supply, energy affordability, strategic independence, and industrial competitiveness. The Port Authority stated that this decision-making belongs in the political sphere to ensure widespread support. European and Dutch legislation, including the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), aims to reduce emissions under uniform conditions and does not prescribe routes for limiting or ceasing fossil fuel activities for specific regions or companies. The Port Authority does not expect that limiting fossil fuel activities in Rotterdam would contribute to a reduction in global emissions. It noted that there is currently an insufficient supply of sustainable energy and raw materials to keep society running. Companies continue to meet demand for fossil energy and fuels while making gradual investments in sustainable production, such as recycled plastics, hydrogen, and biofuels. The authority pointed to examples in the port, including the largest biofuels cluster in Europe and two large hydrogen plants under construction. If a region imposes stricter rules, companies would likely move their fossil fuel production and imports to other regions and countries, potentially also making sustainable investments elsewhere. The authority warned that forcing certain activities to stop only in Rotterdam would result in a waterbed effect for CO2 emissions, would not aid in establishing sustainable industry locally, and would have substantially negative effects on the port, the Netherlands, and Europe. The Port Authority stated that it will continue implementing its strategy and approach to creating a climate-neutral port, as laid out in its Climate Transition Plan. It is currently refining its scenarios for the transition up to 2050, mapping various paths to a climate-neutral, competitive, and resilient port. The authority indicated it is open to continued dialogue with Advocates for the Future and other parties involved in the port. Making Data-Driven Decisions to Grow Your Business A Quick Overview of Market Performance Understanding the Current State of The Market and its Prospects Finding New Products to Diversify Your Business Choosing the Best Countries to Establish Your Sustainable Supply Chain Choosing the Best Countries to Boost Your Export The Latest Trends and Insights into The Industry The Largest Import Supplying Countries The Largest Destinations for Exports The Largest Producers on The Market and Their Profiles The Largest Markets And Their Profiles Instant access. No credit card needed. Online access to 2M+ reports, dashboards, and tables. Trusted by Fortune 500 teams.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes Port of Rotterdam Authorityhas formally rejected demands from environmental legal groupAdvocates for the Futureto compel companies to scale back or end fossil fuel activities in the Dutch port, arguing that such action falls outside its legal mandate and would undermine European energy security, industrial competitiveness, and climate policy. In a response to a legal notice submitted by Advocates for the Future in May, the port authority said it fully supports the transition to a climate neutral port by 2050 and considers decarbonization one of its core strategic priorities. However, it said requiring companies to halt legally permitted fossil fuel operations in Rotterdam would conflict with Dutch and European legislation and would not deliver meaningful reductions in global carbon emissions. The dispute highlights the growing tension between climate litigation and Europe’s efforts to balance emissions reductions with industrial resilience. Rotterdam remains Europe’s largest seaport and a critical hub for crude oil refining, chemicals, liquefied natural gas imports, and the handling of renewable energy products. Any restrictions on fossil based operations could have significant implications for energy supply chains, manufacturing, and cargo flows across Northwest Europe. The port authority said governments, rather than port operators, are responsible for determining the pace and structure of emissions reductions. According to the authority, policymakers must weigh climate objectives alongside energy affordability, security of supply, strategic independence, and the competitiveness of European industry. European climate policy currently relies on market based mechanisms such as the European Union Emissions Trading System, which reduces greenhouse gas emissions through common rules across member states rather than targeting specific companies or regions. The authority said current legislation does not require individual ports to prohibit fossil fuel activities. As a company jointly owned by the Dutch State and the Municipality of Rotterdam, the authority said it operates within government policy frameworks. It argued that banning activities already authorized by national authorities, including oil refining, gas imports, and chemical production, would exceed its responsibilities. Many of these activities are also classified by the Dutch government as critical infrastructure supporting the national economy and energy system. The port authority said it has invested for years in infrastructure designed to support industrial decarbonization, including facilities for hydrogen, carbon reduction projects, and circular production chains. It added that several projects have already been completed or are under construction. However, it acknowledged that industrial investment in low carbon projects has slowed because of weaker market demand for sustainable products and a less attractive investment climate. According to the authority, companies will only proceed with large scale decarbonization investments if they expect adequate commercial returns over time. Rotterdam has positioned itself as a key European hub for renewable fuels and hydrogen production, with Europe’s largest biofuels cluster and two large hydrogen plants currently under development. The authority also challenged the effectiveness of restricting fossil activities in a single port. It argued that companies would likely relocate production and imports to other regions where regulations are less restrictive, shifting rather than reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Such carbon leakage, it said, would weaken Rotterdam’s industrial base without producing measurable climate benefits. The port authority said it will continue updating its climate transition strategy and is currently refining multiple scenarios for achieving a climate neutral, competitive, and resilient port by 2050. It also stated that it remains willing to continue discussions with Advocates for the Future and other stakeholders on the future direction of the port’s energy transition. Go to top “Breakbulk.News publishes editorial content, including news, features and press releases supplied by third‑party companies, institutions and PR agencies. Third parties who submit material to us are solely responsible for ensuring that all text, images, logos and other content they provide are accurate and that they hold all necessary rights, licences and permissions for news use. By submitting content to Breakbulk.News, contributors represent and warrant that their material does not infringe the rights (including copyright and related rights) of any third party and agree to indemnify Breakbulk.News in respect of any claims arising from their submissions. If you believe any content on our site infringes your rights, please contact us at[email protected]with full details and we will investigate promptly..”

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes The maritime industry is entering a critical compliance period as operators face mounting pressure to cut emissions while grappling with high fuel costs, uneven adoption of efficiency technologies, and limited progress from charterers during the latest reporting cycle. New industry data released this month shows that large shipowners and charterers achieved only modest emissions improvements in 2025 despite increased use of biofuels and energy saving technologies. The findings arrive as FuelEU Maritime enters its first full compliance cycle, with penalties for non compliance in the 2025 reporting period due to be issued by 30 June 2026. The combination of regulatory deadlines, elevated bunker prices, and slow investment decisions is creating a challenging environment for shipowners, carriers, and cargo interests across Europe and key global trade lanes. Industry analysts say operational efficiency measures are delivering measurable benefits, but deployment remains too limited to meet longer term decarbonization targets. According toDNV, shore power is rapidly evolving from a voluntary environmental initiative into a regulatory requirement. European ports, California, and several Asian jurisdictions are expanding requirements for vessels to connect to onshore electricity while at berth to reduce emissions and local air pollution. The shift is occurring as FuelEU Maritime introduces financial consequences for operators failing to meet greenhouse gas intensity targets. For many shipping companies, compliance planning has moved from a strategic discussion to an operational necessity. The regulatory burden extends beyond vessel owners. Charterers increasingly influence fuel choices, voyage planning, and operational efficiency, making their participation critical to achieving emissions targets. However, industry reporting indicates progress among charterers remains slower than many regulators and shipowners had anticipated. High marine fuel prices remain a significant obstacle to faster adoption of low carbon fuels and retrofit programs. Singapore bunker indications on 24 June showed very low sulfur fuel oil trading at approximately $711.50 per metric ton, while marine gasoil approached $936.50 per metric ton. Separate market assessments placed Singapore VLSFO closer to $762.00 per metric ton and Rotterdam VLSFO at approximately $687.50 per metric ton. The elevated cost environment is forcing many operators to balance regulatory compliance against commercial realities. Retrofit projects, alternative fuels, and new efficiency technologies often require substantial capital commitments at a time when freight markets remain volatile across several shipping segments. For breakbulk, project cargo, and heavy lift operators, the challenge can be particularly complex because vessel utilization patterns and specialized cargo requirements often limit operational flexibility. Industry attention continues to focus on technologies capable of reducing fuel consumption without requiring immediate fuel switching. DNVestimates that wider adoption of shore power for vessels above 5,000 gross tons could reduce fuel oil consumption by roughly 3.5%, equivalent to approximately 29 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. However, infrastructure limitations and inconsistent port availability continue to constrain implementation. Meanwhile,Lloyd’s Registerreports growing interest in propulsion energy saving devices, hull coatings, wind assisted propulsion systems, and other efficiency measures. Adoption is increasing across both newbuild and retrofit markets, but deployment remains uneven across the global fleet. Longer term policy signals remain clear. TheInternational Maritime Organizationexpects its Net Zero Framework, approved in 2025, to enter into force in 2027 with the first year of application scheduled for 2028. At the same time, green shipping corridor initiatives continue to expand, including new pilot projects and the recently announced Brazil to Belgium corridor consortium, reinforcing industry expectations that regulatory and commercial pressure to decarbonize will continue to intensify. Go to top “Breakbulk.News publishes editorial content, including news, features and press releases supplied by third‑party companies, institutions and PR agencies. Third parties who submit material to us are solely responsible for ensuring that all text, images, logos and other content they provide are accurate and that they hold all necessary rights, licences and permissions for news use. By submitting content to Breakbulk.News, contributors represent and warrant that their material does not infringe the rights (including copyright and related rights) of any third party and agree to indemnify Breakbulk.News in respect of any claims arising from their submissions. If you believe any content on our site infringes your rights, please contact us at[email protected]with full details and we will investigate promptly..”

Japanese shipowner strikes bioLNG supply deals with Axpo and Titan for LNG-capable vehicle carriers operating in Europe Japanese shipowner Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL) has signed two key bioLNG supply deals with European suppliers Axpo and Titan to expand its use of low-GHG methane on LNG-fuelled pure car truck carriers (PCTCs) operating in Europe. The agreements, announced in early June, ensure MOL has a continuous and stable supply of bioLNG in Northern Europe and the Mediterranean region for its car carrier fleet. The bioLNG also has International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC-EU). This certification system, established under the European Renewable Energy Directive (RED III), verifies that sustainable fuels produced from biomass or waste comply with the EU’s legal requirements for sustainability and GHG emissions reduction standards. Current production of bioLNG is limited, meaning shipping will have to compete with other sectors for supply. Additionally, it is more expensive than fossil LNG. But it reduces regulatory and financial exposure under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and FuelEU Maritime. “Securing access to low-GHG methane may require long-term offtake agreements, partnerships with fuel producers, or participation in emerging fuel value chains. Fuel procurement, therefore, becomes both a strategic and an operational consideration for shipowners,” explained DNV senior consultant Øyvind Sekkesæter. DNV pointed out that as of late 2025, liquefied biomethane in the Port of Rotterdam was priced at around US$1,860 per tonne, almost three times the price of fossil LNG. However, when regulatory incentives are considered, most notably reduced exposure under the EU ETS and pooling revenues under FuelEU Maritime, biomethane can already be cost-competitive on selected EU-to-EU voyages. Mr Sekkesæter is the lead author of the class society’s new white paper, Methane in Shipping, which discusses low-GHG methane’s role in keeping LNG-capable ships compliant. With tightening GHG intensity requirements, LNG-capable ships are well positioned to transition towards lower GHG emission fuels like bioLNG and e-methane (also known as synthetic methane) without major retrofits. The white paper explores the challenges of production and supply constraints for shipping and methane slip. MOL adopts bioLNG MOL was an early adopter of bioLNG for its PCTCs, first bunkering 500 tonnes of liquefied biogas inCeleste Acesupplied by Titan in the Port of Zeebrugge in 2025. Titan explained the ISCC-EU-certified bioLNG has a carbon intensity of less than zero on a life cycle basis from fuel production to consumption. The feedstock for bioLNG is biogas captured from animal manure and food waste, which is purified and liquefied. Biogas is considered carbon neutral throughout its cycle from production to consumption because it absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere during its growth. Biogas enables methane – a powerful GHG gas that would have been released into the atmosphere from organic waste- to be recovered and burned. According to MOL, the bioLNG supplied by Axpo and Titan will have a lifecycle carbon intensity of −15 g-CO2/MJ or less, from production through consumption. Replacing one tonne of conventional heavy fuel oil with this bioLNG fuel results in a reduction of approximately 4.5 tonnes of CO2 emissions. MOL’s first vessel supplied under its contract with Axpo wasLapis Ace, with a ship-to-ship transfer operation conducted in the port of Barcelona. BioLNG was transferred to the vehicle carrier from the 7,500-m3bunkering vesselGreen Pearl. Axpo verified in a statement toMarine Propulsionthat it would supply bioLNG fuel to MOL across the Mediterranean, providing bunkering services at the Spanish ports of Málaga and Barcelona. “The agreement builds on our Western European partnership with MOL, which began in March 2025. Further details concerning the duration of the partnership cannot be disclosed,” said the company. Pooling for FuelEU Maritime Axpo, Titan, Gasum and other bioLNG suppliers actively contribute to the FuelEU Maritime pooling market, using biofuels and their own LNG bunkering fleets to generate compliance surpluses. These compliance surpluses can be used by other shipowners that have compliance deficits. In April 2026, Titan shared that it concluded its first pooling exercise for compliance with FuelEU Maritime for 2025. Verified by DNV, the fuel supplier said its first FuelEU pool included several hundred vessels to balance operators with compliance deficits with those that had positive compliance balances. “Pooling was designed to provide a competitive advantage to all alternative fuels, with LNG and (liquefied biomethane) in particular delivering on the regulation’s potential today,” said Titan commercial director, Grégoire Hartig. For LNG-capable ships, long-term regulatory emissions compliance will depend on the supply of bioLNG and e-LNG. Fossil LNG can deliver a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions, reduce NOx by 80%, and virtually eliminate sulphur and particulate matter compared to heavy fuel oil, but it is only a bridging solution to zero emissions. “Ultimately, LNG’s role in shipping will not only be defined by its status as a fossil fuel, but by its ability to enable a transition to low-GHG fuels like liquefied bio-methane and e-methane,” said Mr Sekkesæter. “As Methane in Shipping makes clear, the opportunity is real: there is already a pathway for today’s LNG-capable fleet to evolve into a lower-emission fleet if the right conditions are put in place,” he said. MOL plans to use LNG and bioLNG as low-carbon fuels in the near term to underpin its long-term commercial and environmental sustainability goals. When MOL first bunkered bioLNG in Celeste Ace last year, MOL Marine Fuel GX Division general manager Yoshikazu Urushitani said the shipowner would “start using bioLNG to lead the shipping industry in the transition to clean alternative fuels. We remain committed to adopting clean fuels to reach net zero GHG emissions by 2050”. Events © 2026 Riviera Maritime Media Ltd.

Torna l’appuntamento più atteso in Italia per gli operatori a vario titoli impegnati nel business della logistica e dei trasporti di merci varie e project cargo Il prossimo 23 ottobre torna a Venezia il Business Meeting BREAK BULK ITALY e questa volta, l’appuntamento organizzato da SHIPPING ITALY, SUPPLY CHAIN ITALY e AIR CARGO ITALY in collaborazione con l’Autorità di sistema portuale del Mar Adriatico settentrionale, sarà ospitato presso la Scuola Grande di San Giovanni Evangelista. Una location congressuale di prestigio che sorge al centro della Serenissima e a poca distanza dalla stazione ferroviaria di Santa Lucia e da Piazzale Roma. Il sistema portuale del Veneto e più in generale il comparto del project cargo nei giorni scorsi ha iniziato a scaldare i motori partecipando a Rotterdam alla fiera Breakbulk Europe 2026, la più importante manifestazione fieristica europea dedicata alla logistica delle merci varie e dei trasporti eccezionali. Data la rilevanza strategica del comparto per gli scali lagunari di Venezia e Chioggia, la missione coordinata dall’Adsp del Mare Adriatico Settentrionale era guidata dal segretario generale Roberto Mantovanelli e ha visto la partecipazione di circa trenta operatori tra agenti marittimi, spedizionieri, operatori logistici e terminalisti, oltre ai tecnici dell’ente. “La presenza del Sistema Portuale del Veneto a Breakbulk Europe in questa specifica edizione è di importanza fondamentale, per sottolineare come nel complesso contesto geopolitico internazionale, Venezia e Chioggia continuano – e devono continuare – a rappresentare un punto di riferimento per la logistica di breakbulk e project cargo, la cui eccellenza italiana trova sede in parte proprio a Porto Marghera. Per questo ci siamo confrontati con tutti gli attori della filiera per individuare ulteriori margini di miglioramento della nostra offerta e garantire performance logistico-portuali sempre più alte, a supporto dell’ingegneria e dell’industria veneta e del Nordest. In sintesi: guardiamo con fiducia alla prossima sottoscrizione del Memorandum d’Intesa tra Iran e Stati Uniti d’America, auspicando che possa contribuire a risolvere la situazione nello Stretto di Hormuz ma, al contempo, lavoriamo assiduamente con gli operatori, i soggetti economici e le istituzioni internazionali per dare risposte concrete nell’immediato” sono state le parole di Roberto Mantovanelli. Il Business Meeting BREAK BULK ITALY del 23 ottobre prossimo come di consueto garantirà momenti di approfondimento e di networking fra caricatori, spedizionieri, vettori marittimi e terrestri, broker e agenti marittimi, terminal portuali, EPC contractor, cargo owner, service provider e fornitori attivi nel mercato nazionale e internazionale dei carichi non unitizzati. Fra gli speaker e in platea sono attesi i nomi più importanti dello shipping, del terminalismo portuale, delle imprese di spedizioni, delle compagnie di navigazione e delle aziende che abitualmente spediscono o ricevono impianti, macchinari e semilavorati tramite trasporti eccezionali per peso e dimensioni. Il format, ormai collaudato, prevede una mattinata di lavori composta da un opening speech, contributi tecnici, un paio di tavole rotonde, Q&A session e vari momenti conviviali per gli ospiti. Speaker e sponsor dell’evento avranno accesso al “Dinner before BREAK BULK ITALY” per conoscersi e allinearsi sui contenuti e sui temi del momento prima del Business Meeting. Per info su modalità di partecipazione scrivere a segreteria@alocinmedia.it oppure chiamare il numero +39 010 970307

OceanScore’s FuelEU Pooling Index drops to 2026 low B100’s discount to VLSFO narrows to $18/mt LBM pooling values lose up to $306/mt since May All bunker prices described in the text below have been adjusted for calorific content to make them VLSFO-equivalent. They have estimated EU-EU voyage compliance costs included for Rotterdam, and nonEU-EU compliance costs included for Singapore. These account for EU ETS costs and FuelEU Maritime penalties, and the average price of compliance surpluses we have picked up from the FuelEU pooling market from the past week. OceanScore's FuelEU Pooling Index has fallen to €169/mtCO2e ($193/mtCO2e) this week, its lowest level of the 2026 compliance cycle so far. The benchmark has declined by €4/mtCO2e ($5/mtCO2e) over the past week. Over the same period, ENGINE-assessed FuelEU Maritime pooling values for B100 and liquefied biomethane (LBM) on EU-EU voyages have fallen by $20/mt and $29-33/mt, respectively. While the weekly decline in pooling values has been relatively modest, the impact is more pronounced over a longer period. Market participants shifted their focus to 2026 FuelEU compliance in May after completing 2025 reporting and pooling activities by the end of April. Since the first week of May, OceanScore's FuelEU Pooling Index has slumped by €56/mtCO2e, from €225/mtCO2e ($263/mtCO2e) to €169/mtCO2e ($193/mtCO2e) now. The decline in the underlying benchmark has reduced B100's potential pooling value by $188/mt to $522/mt over the same period. LBM pooling values have been hit even harder, falling by $261-306/mt to $724-849/mt. “The decline suggests that sellers are becoming increasingly willing to place compliance surpluses at lower price levels than earlier in the year, and a belief that banking will not translate into better prices any time soon,” OceanScore said. The decline in pooling values has impacted bunker spreads in Rotterdam. On 5 May, Rotterdam's B100 stood at a $299/mt discount to HSFO. That has since shifted to a $68/mt premium over HSFO. Its discount to VLSFO has narrowed by $395/mt to $18/mt and its discount to LSMGO has narrowed by $622/mt to $240/mt. LBM discounts to LSMGO have narrowed by $469-509/mt, and to LNG by $132/mt over the same period. Liquid fuels Rotterdam's conventional fuel prices have fallen by $32-102/mt over the past week, while its B100 price has edged up by $1/mt. Prompt HSFO and VLSFO availability remains tight in the ARA bunkering hub, because of loading delays at the terminals, a trader said. Lead times of around 7-8 days are recommended for both grades. Singapore’s HSFO and LSMGO prices have declined by $18-78/mt in the past week, while its VLSFO price has risen by $34/mt. Its B100 has declined by $29/mt. VLSFO availability in Singapore is still facing constraints, with suppliers recommending lead times of 10-14 days for deliveries. HSFO availability has improved marginally, with lead times shortening to 5-12 days from 10-15 days previously.LSMGO availability has become more stretched, requiring 7-10 days of advance planning versus roughly seven days previously. Liquid gases Rotterdam’s LNG prices have declined by $27-33/mt in the past week. The LBM price for Otto medium-speed engines has inched lower by $2/mt, while the price for diesel slow-speed engines has inched higher by $3/mt. Singapore’s LNG prices have plunged by $150-153/mt on the week. By Konica Bhatt Please get in touch with comments or additional info to news@engine.online

The new FIT-HORIZONS project is bringing together 19 leading maritime companies, researchers, software developers, and technology providers from across Europe to develop an intelligent and flexible retrofit design environment for low- and zero-emission shipping. Coordinated by SINTEF Ocean and funded by the European Union with nearly €4 million, the project aims to simplify and accelerate retrofit decisions for shipowners by combining advanced simulation tools, AI-supported modeling, and operational data into one holistic design framework. The maritime sector currently accounts for around 3% of global CO2 emissions. While new zero-emission vessels are entering the market, most ships operating today are expected to remain in service for decades. Retrofitting the existing fleet is therefore essential to achieving international climate targets. “Shipping needs practical pathways to decarbonization now, not only in the future. FIT-HORIZONS will help the industry make better retrofit decisions by understanding how different technologies interact onboard a vessel. Our ambition is to reduce uncertainty and accelerate the transition from analysis to implementation,” said the coordinator of FIT-HORIZONS, Dr. Kourosh Koushan, Special Advisor at SINTEF Ocean. The project will develop and validate a flexible design environment capable of evaluating multiple retrofit technologies simultaneously, including alternative fuels, electrification, wind-assisted propulsion systems, air lubrication systems, hull modifications, and energy efficiency solutions. As one of the project’s technology partners, bound4blue will contribute its expertise in wind propulsion, including its eSAIL® suction sail technology, to support the development and validation of FIT-HORIZONS’ holistic retrofit design environment. Its role will focus on supporting the assessment of wind propulsion systems as part of combined retrofit solutions, helping shipowners understand how wind can support practical, scalable decarbonization pathways for existing fleets. Rather than assessing technologies in isolation, the FIT-HORIZONS platform will analyze how combinations of technologies perform together under realistic operating conditions and across different vessel categories. The project will deliver six virtual demonstrations based on real operating vessels representing key European ship segments: inland waterways, short-sea shipping, long-distance shipping, ferries, cruise vessels, and offshore vessels. By integrating machine learning, surrogate modeling, operational data, and high-fidelity simulations, the consortium aims to create a tool environment that can support more reliable, scalable, and commercially viable retrofit decisions across the maritime industry. “Reconstruction of existing ships to include one or more new technologies is complex and commercially difficult to evaluate. The industry needs tools that make it easier to identify the most effective decarbonization routes for each vessel,” said Øystein Huglen, Head of Technology and Innovation at Maritime CleanTech. They are in charge of maximizing industry impact and market uptake in the project. The FIT-HORIZONS consortium builds on experience and knowledge developed through previous European initiatives, while introducing new AI-supported approaches for maritime engineering and retrofit optimization. The flexible design environment developed in FIT-HORIZONS is expected to reach a technology readiness level of TRL 7–8 by the end of the project in 2029. The consortium will also develop recommendations for best practices, regulatory approval processes, and business models to support faster market uptake of retrofit solutions. As new climate regulations, such as FuelEU Maritime and the EU Emissions Trading System increase pressure on shipping to reduce emissions, the project aims to provide shipowners and designers with practical tools to navigate an increasingly complex transition. Sintef Ocean (Norway), Maritime CleanTech (Norway), Friendship Systems (Germany), Vard Design (Norway), Laskaridis Shipping Company (Greece), SimFWD (Greece), Consiglio Nazionale Delle Ricerche (Italy), Bound 4 Blue (Spain), Entwicklungszentrum für Schiffstechnik und Transportsysteme (Germany), Atlantec Enterprise Solutions (Germany), Alfa Laval Rotterdam (Netherlands), American Bureau of Shipping (Greece), Hurtigruten (Norway), Tidewater Rederi (Norway), Columbia Shipmanagement (Cyprus), Levante Ferries (Greece), University of Srathclyde (UK), Haeger & Schmidt Logistics (Germany), LMG Marin (France). This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe Framework program under grant no 101270016.

Search across reports, market insights, and blog stories. A fresh industry analysis indicates thatEurope must substantially scale up its carbon dioxide transport network, involving a specialized fleet of roughly 65 CO2 vessels and 33 port facilities, to achieve its carbon capture, utilization, and storage targets by mid-century. The CCUS Enabling Infrastructure Study, produced by energy consultancy Xodus for the Net Zero Technology Centre with backing from EBN, the Port of Rotterdam, Gasunie, and Offshore Energies UK, outlines the necessary investment to convey captured emissions from European industrial sites to subsea storage reservoirs. The report projects that captured CO2 quantities across Europe will climb steeply from 70 million metric tons annually in 2030 to 320 million metric tons annually by 2050. Although pipelines are anticipated to become the primary transport method as infrastructure grows, maritime shipping will remain essential. Even though shipping's portion of the transport market is forecast to fall from 48% in 2030 to 24% in 2050, the absolute volume of CO2 carried by sea is predicted to more than double to 79 million metric tons annually during that timeframe. Analysts examined roughly 850 active ports throughout Europe and reduced that list to about 200 prospective hubs. Among these, as many as 60 ports were deemed strategically located to gather captured emissions and enable their movement to offshore geological storage sites by 2050. Prominent locations are expected to encompass major industrial zones like the Port of Rotterdam, Humberside, and Liverpool Bay. According to the study, Europe'sCO2 transport systemis likely to develop into a hybrid model between 2030 and 2050. Pipelines will handle high-volume industrial routes where cost efficiencies are possible, while shipping will offer adaptability, facilitate cross-border movement, and support carbon capture initiatives in areas where pipeline infrastructure would be less economically feasible. Cost analysis points to the North Sea as Europe's primary carbon storage zone, with the UK, Dutch, and wider North Sea regions expected to take in substantial amounts of imported CO2 from elsewhere on the continent. To satisfy anticipated demand, the study calculates that about 22 CO2 carriers will be needed by 2030, rising to 65 ships by 2050, assuming average cargo loads of 15,000 metric tons. These vessels would function through a system of high-capacity ports, including roughly 23 export hubs and 10 receiving terminals connected to offshore storage sites. For shorter hauls between industrial emitters and ports, the report points to road tankers, rail cars, and river barges as established and expandable options, leveraging technologies already common in the liquefied petroleum gas sector. James McAreavey, Global Head of CCUS and Special Projects Lead at Xodus, noted that most of the technology for moving captured carbon across Europe is already available, having been demonstrated over decades in the LPG industry and currently used in CO2 service via initiatives like Northern Lights, with the challenge now being to expand it. He further remarked that shipping provides emitters with early access to offshore storage years before onshore pipeline networks can be approved and built, and that if investment in ports and ships begins promptly, the North Sea can establish a standard for how the UK and Europe link emitters to storage. Iain Martin, CCUS Technology Manager at NZTC, stated that this work underscores the strategic significance of enabling infrastructure for scaling CCUS throughout Europe, and that as offshore storage demand increases, the North Sea is ideally situated to act as the central node of an integrated, cross-border CO2 transport and storage network. He added that focused investment in port facilities, shipping capacity, and storage development will be crucial for building a robust and economically viable system, and that the immediate priority is to convert this understanding into coordinated efforts that speed up deployment and reinforce the UK and broader North Sea regions' contribution to Europe's decarbonization goals. Making Data-Driven Decisions to Grow Your Business A Quick Overview of Market Performance Understanding the Current State of The Market and its Prospects Finding New Products to Diversify Your Business Choosing the Best Countries to Establish Your Sustainable Supply Chain Choosing the Best Countries to Boost Your Export The Latest Trends and Insights into The Industry The Largest Import Supplying Countries The Largest Destinations for Exports The Largest Producers on The Market and Their Profiles The Largest Markets And Their Profiles Instant access. No credit card needed. Online access to 2M+ reports, dashboards, and tables. Trusted by Fortune 500 teams.

La descarbonización en el transporte de mercanciás es uno de los mayores desafíos de la industria. Y no solo por carretera, sino también si miramos a las rutas marítimas. Aunque el foco suele centrarse en los vehículos particulares, los vehículos pesados suponen una fuente masiva de emisiones. Con el fin de reducir su impacto, Noruega ha decidido ponerse a la vanguardia con el desarrollo de una infraestructura que promete cambiar las reglas del juego en el transporte de corta distancia. La naviera noruegaEitzen Group, a través de su filial especializada en electromovilidadZen, ha formalizado el encargo de dos buques portacontenedores 100% eléctricos. Estos barcos no solo destacan por prescindir de combustibles fósiles, sino que aspiran a convertirse en los más grandes del mundo en su categoría operativa. La iniciativa marca el inicio de una transformación estructural en las rutas comerciales del norte de Europa, demostrando que la electrificación es una alternativa viable para la navegación comercial. Cada uno de los dos buques estará equipado con un paquete de baterías que supera los 100 MWh, el equivalente a la capacidad combinada de más de 1.000 coches eléctricos. Estas celdas de energía de alta densidad, desarrolladas internamente por Zen y fabricadas en su planta de Tønsberg (Noruega), cuentan con especificaciones críticas para soportar las exigencias del mar. Están diseñadas con sistemas de impermeabilización capaces de resistir la inmersión permanente y ofrecen el doble de densidad energética volumétrica que las soluciones estándar del sector. Gracias a esta configuración, las embarcaciones dispondrán de una autonomía operativa de entre 500 y 600 millas náuticas, entre 926 y 1.111 kilómetros con una sola carga. Si bien este rango no es suficiente para cubrir rutas intercontinentales de larga distancia, lo es para vertebrar los corredores comerciales de corta distancia dentro del continente. El despliegue operativo de estos gigantes eléctricos ya tiene una hoja de ruta definida. Los barcos, cuya construcción ha sido adjudicada al astillero chino Zhejiang Dongpeng Shipbuilding, tendrán una capacidad de carga de hasta 900 TEU (unidad de medida equivalente a un contenedor estándar). Su propósito principal será operar en un corredor de transporte de mercancías ecológico que unirá de forma regular los puertos de Oslo, Gotemburgo y Hamburgo, permitiendo incluso realizar trayectos directos entre Oslo y Rotterdam sin tener que parar para recargar. La viabilidad de este proyecto se apoya en la colaboración financiera pública y privada.La agencia estatal noruega para la transición energética, Enova, ha aportado una subvención de 200 millones de coronas noruegas (aproximadamente 18,2 millones de euros) a la filial de Eitzen Avanti para asegurar la viabilidad de los nuevos buques. El plan contempla tener la primera unidad operativa en un plazo de 24 meses, mientras que la segunda se incorporará a la flota unos 3 meses después. Además, el puerto de Oslo trabaja en paralelo instalando un sistema de carga de alta tensión en sus terminales. Esta infraestructura específica operará a un voltaje de 6,6 kV y ofrecerá una capacidad de 7,5 MVA, garantizando que el tiempo de inactividad de los buques durante las labores de carga y descarga de contenedores sea mínimo y optimizando la eficiencia de la flota. La estrategia de la naviera no se limita a la sustitución de un motor diésel por uno eléctrico. El verdadero valor de esta evolución radica en la creación de un ecosistema logístico totalmente nuevo. La visión a largo plazo contempla la unificación de los sistemas de propulsión eléctrica con software de gestión energética, monitorización remota y tecnologías deconducción autónoma. Al reducir la necesidad de tripulación convencional en determinadas maniobras rutinarias y optimizar las rutas, se prevé una reducción significativa de los costes operativos. Los expertos del sector consideran que este hito representa el inicio de lo que denominan la segunda ola de la electrificación marítima. Mientras que la primera fase se centró con éxito en la transformación de transbordadores de pasajeros de corta distancia y ferris locales, este paso introduce la tecnología de cero emisiones en la cadena de suministro internacional. Con la puesta en marcha de este tipo de buques, el transporte de mercancías por mar se empieza a redefinir, imitando al de carretera. Temas