Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

Ascolta la versione audio dell'articolo 2' di lettura English Version Translated by AI. For feedback, please contact english@ilsole24ore.com Le Regioni non possono contestare il mancato conferimento da parte dello Stato di risorse per il miglioramento della qualità dell’aria. Il recepimento della direttiva europea su questa materia, infatti, non ha ancora portato nuove competenze ai governatori che, quindi, non possono agire in maniera preventiva. Chiedilo al Sole Le domande sono suggerite automaticamente da 24Ore AI sulla base del contenuto visualizzato. Domande di approfondimento generate da 24Ore AI I ricorsi delle Regioni La Corte costituzionale, con la sentenza n. 145, ha affrontato anche una questione di legittimità proposta, in modo insolito, dalle Regioni Lombardia, Piemonte e Veneto, con tre ricorsi distinti. I tre governatori hanno impugnato, proponendo diverse questioni di illegittimità costituzionale, l’articolo 12 della legge di delegazione europea 2024. Si tratta della legge delega per il recepimento della direttiva europea in materia di qualità dell’aria, nella quale proprio i piani regionali hanno un ruolo centrale. Per l’attuazione di quell’articolo, dice la delega, «non devono derivare nuovi o maggiori oneri per la finanza pubblica». Loading... Proprio su questo aspetto, allora, si concentrano molte contestazioni delle Regioni. Secondo la sentenza, però, sono inammissibili perché si parla di risorse per lo svolgimento di funzioni «non ancora conferite». In aggiunta, i ricorsi «non hanno precisato quali sarebbero le funzioni ora loro assegnate ulteriori rispetto a quelle» già di loro competenza e perché «le risorse disponibili non sarebbero sufficienti». Redazione dei piani e monitoraggio In questo contesto, l’attività di redazione dei piani della qualità dell’aria e le funzioni di monitoraggio «rientrano già tra i compiti istituzionali e ordinari delle Regioni, non richiedendo strutturalmente ulteriori risorse». Da considerare, poi, che il legislatore in fase di attuazione potrebbe «modulare gli ulteriori compiti tenendo conto delle risorse disponibili, valorizzando forme di coordinamento interistituzionale e la migliore utilizzazione o distribuzione delle risorse già esistenti». In questo quadro, la Corte ha anche ricordato che il giudizio di legittimità costituzionale si configura come strumento di tutela delle attribuzioni legislative delle Regioni. «Il gravame - dicono i giudici - può configurarsi non solo quando sono indebitamente sottratte o limitate delle competenze regionali, ma anche, all’opposto, quando sono attribuite alle Regioni delle competenze che non sono di loro spettanza».

Risk Intelligence examines security incidents and related concerns on Asian waters during the second quarter of 2026. July 24, 2026 Compared both to the first quarter of 2026 and to Q2 2025, several clear trends emerge: intensified blockade and sanctions enforcement on the Indian Ocean, insurgency activity entering the maritime domain, persistent yet improving circumstances surrounding vessel boardings and ongoing regional diplomatic efforts. These developments illustrate both progress and enduring challenges in safeguarding shipping and port operations across the continent. Although Iran, the focus of theUSOperation Epic Fury and Israel’s Operation Roaring Lion, is far to the west, related enforcement of US sanctions and blockades saw at least nine crude oil tankers intercepted by US military forces while navigating the Indian Ocean during Q2. A number of these incidents involved vessel boardings off Sri Lanka and to the east of the country. The nine operations during Q2 reflect a sharp intensification of the US blockade against Iran’s maritime trade andsanctionsas compared with about three crude oil tankers intercepted in Q1. Related:Saudi tanker on fire after Houthi strike in Red Sea Following an April vessel boarding involving a Botswana‑flagged tanker carrying Iranian crude in the Bay of Bengal, the Pentagon described the action as a “right‑of‑visit maritime interdiction,” adding that the vessel was deemed “stateless” despite its flag. The Equasis database listed the vessel as Botswana flagged until March this year, and some other sources said its flag was unknown. While US officials said the interdiction was part of global maritime enforcement efforts to disrupt illicit networks tied to Iran, the Pentagon emphasised that “international waters are not a refuge for sanctioned vessels”. Similarly, in June US Indo-Pacific Command confirmed the boarding of a sanctionedVLCCsouth of Sri Lanka. The US sanctioned the ship in October 2024 for its role in Iranian oil trading. US Indo-Pacific Command stated that the US “will continue global maritime enforcement to disrupt illicit networks and interdict vessels providing material support to Iran, wherever they operate.” The US took similar action in 2025, boarding and seizing multiple sanctioned crude oil tankers in the Indian Ocean, mainly tied to Venezuela’s shadow fleet. These operations set the precedent for the much larger interdiction campaign now underway against Iran. A rare display of insurgency activity impacting the maritime domain took place in April when a Pakistani Coast Guard vessel was attacked near Jiwani, close to the Iran–Pakistan border, resulting in the deaths of three personnel. Officials attributed the assault to suspected members of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), a separatist group that regularly targets government forces and infrastructure across Balochistan. Related:Ukraine and Russia strike multiple ships in the Black Sea The BLA’s operations typically involve land‑based ambushes, IED strikes, and attacks on checkpoints, convoys, and projects linked to the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor, with occasional urban assaults in Quetta and Turbat. By contrast, attacks in the maritime environment are extremely rare, making the Jiwani incident notable as a potential expansion of the group’s tactics. If the BLA continues to operate in coastal waters, it could signal a shift toward targeting maritime security forces and port infrastructure, raising new risks for shipping and strategic assets along Pakistan’s Makran coast. A 35% quarter-on-quarter increase in the number of reported thefts and armed robbery incidents in Asia was mainly fuelled by an increased number of boardings at Manila’s anchorage, where five armed robberies were reported. Other ports where boardings took place include Belawan, Batangas, Chittagong, Sandakan and Chittagong. Like the activity at Manila, most boardings take place at anchorage areas. Related:Tankers reverse course in Red Sea after loading in Saudi Boardings of vessels transiting the Singapore Strait totalled 11 in Q2, accounting for 41% of all incidents in Asia for the quarter. This figure is only marginally higher than the 10 boardings recorded in Q1, indicating a return to the average monthly levels observed before the 2025 surge. For comparison, Q2 2025 saw 37 boardings in the strait, underscoring the marked improvement in 2026 and illustrating a 70% year‑on‑year decrease. Asian maritime security incidents in Q2 - source Risk Intelligence While the reduction in the number of boardings is welcome, concerns regarding the safety and welfare of seafarers remain, as perpetrators based on Batam and possibly Karimun are known to use methamphetamine, a drug that can cause violent and erratic behaviour. This, combined with their modus operandi of carrying knives and, at times, airsoft guns, raises the potential for seafarers to face serious injuries. Q2 saw China maintain its sustained military and maritime pressure around Taiwan, with the most notable development being the increased use of coastguard and maritime law enforcement activity east of the island. As usual, Chinese Coast Guard patrols and survey ship activity near Taiwan’s eastern waters drew criticism from Taipei and several Western governments, as the activity appeared aimed at extending Beijing’s jurisdictional claims and testing options beyond routine PLA air and naval patrols. Like the China/Taiwan activity, tensions betweenChinaand thePhilippinesalso continued, marked by additional confrontations near Second Thomas Shoal. Chinese coastguard vessels again obstructed Philippine resupply missions to the BRP SIERRA MADRE, employing water cannons and aggressive manoeuvres. Manila lodged formal protests, condemning the incidents as violations of sovereignty and international law. Beijing defended its actions as lawful enforcement, underscoring the entrenched dispute over contested maritime claims and the risks to routine logistical operations. ASEAN foreign ministers convened in Bangkok to assess progress on the South China Sea Code of Conduct (COC). Philippine delegates reiterated calls for binding enforcement mechanisms, while Vietnam and Malaysia pressed for stronger safeguards against coercion. China maintained its opposition to external arbitration, insisting disputes be resolved bilaterally and warning against “outside interference,” reflecting the continued divergence in positions. Parallel technical consultations in Hanoi reaffirmed the 2026 deadline for the COC, with delegates stressing adherence to UNCLOS and the need to prevent escalation. Discussions again highlighted the aforementioned recurring incidents at Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, reinforcing the urgency of codified safety protocols. On the sidelines, Philippine and Chinese envoys held bilateral exchanges described as candid but inconclusive, reflecting persistent differences despite ongoing dialogue. Read more about: Thomas Timlen Senior Analyst, Risk Intelligence Thomas Timlen, based in Singapore, is a Senior Analyst with Risk Intelligence. His background addressing maritime security threats began in the 1990s as an industry representative with BIMCO. Since then he has been involved with a variety of security related work including research conducted as a Visiting Research Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. He holds a BSc in Business Administration and Management from Boston University.

Container throughput up 3% at the US energy gateway port that has plans for a new box terminal July 24, 2026 Port Houston handled 2.22 million teu through the first half of the year up 3% on the same period last year. It was also the highest first-half container volume in the port’s history. As shippers’ frontloaded shipments ahead of the peak season June saw an 18% year-on-year jump in container volumes driven by a 27% jump in loaded imports. Crude oil and refined products together account for more than half of all tonnage moving through the region, reinforcing its role as a leadingUSenergy gateway. Port Houston has approved a package of projects to expand the ports with berth upgrades,- a proposed new container terminal and the next phase of channel deepening. According to Port Houston, the project would develop a new cargo terminal on Spilman Island, including two vessel berthing slips and associated improvements to the Houston Ship Channel. The work will include preparation of an environmental impact statement and support for the US Army Corps of Engineers permitting process, covering emergency dredging and advanced engineering work for the east end of the Bayport Container Terminal. Related:DP World seeks to bypass Hormuz with new Fujairah terminals The port has completed commissioning four new STS cranes at Bayport Container Terminal, bringing the terminal’s operational fleet to 21 cranes as the port continues to expand capacity amid strong cargo growth. Read more about: Michele Labrut Americas Correspondent Michèle Labrut is a long-time Panama resident, a journalist and correspondent, and has continuously covered the maritime sector of Central & Latin America. Michèle first came to Panama as a press attaché to the French Embassy and then returned to the isthmus as a foreign correspondent in the 1980s. Author of Seatrade Maritime's annual Panama Maritime Review magazine and of several books, Michèle also wrote for Time magazine, The Miami Herald, NBC News and the Economist Intelligence Unit. She has also collaborated in making several documentaries for the BBC and European and U.S. television networks. Michèle's profession necessitates a profound knowledge of the country, but her acumen is not from necessity alone, but a genuine passion for Panama. In 2012 she was awarded the Order of Merit (Knight grade) by the French Government for her services to international journalism and in 2021 the upgrade to Chevalier grade.

inInternational Shipping News24/07/2026 In the latest edition of DNV’s Maritime Impact podcast, Eirik Nyhus, director, environment for maritime at class society DNV, outlined the practical implications of the new framework, highlighting both the compliance requirements and the outstanding uncertainties that remain ahead of implementation. “This is more than just another reporting obligation,” Nyhus said. “For operators in scope, the UK ETS introduces a company-level compliance regime with new requirements for emission monitoring, reporting, verification and ultimately the surrender of allowances.” The new rules will initially apply to cargo and passenger vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above operating on domestic UK voyages. Offshore vessels will be brought into scope later, from January 1, 2027. While the legal framework has now been established, maritime companies face a relatively short timeframe to ensure systems, procedures and reporting structures are ready. A key feature of the UK approach is the requirement for operators to establish an approved Emissions Monitoring Plan (EMP). Unlike the EU ETS, which relies on vessel-specific documentation, the UK framework adopts a company-wide model. Operators must submit a single EMP covering all vessels under their responsibility, detailing monitoring methodologies, emission sources and calculation approaches. Nyhus explained that approval for an EMP can be sought at any time but no later than 42 days after a company undertakes a maritime activity falling within the scope of the scheme. The process will be managed through the UK’s digital Maritime Emissions Trading Scheme (METS) platform and the UK ETS Registry. The introduction of the UK ETS maritime regime also coincides with the end of the previous UK Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) framework. That system was revoked on April 3, 2026, with residual reporting obligations being absorbed into the new ETS structure from July 1. “This means there are no reporting obligations for the period April 3 to June 30,” Nyhus noted, describing the shift as a move into “a new architecture for emissions compliance”. Operational impactsAlthough the scope of the scheme is relatively narrow, its impact on operational planning could be substantial. The UK ETS will cover emissions generated on domestic voyages between UK ports, including voyages that begin and end at the same UK port. Importantly, emissions generated during port calls are also covered. “One practical consequence is that emissions from port stays on international routes are also captured under the UK ETS,” Nyhus said. “So even where the voyage itself may be outside the scope, the port call in the UK will still create a surrender obligation for those in-port emissions, as long as the ship itself is in scope.” The framework also includes several route-specific provisions. Voyages between Northern Ireland and Great Britain will carry a 50% surrender obligation for voyage emissions, while port stays in both locations remain subject to a full 100% surrender requirement. Meanwhile, voyages between the UK and ports outside the European Economic Area, including UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies, are excluded because they are not treated as domestic voyages. Like the EU ETS, the UK system covers carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide emissions from combustion processes, as well as methane slip calculated using a tank-to-wake methodology. Methane and nitrous oxide will be reported using IPCC AR5 global warming potentials, ensuring broad alignment with European carbon accounting methods. However, while the emissions scope closely mirrors that of the EU ETS, the implementation architecture differs in several noteworthy respects, Nyhus said. Under the UK system, EMPs are submitted directly to regulators instead of undergoing pre-assessment by an accredited verifier. Verification instead focuses on the Annual Emissions Report (AER), which must be submitted by March 31 each year and independently verified by a UK Accreditation Service-accredited verifier. Operators must then surrender allowances corresponding to verified emissions by April 30 annually. For the inaugural compliance period, reporting will cover only emissions generated between July 1 and December 31, 2026. The associated surrender deadline will fall on April 30, 2028, combined with surrender obligations for emissions generated during 2027. Responsibility for compliance rests primarily with the registered owner of a vessel. Nevertheless, this responsibility can be transferred to the International Safety Management (ISM) company where a legally binding agreement exists. In such cases, details of the arrangement must be entered into the METS system, Nyhus explained.Another departure from the EU model is the absence of an onboard Document of Compliance.“Unlike the EU ETS, the UK ETS does not require a Document of Compliance to be carried on board,” Nyhus explained. “Instead, compliance is handled digitally through METS and the UK ETS Trading Registry.” Unanswered questionsDespite the framework now being operational, several important questions remain unanswered. Nyhus identified fuel eligibility, emissions reduction claims and certification requirements as areas where greater regulatory clarity is still needed. “The challenge is operationalisation – in other words, translating legal text into clear, consistent, workable rules for real ships, real voyages and real reporting systems,” he said. Current uncertainties include which fuels qualify when regulations are silent, whether lists contained in Annex A should be interpreted as exhaustive, and how the UK authorities intend to recognise voluntary certification schemes in future. Additional questions surround the relationship between the UK ETS and sustainability criteria under the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED). According to Nyhus, these issues have practical significance because they influence not only fuel eligibility but also the evidence operators must retain and the methodologies verifiers are expected to apply. Proof requirements also remain under discussion. Industry participants continue to seek clarification regarding acceptable forms of evidence, including whether Proofs of Sustainability, Proofs of Compliance or supplier declarations will be recognised, and whether copies of documentation are sufficient. Further complexity may emerge from future political developments. Both the UK and EU have previously indicated an intention to align their respective emissions trading systems, although implementation timelines remain uncertain. “Negotiations have started, but look to be taking a while, and my guess is that the likely earliest practical year for alignment to happen would be 2028,” Nyhus said. “What practical changes this will lead to remains to be seen.” For shipowners operating across both UK and European trades, the result is an increasingly complex compliance environment. While the UK and EU regimes share common principles, they differ sufficiently in structure and execution to require dedicated management processes. “The UK ETS maritime extension is important not only because it adds a new compliance obligation, but because it reflects the continued development of regional market-based measures in shipping,” Nyhus observed. Operators, he added, are now “increasingly navigating overlapping carbon frameworks with different boundaries, timelines, tools and evidentiary requirements.” As the July 2026 start date approaches, Nyhus’s message is simple: “Get ready as soon as you can,” he said. “Get your data and roles in order, and keep a close eye on the evolving guidance and interpretations being published by the UK authorities.”Source: Baltic Exchange

"Apprezziamo che l'Italia stia concretizzando il piano nazionale di elettrificazione delle banchine dando vita a un sistema di cold ironing che probabilmente è il più esteso e capillare d'Europa. Spero che a Genova, come negli altri porti, il progetto diventi operativo in tempi brevi". Lo ha detto Pierfrancesco Vago, presidente esecutivo della divisione crociere del Gruppo Msc, in occasione della cerimonia di consegna della nave Explora III nello stabilimento di Sestri Ponente. "L'auspicio è che ora siano predisposti, dalle Autorità di sistema locale, bandi di gara - ha spiegato - in grado di assicurare livelli di servizio e tariffe adeguate. Tutte le navi Explora, al pari di quelle Msc Crociere, sono già dotate del sistema di collegamento alla rete elettrica in banchina che permette di azzerare le emissioni durante la sosta nei porti, grazie allo spegnimento dei motori".L'appello è per un piano nazionale invece di "un approccio molto localizzato". "Oggi costa meno il gnl a ora della rete elettrica. La richiesta è avere una direttiva che possa consentirci di negoziare con la rete elettrica per avere un costo ragionevole a kilowattore per collegarci a terra una volta che siamo in porto". Riproduzione riservata © Copyright ANSA Da non perdere Condividi

Ascolta la versione audio dell'articolo 2' di lettura English Version Translated by AI. For feedback, please contact english@ilsole24ore.com «Finché la situazione è così nello Stretto di Hormuz, noi non entriamo con le navi, questo è poco ma sicuro». A parlare è Diego Aponte, presidente di Msc e figlio del fondatore del fondatore del gruppo. Adesso, prosegue, «dobbiamo vedere cosa succede nell’altro Stretto, quello di Bab-el-Mandeb, perché pare che abbiano aperto il fuoco su due navi questa mattina e, dunque, tutto diventa più complicato, adesso, sia per il traffico delle petroliere che per il traffico delle portacontainer. Noi, comunque, continuiamo a navigare via Capo di Buona Speranza, non prendiamo nessun tipo di rischio per salvaguardare i nostri equipaggi, che è la cosa che conta di più. Vediamo come andrà a finire». Chiedilo al Sole Le domande sono suggerite automaticamente da 24Ore AI sulla base del contenuto visualizzato. Domande di approfondimento generate da 24Ore AI Aponte, che è al vertice della compagnia numero uno al mondo per il trasporto di contenitori, ha parlato a margine della cerimonia di consegna dell’unità da crociera Explora III (del brand Explora journeys di Msc cruises), realizzata presso la stabilimento Fincantieri di Genova. Soffermandosi non tanto sull’evento quanto sulla situazione del settore cargo, l’armatore ha ricordato, la politica di abbattimento delle emissioni emissioni applicata dal gruppo anche nel trasporto container. Da un lato, «con il cold ironing» (cioè l’alimentazione elettrica, da terra, delle navi all’ormeggio) e «ovviamente - ha aggiunto - anche con tutte le navi a Gnl, dunque dual fuel. Penso che abbiamo impostato la direzione, perlomeno del settore delle portacontenitori e credo che, anche se il Gnl non ci porterà a zero, comunque ci dà un bel 25% in meno di emissioni. Il che, a mio parere, è già molto importante, con l’orderbook che abbiamo relativo al naviglio nuovo: contribuirà sicuramente molto positivamente all’ambiente». Loading... Orderbook da circa 130 unità Quanto al numero delle unità in ordine, «non ve lo ricordo - ha detto Aponte a chi gli chiedeva di quantificarlo - lo lasciamo appositamente fluido. Comunque sono un bel po’ di navi, saranno 130». Ha poi aggiunto che Msc continuerà a investire nell’acquisizione di banchine portuali. «Qualsiasi terminal - ha detto - è importante per il nostro gruppo, dunque continueremo ad investire». L’armatore ha anche affermato di «vedere bene» il mercato dei container: «Il nostro è un mestiere legato al Pil e, come sapete, alla demografia. Dunque, finché Pil e demografia crescono, il settore delle portacontainer, secondo me, va bene. Ovviamente bisogna vedere cosa succede con questa situazione geopolitica; se si riapriranno gli stretti, ovviamente, ci sarà un po’ più di naviglio sul mercato, però non sono preoccupato». Riguardo alla possibilità di praticare una rotta artica, Aponte è tranchant: «È un passaggio sbagliato e pericoloso per l’ambiente. Noi saremo sempre contro e, dunque, la rotta artica non la toccheremo». Relativamente, infine, alla posizione assunta dall’Ue in merito alla revisione dell’Ets, «sono stati fatti degli errori - dice l’armatore- non è stato ancora votato niente e se ne parlerà alla fine dell’anno. Ma quello che è stato messo sul tavolo per il problema dei porti non è stato risolto».

South America’s supply chains are undergoing something of a major shake-up amid the impacts of the Trump tariff regime, a deal with the EU, and efforts closer to home to reorient how the continent engages with international trade. Taking effect in May, the EU-South America trade deal, better known as the Mercosur agreement, is expected to inject nearly half-a-trillion dollars of investment into South America and reduce costs for consumers on both sides of the deal. But it stands out as something of an outlier for a region that has been battered by the White House, Brazil now under particular pressure followingyesterday’s implementation of a wide-ranging 25% tariff rate for trade with the US. Nonetheless, forwarders that spoke toThe Loadstarindicated that, by and large, they believe the continent has done sufficient work to protect itself from the worst impacts of US policy, their concerns instead focused on capacity constraints. One forwarder toldThe Loadstarthat, while the “overall picture” for the region was one of stability, “transit times are becoming less predictable as stronger cargo volumes meet tighter ocean capacity and uneven inland infrastructure”. AGL Cargo’s Jackson Campos singled out Brazil as emblematic of the double-sided face of the supply chain picture, pointing out that Santos –which is expecting a hotly contested bid for its Tecon 10 terminal– has continued to report solid growth in cargo and container volumes. “And yet, a recent two-day trucker mobilisation around the port, despite ending without developing into a wider shutdown, highlighted the dependence of Brazilian logistics on haulage costs and regulation,” Mr Campos toldThe Loadstar. For many, failure to address the issues that have led to trucker protests provoked fears of the repeat ofthe chaos seen in 2018, when trucks stopped moving for 10 daysas drivers, backed by hauliers, demanded cuts to the price of diesel. Nor was the recent spat the first this year, as drivers around the country mobilised – again in response to a dramatic increase in the price of diesel after the onset of the US/Israeli war on Iran – threatening agriculture, food, and goods and services. While that instance resulted in the government “dropping taxes on diesel and upping the utilisation of the country’s refineries”, while sensitive to truckers’ needs, forwarders believe structural changes are needed to ensure there are alternative transport options available. Outside Brazil, the wider region is also experiencing pressures on the Asia–East Coast South America trade, where blanked sailings, equipment shortages, and strong demand have tightened space and increased freight rates. “Inland logistics are more uneven,” says Mr Campos. “The northern grain corridor faced long truck queues and delays during the soybean export season, exposing limitations in road access, terminal capacity, and river transport.” But the picture is not uniform, one forwarder noting that Argentina and Uruguay were both experiencing something of a boom, recording stronger container activity – in part a result ofthe Argentinian government’s controversial “bonfire of regulations”. Under President Milie, Argentina has slashed import tariff rates on more than 1,000 product types, while also increasing the freight-on-board value limit to $3,000, three times the previous limit. The president also upped the amount individuals could import duty-free every year to $400, all of which prompted a 55% uptick in consumer goods imports, taking them to a record-breaking $11.4bn in value. One Portuguese forwarder said: “Argentina is an area where we are seeing volumes and interest from potential customers increase. It seems like the country is making things easier for businesses to operate, and that is certainly helping us develop links there.” For the wider market, Mr Campos said that, despite the difficulties, forwarders were looking to get ahead, and it was clear that “cargo is moving, but earlier bookings, better forecasting, and additional lead-time buffers are increasingly important”. He added: “Overall, the key risk is not that cargo cannot move, but that freight costs, vessel space, and end-to-end transit times are becoming more volatile.”