Cover Story

The Global Maritime Forum has estimated that achieving a 50 % reduction in shipping’ s GHG emissions by 2050 will require investment of $ 1 trillion to $ 1.4 trillion between 2030 and 2050. If full decarbonization is the goal, the total could be as high as $ 1.9 trillion.

“ From an economic standpoint, introducing carbon pricing is essential to level the playing field with sustainable fuels, which are currently not economically viable,” said Rico Luman, senior economist for transport and logistics at global bank ING.“ Regardless of the timing, a pricing mechanism will eventually be necessary to drive progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, also as it helps funding green investments.”

Alternative-fuel container ships dominate orders amid supply shortage

By Greg Knowler

‘ A disappointing setback’

It was a sentiment repeated time and again as the reaction rolled in following the vote.

“ The industry needs clarity to be able to make the investments needed to decarbonize the maritime sector, in line with the goals set out in the IMO greenhouse gas strategy,” said Thomas Kazakos, secretary-general of the International Chamber of Shipping.

Kazakos said the framework would have created the first global carbon pricing mechanism for any industrial sector, with the aim of delivering a clear path for shipping’ s transition to net zero.

“ A year delay is a year of more devastation and displacement... We don’ t have the luxury of time.”

The delay means meeting the IMO’ s decarbonization targets has been made more difficult, Luman told the Journal of Commerce.

“ The current timeline needs to be reassessed, as the projected CO 2 reductions by 2030 already fall short of earlier ambitions,” he said.“ As a result, achieving the 2040 and 2050 targets set out in the IMO’ s net-zero strategy is becoming increasingly challenging, particularly given the long investment horizons typical in the shipping industry.”

Jesse Fahnestock, director of decarbonization at the Global Maritime Forum, agreed, calling the adjournment“ a disappointing setback for shipping” that will make delivery of maritime decarbonization targets even more challenging.

Lars Jensen, CEO of Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce contributor, said the main container carriers were unlikely to stray from their current newbuilding path, at least for now.

“ But it will make it more difficult to convince... investors to come in hard on green fuel production with the new uncertainty,” Jensen wrote in an Oct. 20 LinkedIn post.“ In such an environment, LNG just got another improvement in its relative competitiveness versus the fully green fuels.”

email: greg. knowler @ spglobal. com

www. joc. com

Alexandre Prevot / Shutterstock. com

Concerns over the availability of green fuels continue to drive orders for container ships capable of sailing on liquefied natural gas( LNG) and methanol that now account for more than half of the order book.

Neils Rasmussen, chief shipping analyst for shipping association Bimco, said LNG remains the most popular alternative fuel, with LNG-fueled ships now accounting for two-thirds of all alternatively fueled ships on order.

“ As of end-August 2025, 534 container ships are on order that will be able to use alternative fuels upon delivery,” Rasmussen said in a September market update.“ These represent 53 % of ships on order and 77 % of the TEUs [ on order ].”

A host of dual-fuel LNG ship orders have been announced this year. Most recently, HMM placed orders for 12 dual-fuel 13,000- TEU container vessels from HD Hyundai Heavy and Hanhwa Ocean worth a total of $ 2.55 billion.

In September, Yang Ming Marine Transport upgraded a July order for seven 15,000-TEU LNG and ammonia-capable ships to 16,000- TEUs. Mediterranean Shipping Co. in July ordered six 22,000-TEU dual-fuel LNG vessels and upsized another six LNG ships from 19,000 TEUs to 22,000 TEUs. In February, Taiwan’ s Evergreen Marine ordered 11 24,000-TEU LNG-capable vessels.

According to maritime analyst Aphaliner, 72 % of container ship orders so far this year have been capable of running on either LNG( 60 %) or methanol( 12 %), down slightly from 63 % and 18 % of

November 3, 2025 | Journal of Commerce 13