Source: HINDU

Disclaimer: Copyright infringement not intended.

Context

Shipping industry emissions: ~1 billion metric tonnes of GHG annually (~2.8% of global emissions).

If treated as a country shipping would be the 6th largest emitter globally. Without interventions, emissions may rise by 50–250% by 2050.

 Unlike road or air transport shipping is a global and heavily transboundary sector necessitating global regulatory efforts.

83rd Session of Marine Environment Protection Committee

Conducted by the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

Objective: Adoption of a Market-Based Measure to control GHG emissions.

Key Decision

Adopted Singapore’s hybrid model (based on India’s proposal) as the IMO’s Net Zero Framework.

Marked the first time a global industry accepted a mandatory emissions levy framework.

Proposals at MEPC-83

Geopolitical and National Responses

United States: Did not participate (Trump-era withdrawal from Paris Agreement). Opposed EU’s uniform levy, threatened reciprocal measures.

Oil-exporting countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia): Opposed transition fearing market loss.

Small Island Developing States: Sought steep levies for climate finance.

China & large maritime nations: Advocated low levies to protect competitiveness.

Scandinavian nations: Sought recognition for early decarbonisation investments.

Brazil: Supported shift to methanol as marine fuel.

Traditional maritime powers (e.g., Greece): Skeptical of levy necessity and feasibility.

India's Position and Role

India proposed a middle-ground mechanism focusing on performance-based penalties and rewards.

Played a constructive role with Singapore in facilitating consensus.

India’s MBM model was seen as pragmatic and equitable—considering capabilities and emissions intensity.

India’s Strategic Benefits

Short-term impacts: Marginal rise in shipping logistics cost (~5–8% by 2030).

Long-term projection: 33–35% increase in cost by 2050, but minimal impact on trade volume.

Fleet exposure: Out of 236 Indian ships (>5,000 GT), only 135 operate internationally—rest unaffected.

Fuel cost rise: From $400M to $508M by 2030—manageable for India.

Green hydrogen advantage

National Hydrogen Mission supports production of low-GHG fuels.

Indian green hydrogen aligns with IMO standards for rewards.

Ports being readied for green hydrogen bunkering making India a potential clean fuel export hub.

Broader IMO Strategy Timeline

Regulatory Tools Adopted by IMO

Energy Efficiency Design Index– technical measure.

Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan– operational measure.

Mandatory Fuel Oil Consumption Reporting – transparency and accountability.

Market-Based Measures– financial incentives/disincentives to reduce emissions.

Principles

Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR-RC):

Emphasised in Paris Agreement and earlier UNFCCC frameworks.

Now eroding under IMO deliberations as developed nations push for uniform obligations.

Developing nations including India resist blanket obligations without considering historical emissions and capabilities.

Sources:

HINDU