A Turning Point in Global Maritime Sustainability
In 2025, the maritime sector finds itself at a pivotal intersection. With both the International Maritime Organization and the European Union unveiling distinct but overlapping regulatory schemes to curb greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, the industry is bracing for the dual complexity of compliance. While this dual-layered framework may initially appear daunting, it reveals a powerful opportunity: the convergence of regional and global climate ambitions into a coherent, effective policy alignment.
As the maritime sector continues to be a backbone of global trade, the regulations emerging today are laying the groundwork for the sustainable shipping systems of tomorrow. What appears to be a challenge of harmonisation could well become the blueprint for future-proofing maritime policy on a global scale.
Decoding the Regulatory Landscape
The EU’s FuelEU Maritime and ETS Duo
In January, the EU brought FuelEU Maritime into force, introducing greenhouse gas intensity thresholds for ships over 5,000 gross tonnage calling at European ports. These thresholds are designed to tighten over time, pushing for a radical reduction in CO2-equivalent emissions per megajoule by 2050.
Complementing this is the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS), under which operators face a financial penalty of €2,400 per tonne for failing to meet the GHG fuel intensity thresholds. Notably, FuelEU is still evolving in its implementation, which adds a layer of administrative ambiguity for early movers.
IMO’s Global Net-zero Framework
On the other side of the regulatory coin is the IMO’s Net-zero Framework, set for final adoption later this year and enforcement in 2027. This mechanism will implement a market-based structure based on marine fuel standards and carbon pricing. With two tiers of compliance—Tier 1 being the more ambitious—this system introduces flexibility through a reward model for over-compliance, alongside the obligation to purchase remedial units in case of shortfalls.
Crucially, the funds collected under the IMO scheme will be allocated to developing countries and fuel innovation, aiming to make low-emission fuels not only viable but preferred.
Where the Currents Collide: Diverging Benchmarks and Risks of Duplication
At a glance, the frameworks from both entities aim for the same destination: a dramatic reduction in emissions. But the divergence in methodologies, baseline years, penalty structures, and implementation mechanisms has created friction points for maritime operators.
Take the scenario of a ferry operator working routes between Spain and Italy. Would this operator be held accountable under the EU’s GHG limits and ETS penalties while also needing to contribute to the IMO’s compliance fund? If so, the operator could face de facto double taxation—something not permitted within standard fiscal governance. Without harmonisation, this regulatory overlap risks slowing down adoption, deterring investment, and increasing costs for progressive operators.
The Planning Puzzle: Uncertainty for Pioneers
Operators who have made early investments in dual-fuel engines and transitional fuels like LNG now find themselves penalised due to a lack of recognition mechanisms in current EU regulations. While LNG does offer lower emissions in practice, the absence of methodology to reflect actual performance means that these operators must overpay into the ETS, despite exceeding the emissions performance of many peers.
This reveals an unintended irony: those leading the charge in innovation are most vulnerable under today’s patchwork of regulations. Clear and standardised reporting methods, harmonised benchmarks, and mutual recognition of compliance credits could reverse this paradox and promote confidence in further investment.
Industry Response: Innovation Against the Odds
Despite regulatory uncertainty, industry leaders continue to forge ahead. The Grimaldi Group’s $1.3 billion order for nine methanol-capable ropax vessels is a testament to their forward-thinking strategy. These vessels, slated for delivery between 2028 and 2030, will serve both Mediterranean and Baltic routes.
Equally commendable is Stena RoRo’s E-Flexer series, now established as a benchmark in CO2-neutral ferry design. With a 15th vessel expected to feature hybrid battery systems and methanol-readiness by 2027, these designs demonstrate what commitment to decarbonisation looks like in real-world engineering.
This innovation does not occur in a vacuum. It reflects growing momentum within the sector to invest in fuels and technologies that not only meet but exceed current targets—despite the risk of unclear returns on investment. This is a long game with environmental, operational, and reputational rewards.
Policy Advocacy: Industry Bodies Call for Unity
Industry bodies are responding decisively. Interferry, in collaboration with the European Community Shipowners’ Association and the International Chamber of Shipping, is actively urging the EU to fulfil its long-standing commitment: to align its regional regulations with global IMO standards when a strong international framework emerges.
This is no longer a hypothetical scenario—the global framework is here. Now is the moment to bridge policy divides, creating a seamless regulatory pathway that enables investment, rewards innovation, and brings clarity to operators worldwide.
A Call for Strategic Alignment
The immediate task is not merely to manage complexity, but to use it as a catalyst for integration. Decarbonisation in shipping will only succeed if the rules of the game are clear, complementary, and globally understood. Operators, technology providers, and sustainability strategists all stand to gain from a regulatory environment where duplication is replaced with synergy, and penalties are replaced with pathways for growth.
Conclusion: From Confusion to Convergence
The evolving maritime regulatory landscape is not a hurdle, but a sign of accelerating global resolve. The current divergence between EU and IMO frameworks highlights the need for swift harmonisation—an outcome that is within reach if policymakers choose alignment over fragmentation.
Operators do not shy away from ambition. What they seek is predictability. As the sustainability ecosystem around shipping matures, aligning regional and global rules becomes not just a bureaucratic need, but a competitive advantage. The time to act on that alignment is now, before overlapping regimes dilute progress and disrupt market confidence.
In a sector already showing leadership through advanced vessel design, alternative fuels, and circular infrastructure thinking, the alignment of policy can become the final piece of the puzzle that unleashes scalable transformation.