Decarbonization of maritime transport blocked by the United States

Donald Trump’s government is becoming a symbol of environmental backwardness and climate short-sightedness. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) meeting, which ended on Friday, turned out to be a complete failure after the U.S. administration rejected the proposal for a fundamental reduction of emissions in maritime transport. Decarbonization of the sector is becoming increasingly unrealistic.

Trump threatens again

Last week, representatives of 100 countries met in London to officially approve the plan for mandatory emission reductions in maritime transport, agreed upon in April this year. The talks, held under the auspices of the IMO, unfortunately became a stage for political intimidation and the pursuit of narrow national interests. Representatives of the Trump administration threatened that, in retaliation for adopting the plan unfavorable to them, they would impose visa restrictions on the supporting countries, ban their ships from entering American ports, and introduce sanctions against officials sponsoring climate policies.

In addition to the United States, Saudi Arabia also turned out to be a fierce opponent of maritime decarbonization. In August, it supported the U.S. in blocking progress on the Global Plastic Treaty. Russia, Brazil, and small island states – whose economies depend on shipping and which were effectively intimidated by U.S. threats – also opposed the agreement.

Most member states, along with the United Kingdom, supported the continuation of discussions on maritime transport decarbonization. Greece broke ranks with European climate solidarity.

Maritime transport decarbonization slows down

The framework project of the new agreement, adopted in April, aimed to amend the existing MARPOL treaty on the prevention of marine pollution by ships. The document introduces new fuel standards for maritime transport and establishes rules for pricing greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These emissions currently account for as much as 3% of global totals, and their reduction is a key element in combating climate change.

According to the proposal, ship operators would pay fees for greenhouse gas emissions into a special fund created by the IMO. The collected funds would be used for climate action. The tax mechanism itself was intended to encourage a shift away from fossil fuels toward greener solutions.

If the agreement had been adopted, it would have been the first global decision in history to decarbonize the entire sector. IMO members had already agreed in 2023 that the industry should reach net-zero emissions by around 2050. However, the U.S. administration argued that the emission pricing mechanism was nothing more than a new carbon tax that would increase shipping costs by 10%. Donald Trump himself called the idea a “fraudulent tax,” while the U.S. Secretary of State issued an official statement saying:

The Administration unequivocally rejects this proposal (…) and will not tolerate any measures that increase costs for our citizens, energy suppliers, shipping companies and their clients, or tourists.

What next for maritime transport emissions?

IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez, in his closing speech, tried to motivate participants to keep working and not give in to frustration. “There are no winners or losers in this session. Let us use this moment to learn from it, return ready to negotiate, and take further steps,” he said, urging continued cooperation within the IMO framework.

In reality, the talks ended with a decision to postpone any resolution by 12 months, which means that the document in its current form will likely never be adopted, as it will require revision. Most participants seeking to accelerate the decarbonization of maritime transport left with a deep sense of defeat. UN Secretary-General António Guterres also expressed his disappointment, calling it a missed opportunity.

---

main photo: Hennie Stander/Unsplash