Decarbonizing Korean Shipping (7/13): The Rules Will Tighten
EEXI and CII are only the prologue. The time to coast on slow steaming is short, and tougher rules are lining up.
EU ETS: Putting a Price on Emissions
In 2024 the EU folded shipping into its Emissions Trading System (ETS). It applies to any ship of 5,000 GT and up that calls at an EU port, regardless of flag, so an HMM vessel sailing from Busan into Rotterdam is covered. Intra-EU voyages count for 100% of emissions, EU to non-EU voyages for 50%, and carriers must buy and surrender allowances accordingly. After a phase-in of 40% in 2024 and 70% in 2025, full coverage begins in 2026, now including methane and nitrous oxide. The analytics firm OceanScore estimates that under full coverage, Asian carriers could face about €1.5 billion a year (1.2 million tonnes for Korea).
FuelEU Maritime: Regulating the Fuel Itself
Same EU-port trigger, different focus. Rather than total emissions, it caps the greenhouse-gas intensity of the fuel (emissions per MJ). Slow steaming therefore does nothing for the score; only changing the fuel does. It also uses a Well-to-Wake basis, counting the whole chain from production to use, so even LNG, with its methane slip, is penalized. The required cut steepens from 2% in 2025 to 80% by 2050 against a 2020 baseline.
IMO NZF: A European Experiment Going Global
The IMO is preparing its own Net-Zero Framework, combining a fuel standard (GFI) with economic measures: charge high-emitting ships and reward vessels running zero or near-zero fuels such as e-methanol and e-ammonia. Once in force, it would cover everything from a Busan-to-LA container ship to a Brazil-to-Qingdao bulker. But members remain split over who pays, with the US and oil producers on one side and the EU and island states on the other, and MEPC 84 reached no agreement. December's ES.2 is the watershed.
Beyond the Ship, to the Port
The rules ultimately point to one question: where do you refuel? From 2030 FuelEU mandates shore power (OPS) for ships berthed at major EU ports, which only helps if that electricity is renewable. Pacific Environment argues Korea could pair Busan and Gwangyang with offshore wind to become an energy hub that absorbs otherwise-curtailed renewables. Portsmouth and Yokohama are already moving; Korea still has no integrated strategy.
The seventh article in the 13-part series "Decarbonizing Korean Shipping," co-produced by ClimateInFact (CLIF) and PLANiT.