Specifically, Intercargo noted that far from being a meaningful contribution towards meeting those objectives, this move is, instead, ''a confirmation of how distanced the thinking of European decision-makers is from the global dimensions of the shipping sector.''

It added thaet the EU ETS risks causing trade retaliation, an increase in emissions and the decline of European ports.

Moreover, there is a danger that trans-shipment centres will be set up just outside EU borders and served by large, efficient bulk vessels. Smaller, less GHG efficient ships will then transport cargoes to EU ports which will lose efficiencies gained through technology and size. In short, carbon leakage will take place.

What is more, regarding IMO’s initial strategy and the adoption of the GHG Roadmap, Intercargo says that shipowners have responded responsibly to the challenge by putting forward the USD 5bn R&D fund proposal as a much needed longer-term complementary contribution to set in motion the chain of innovation, investment, production, and adoption by the marketplace of innovative technologies and energy carriers.

The industry needs fuel/energy suppliers, engine manufacturers, shipbuilders and charterers to achieve IMO’s objectives. Bringing these key stakeholders aboard has arguably been the greatest challenge for IMO. One more challenge has now been added: changing the thinking of narrow-minded regional decision-makers and persuading them to see the broader picture. The inclusion of shipping in EU ETS is basically a money collection mechanism, fundamentally disconnected from the work at IMO, and risks undermining a global GHG solution

highlighted INTERCARGO Secretary General Kostas Gkonis.