The European Commission’s proposed revision of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) has received backing from Danish Shipping and the World Shipping Council (WSC), according to Ship & Bunker. Both organizations pointed to the proposal’s emphasis on alternative marine fuels and technologies as a key reason for their support.
Central to the Commission’s plan is a new mechanism called the Sustainable Maritime and Propulsion (SMAP) system, designed to narrow the cost difference between conventional bunker fuels and alternative options. The proposal also calls for using the EU’s Innovation Fund to support decarbonisation efforts across the maritime sector, Ship & Bunker reports.
Industry Reaction
Nina Porst, Executive Director of Sustainable Ships and Skills at Danish Shipping, said in an emailed statement cited by Ship & Bunker that the Commission’s move to maintain a stable ETS framework was a positive step. “Shipping companies need clear and long-term rules when making substantial investments in the green transition,” Porst said, adding that the EU should make greater use of the ETS to speed up the transition.
Simon Bergulf, Vice President of Environment and Climate at WSC, also welcomed the proposal, according to Ship & Bunker. He noted that liner shipping has already committed more than €160 billion to vessels capable of running on renewable fuels, but said those ships still need access to cleaner fuel supplies. “Closing the price gap is one of the most practical ways to get those fuels into ships’ tanks,” Bergulf said.
Danish Shipping additionally supported a proposed reduction of the ETS threshold to 400 GT for certain vessel categories, arguing it would widen the system’s reach and boost demand for alternative fuels and propulsion technologies, Ship & Bunker reports.
IMO Alignment and Port Competition
Danish Shipping welcomed the Commission’s intent to align the EU ETS with a future global greenhouse gas measure being developed at the IMO, which would help prevent vessels from being charged twice once an international system is in place. WSC backed this goal as well but said it wants stronger guarantees in the final legislation to avoid double payments, according to Ship & Bunker.
WSC also raised concerns about proposals that could expand the list of ports covered by the ETS based on infrastructure rather than actual transhipment volumes, warning this could disadvantage neighbouring non-EU ports without cutting emissions. “The ETS should be focused on cutting emissions, not making neighbouring non-EU ports less competitive,” Bergulf said, as quoted by Ship & Bunker.
What Happens Next
According to Ship & Bunker, the Commission’s proposals will now move to negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council, with a possible agreement reached in the first half of 2027 and implementation expected in 2028.
Does This Matter to You?
The proposed ETS changes could influence fuel procurement strategies and compliance costs for vessels calling at EU ports, particularly if the SMAP mechanism succeeds in narrowing the price gap between conventional and alternative fuels. A lower GT threshold would also bring smaller vessels into scope, potentially widening the pool of ships subject to ETS obligations. Port operators near EU borders may want to monitor how transhipment provisions develop, given WSC’s concerns about competitive impacts on non-EU ports. As negotiations continue, the direct financial and operational effects will depend on the final text agreed between EU lawmakers.
Gulf Bunkering does not provide operational or security guidance. This article is for informational purposes only. Operators should consult flag state authorities, P&I clubs, and relevant advisories for decisions relating to transit planning.
Sources: Ship & Bunker
