“Give us truly zero-emission alternative fuels, and we will burn them.”
Capt. Eberhard Koch’s remark at the Capital Link Japan Maritime Forum got straight to the point. I could see the audience react.
I travelled to Tokyo to attend the forum at the Tokyo American Club on 16 October. Capt. Koch, Chairman of OL Shipping, questioned imposing carbon charges before sufficient alternative fuels and infrastructure are available. He also asked whether environmental measures reflect vessel operations and reward genuine efficiency.
Capt. Koch also drew attention to the potential consequences for smaller and medium-sized shipowners, "the backbone of our industry," who could face disproportionate financial pressure under a system that does not adequately reflect the commercial and operational realities of shipping.
An owner can improve a ship and install energy-saving devices. But developing the next generation of fuels and engines is beyond an owner’s reach. It requires cooperation from many others.
Russia’s objections deserve more attention than they have received. Lloyd’s List reported Moscow’s argument that owners will pay for compliance rather than switch fuels, while questioning the evidence behind that conclusion.
If paying is cheaper than switching, will the framework change the fuel in the tank—or simply increase the cost of carrying cargo?
What surprised me was the directness of Greek Shipping Minister Vasilis Kikilias. He spoke without a presentation or prepared text, from the heart and with conviction.
“Whatever happens at sea reaches grocery stores, supermarkets and the household budget,” he told the audience.
That sentence deserves a place beside every proposal to increase shipping’s costs.
He supported the environmental objective but questioned the pace: “The pace towards 2050 and 2100 should be such that society can cope with it and economies can cope with it too.”
Cyprus Shipping Deputy Minister Marina Hadjimanolis stressed practicality.
“We need one global measure that will work for everybody,” she said.
She also explained what investors need: “They need a regulatory framework that is stable. They don’t want surprises.”
Her point about trust hit home. But one Financial Times report has stayed with me for some time.
In November 2025, the newspaper reported allegations of US pressure on delegates during the previous month’s IMO negotiations. Reported threats included visa restrictions, trade penalties and higher port charges.
“They went from delegation to delegation … threatening them,” one diplomat told the FT. Another described it as “bully-boy tactics.”
If representatives face threats to their countries, their travel or their families, how freely can they decide? How much confidence can the industry place in a vote held under such pressure?
We talk about rebuilding trust. Reports like this make that task much harder.
The proposed Net-Zero Framework combines fuel-emissions standards with a pricing mechanism that could collect billions annually. Broad spending purposes include cleaner shipping and support for vulnerable countries.
Who receives the money? Who selects the projects? Who checks the results?
The IMO’s technical achievements deserve recognition. The question raised by Capt. Koch was whether the IMO will now be expected to act like a bank for billions of dollars.
Supporters argue that producers need predictable demand before investing. Owners need dependable supply before choosing machinery. A workable framework could help both move forward.
Owners must also pursue efficiency improvements available today. Uncertainty is no excuse for wasting fuel.
Capt. Koch asked for usable fuel. Mr Kikilias asked whether society could afford the transition. Ms Hadjimanolis asked for workable rules and stability.
But who is listening to the consumer?
The family buying bread, milk and coffee has no seat at the IMO. These additional costs do not end with the shipowner. They will find their way to the consumer’s breakfast table.
How much more could everyday essentials cost? What will that money achieve? Who will explain it to people whose budgets are already under pressure from conflicts and high energy costs?
Before governments count the billions, they could collect, they should listen to the people who may ultimately help pay.
*By Sunil Kapoor, COO & Partner of OL Shipping Group
