FEATURE: IMO Net-Zero Framework Likely to Pass Vote Despite US Pushback

The MEPC second extraordinary session will be held from 14 to 17 October at IMO HQ in London. Image Credit: IMO

The IMO is gearing up for one of its most significant meetings in years, as the Marine Environment Protection Committee holds its second extraordinary session from October 14 to 17 to decide on the adoption of the Net-Zero Framework.

The draft package, first agreed in April, is due to enter effect from 2028 if adopted in October. 

Adoption requires two-thirds majority of contracting parties to MARPOL Annex VI to vote in favour - a threshold that appears within reach, even as US opposition raises the stakes.

To see how the industry is approaching the upcoming vote, Ship & Bunker spoke to experts closely monitoring the framework at IMO. 

US Pushback Raises Stakes

The US government has openly opposed the framework, arguing that it harms American interests.

The US delegation did not attend April's IMO meeting that approved the package, and in August, the Trump administration confirmed its opposition, threatening retaliation.

Reports indicate that Washington is contemplating tariffs, visa restrictions, and port levies to discourage support for the deal.

"Whilst governments will take the views of the US very seriously due to its role as a major trading nation, there is already significant political capital invested by those same governments in the IMO process and the consequence of the IMO Net-Zero Framework now being rejected would have ramifications not just for IMO but wider geo-political and climate negotiations," Edmund Hughes, IBIA representative to the IMO, told Ship & Bunker.

Tristan Smith, professor at UCL Energy Institute, noted that US pressure was already in play during April's deliberations.

"At that point in time, there were also similar messages from the US about retaliation, and significant political pressure being applied and being considered by member states, Smith told Ship & Bunker.

"It's public record that, as a response to that pressure, 7 countries (besides the US), that were annex VI signatories and eligible to vote, expressed 'no'."

Two-Thirds Majority Looks Within Reach

Despite the pressure, Hughes remains confident the framework will secure adoption.

"I am optimistic that the amendments will be adopted, Hughes said.

"59 Parties to MARPOL Annex VI voted "yes" to circulation back in April and only 9 voted "no". 

"A winning majority would be 73 if all Parties were "present and voting" but the majority needed will be more likely be lower, suggesting that unless some governments change their minds there should be sufficient numbers to support adoption," he added.

Smith agreed that the numbers favour adoption.

"57 countries that are MARPOL signatories voted yes, Smith added.

"To be successful to disrupt adoption, pressure would have to 'flip' 15 of the 57 yes countries to 'no'.

"We're not aware of evidence that is likely.

Smith sees that the count could in fact strengthen in October.

"We are aware there is potential for greater total number of 'yes' votes relative to the total counted in April, which then further increases the changing of positions of countries (yes to no) needed to block adoption," he added.

Abstentions a Wildcard

With the US stepping up pressure, some governments may see abstention as a way to avoid political consequences.

"There were 24 abstentions in April 16 of which were MARPOL signatories; similar numbers are possible, but do not count/contribute towards the threshold of 'present and voting'," Smith said.

Hughes warned that abstaining could backfire on the country's interests.

"A Party voting to abstain means their vote does not count towards the two-thirds majority required to adopt or the one-third blocking minority, Hughes said.

"As such, whilst it is understandable that some governments would see political reasons for abstaining, by doing so they would risk ending up with the outcome they do not want, and so I do not expect large numbers to do so."

No Plan B if Framework Fails Adoption

While most observers expect adoption, both experts stressed the consequences if the package is rejected, warning that a failure would not only delay regulatory clarity for shipping but also undermine the credibility of the IMO's 2023 climate strategy.

"There isn't one," Hughes said when asked about a fallback plan.

"If not adopted at MEPC/ES.2 then the reality is it would probably take several years for a revised IMO NZF to be returned for consideration for adoption again."

Smith underlined that rejection would clash with the IMO's existing commitments.

"If adoption of this policy cannot be achieved, it will have to go back through the policy design process to come up with a new proposal that can achieve the IMO's strategy.

"Given the short time between now and significant and deep emission reduction targets, postponing the point at which IMO clarifies its policy, will only result in more disruption to the sector and the member states it serves."

Industry Groups Stand Behind Framework

Shipping industry bodies such as International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) and Danish Shipping have expressed support to the framework. 

Danish Shipping called it a gamechanger for international decarbonisation.

Bunker industry body IBIA has also expressed its support to the framework.

"We remain confident that the Net-Zero Framework will be adopted,  the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) told Ship & Bunker.

"It is the only practical option on the table and as Arsenio Dominguez [IMO secretary-general] said multiple times during London International Shipping Week there is no plan B – we need to move forward if we are to meet net zero by or around 2050.

"Any alternative risks the creation of a chaotic web of unilateral measures, which as we know will not wait for any new plan to be developed.

"The international shipping industry continues to support the framework, which is a landmark step towards decarbonising international shipping and the result of many years of negotiation," ICS noted.

Conclusion

The IMO's October session will now determine whether the organisation can lock in its most ambitious climate package yet -- or risk years of delay at a time when international shipping is under growing pressure to deliver on net-zero commitments.

To learn more about IMO, EU ETS and Fuel EU Maritime compliance costs, access Ship & Bunker's calculator for compliance here.