Green Shipping 2026: How IMO Emissions Rules Are Reshaping Freight Costs

The Regulatory Milestone: IMO’s Net-Zero Framework

The International Maritime Organization adopted its 2023 Strategy on GHG Reduction, aiming for net-zero by 2050. In April 2025, during the MEPC 83 session, draft amendments to MARPOL Annex VI were approved — combining carbon-intensity limits and a global emissions levy for large vessels.

• Legally binding fuel standards requiring ships to meet carbon-intensity thresholds.
• A global emissions-pricing mechanism (levy) for vessels exceeding limits, targeted for early implementation by 2028.
• Intensity targets: -20% CO₂/tonne-mile by 2030; -70% by 2040 (vs 2008 baseline).
• Estimated $1 trillion investment needed for fleet and fuel transition.

These developments mark the end of voluntary compliance — non-compliance will now directly impact freight cost and competitiveness.

Regional Cost Mechanisms: The EU ETS & Others

While IMO sets the global standard, regional initiatives are already shaping real costs. The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) expanded to maritime transport in 2024, requiring vessels over 5,000 GT calling at EU ports to surrender emission allowances.

• Coverage rises to 100% by 2026.
• Estimated revenue: €1.6B (2024), €5.5B (2025), and €8B (2026).
• Inclusion of CH₄ and N₂O from 2026 onwards.

These regional rules act as precursors to the global IMO pricing model — offering insight into how freight costs may evolve as carbon intensity is priced in.

Impact on Shipping Economics & Freight Costs

Combined global and regional rules mean that freight cost forecasting must evolve. Key cost drivers include:

• Fuel mix change: Transition to LNG, methanol, hydrogen, ammonia — higher costs and new infrastructure needs.
• Emission pricing: Surcharges for high-carbon fuels; early drafts suggest up to $380/tonne CO₂.
• Fleet depreciation: Older tonnage faces early obsolescence or costly retrofits.
• Routing & speed: Slow steaming reduces emissions but raises transit and inventory costs.
• Pass-through to shippers: Expect “green surcharges” as carriers transfer compliance costs.

Logistics planners must recalibrate “total landed cost,” factoring in emission surcharges, fuel-type premiums, and time-based trade-offs.

Operational & Strategic Supply-Chain Implications

1. Route & service design changes: Carriers will merge services, drop inefficient routes, and prioritise fuel-efficient vessels.
2. Supplier and sourcing footprint: Regional supply chains gain advantage due to lower emission exposure.
3. Contracting & procurement shifts: Contracts should include green-fuel clauses and emission-cost adjustments.
4. Data & visibility requirement: Visibility platforms like ImportKey will be vital for tracking fuel types, routes, and emission intensity.
5. Financial planning and investment: Green surcharges and compliance costs will shift capital from assets to operational budgets.

Risks, Challenges & Uncertainties

• Alternative fuels remain niche, costly, and infrastructure-limited.
• Some major flag states, like the U.S., resist IMO frameworks.
• Uneven fleet adoption may distort competition and freight rates.
• Implementation timelines may slip, but cost planning cannot wait.
• Emission data verification remains technically complex.

What to Monitor into 2026

Conclusion

The decarbonisation of shipping is no longer a future aspiration — it is a present freight cost driver. For 2026 and beyond, freight models must integrate emission pricing, alternative-fuel risk, and fleet eligibility.

Shippers that embed visibility, flexibility, and data-driven logistics into their cost planning will gain competitive advantage. Greener shipping means higher baseline cost — but smarter logistics means higher strategic value.