Category Archives: Strategy

Green Corridors Hit ‘Realization’ Stage: The Zero-Emission Hurdle

The Getting to Zero Coalition and the Global Maritime Forum have issued a new report At a Crossroads: Annual Progress Report on Green Shipping Corridors 2025. Green shipping corridors are a very impactful way of moving toward zero emissions in the maritime area. They can coordinate many players by providing a specific attainable goal— zero emissions on a specific route for specific ship types. These corridors are independent of efforts by the EU to create incentives and penalties for carbon emissions and reductions, and of efforts by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to reach a consensus on rules and measures for intrnational ocean shipping. Many times they are organized by specific ports and specific ocean carriers. Often they try to focus efforts on supply chains for specific fuels at those ports.

I think these efforts are extremely important. They can show how to provide reasonably priced fuel supply chains and how to coordinate investors, ocean shipping players, and financial institutions as well as governments. These experiments need to be tried.

The report has been published since 2022, effectively the beginning of the green shipping corridors movement. Steady gains have been made, and today there are 84 initiatives catalogued, with 305 stakeholders. 25 more initiatives have been recorded.

Source: Annual Progress Report on Green Shipping Corridors, 2025.

An interesting section discussed progress at the four corridors that have reached the highest stage in the journey: the Realization stage. Three of them are short-sea routes in Europe. The longest runs bulkers from Australia to China and other Far East ports.

  • Stockholm-Turku ferry, Finland to Sweden, biomethane;
  • Vaasa-Umeå ferry, Finland to Sweden, biomethane;
  • Australia-East Asia bulk carriers, iron ore, ammonia;
  • Oslo-Rotterdam container ships, hydrogen.

I found it interesting that the three short routes fund the difference between green and dirty fuels by entering pooling agreements to sell credits to other shipping lines, under the EU policies. The long ammonia route alone is driven by private firms involved in the trade, to help them meet dramatically lower emissions goals, with fuel costs not funded but expected to drop to a reasonable level as the infrastructure is built out. China, Korea, and Japan all have goals for reduced emissions from shipping which the iron ore route will help with.

Four recommendations emerge from the report’s assessment of the green corridor potential and progress.

  • Pursuing strategies to break the inertia and keep the momentum;
  • Connecting cargo owner willingness to pay to the corridors;
  • Taking an active stance at the IMO;
  • Tapping into or replicating emerging national policy instruments.

Significant issues for now are:

  • Delay of the IMO Net-Zero framework; participants may wait for more clarity.
  • Will the cargo owner be willing to pay for green shipping on the corridor? The evidence so far is not good.
  • Influencing public policies to support investment and regulation.
  • Staying focused on truly green corridors that deploy zero-emission assets rather than fossil fuels, do it early, and iron out the kinks.

This chart shows the right and wrong approaches:

Source: Annual Progress Report on Green Shipping Corridors, 2025, page 25

The study is available in PDF at this link. It contains an Appendix listing all the current Green Corridors in the portfolio at present.

I was very happy to read this summary of the state of green corridor adoption. Keeping this movement going will play an important part in maritime decarbonization.

Gary Howard, Middle East correspondent November 27, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/green-shipping/first-four-green-corridors-hit-realisation-stage

Supply chain choke points matter!

China expert Leland Miller, co-founder and CEO of China Beige Book International, says that trade is not the issue. The real question is control of supply chain choke points.

These could be supplies of scarce materials, such as rare earths, that are used in worldwide manufacturing processes. It could also be control over key ports or routes that supply products to the world.

Tariffs don’t matter much in this context; they can change, be skirted, or negotiated. Miller pointed out that worldwide, tariffs aren’t actually that high. Control over supply can be used to cut off countries or individual firms that aren’t doing what you want.

Looked at in this light, we can see the China-US struggle over ownership of the Hutchison Panama Canal ports as an effort to control a choke point in trade. We can also see the Houthi effort to gum up the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea as a control effort— to improve Israel’s behavior towards Gaza; with the help of Iran. The Hecksher-Ohlin theory of trade says that nations should trade when there is an imbalance in resources of whatever kind– labor, raw materials, educational capacity, agricultural land. And to exploit these advantages to defeat competitors is as old as warfare itself. Miller believes the Chinese are positioning themselves to wipe out economic competition when they see fit.

The US government will then become a participant, and perhaps a controller, of the free markets. That’s already happening as the US government takes a stake in companies here in the US. So it won’t be free enterprise, but government-influenced markets.

I don’t believe selling interests is necessarily our best course as a nation. Business becomes dealmaking in exchange for foreign cash, that evaporates into the hands of a few rich owners. The people, or workers, don’t benefit; instead they see the higher prices brought on by controls on supply.

John Kingston Tuesday, October 21, 2025

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/china-expert-miller-why-supply-chain-choke-points-matter-most

Federal Maritime Commission investigating Flags of Convenience

It’s about time for some agency to look at flags of convenience. Some states are abetting sanctioned trade, and quite a few do not have the means or intent to enforce regulations for safety, environmental, and labor standards. It’s increasing risk for marine traffic and for mariners.

The US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) may not be the best positioned for this investigation right now. The US government has shown that it may use its powers to punish views of other nations, rather than in the interest of collaboration on mutual goals. And the US has withdrawn from some international agencies and agreements, showing a lack of collaboration. Recently the US State Department has threatened the International Maritime Organization (IMO) over its push to impose greenhouse gas emission controls and standards on international shipping.

These actions reduce the effect of any unilateral action by the US. It’s likely they will be ignored. That is something the current US administration will not like, but it’s inevitable.

Let’s hope the FMC figures out real actions that will help flag states increase compliance with international shipping standards.

Seatrade logo

Barry Parker, New York Correspondent

September 3, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/regulations/federal-maritime-commission-investigating-flags-of-convenience

Seatrade logo

Nick Savvides, Europe correspondent

September 4, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/regulations/imo-member-states-tire-of-us-threats-over-climate-rules