LNG Interests Press IMO To Decarbonise Shipping, Strait Of Hormuz Becomes Pressure Point

A new fight over how to decarbonise global shipping is unfolding at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as LNG interests press to disrupt the talks, with the Strait of Hormuz emerging as a key pressure point.

“Editing:Sebastian Rodriguez The future of the global shipping industry – and its 3% share of global emissions – will be decided in three weeks of talks in the third quarter of this year, after a decision taken in London on Friday”

Climate Home News

The Guardian says about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) passed through the strait “before it was in effect closed by the US-Israeli attack on Iran,” a disruption that “sent the price of oil soaring” and left “an estimated 20,000 seafarers on 2,000 vessels stranded.”

Climate Home News

The same report ties shipping’s emissions problem to both fuel choice and cargo dependence, noting that “shipping produces about 3% of global greenhouse gases” and that “About 40% of the global fleet is used to transport fossil fuels.”

Marie Fricaudet of the Energy Institute, University College London, frames the challenge as a phase-out of the fossil-fuel trade itself, saying “[That’s] a trade that must be phased out to prevent the most severe impacts of climate change.”

The Guardian also describes LNG as “one of the most costly fuels to move,” requiring “specially cooled containers” and “some of the most expensive vessels around.”

It adds that LNG’s midterm outlook is “particularly dodgy in the mid-2030s,” quoting a person involved in the IMO talks and then reinforcing the point with Fricaudet’s view that LNG tankers “represent a relatively new and capital-heavy segment.”

In parallel, The Nautilus reports that the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 84) adopted a resolution condemning attacks on commercial navigation in the Strait of Hormuz region and warned that such attacks could cause “large-scale marine pollution” including oil and hazardous residues from “missiles, drones, fires and explosions.”

At the IMO, the decarbonising agenda is being negotiated through a series of sessions and intersessional work, but the Guardian portrays the process as vulnerable to pro-oil lobbying and LNG-linked influence.

The Guardian places the talks at their midpoint, saying “two weeks of talks among scores of governments focused on the means of decarbonising shipping are at their midpoint,” and it adds that “Insiders have told the Guardian that many countries have been assailed by fierce pro-oil lobbying.”

Economia del Mare

It names Liberia, Panama and Greece as among countries that “appear to have shifted their position,” moving “from support for strict controls on greenhouse gas emissions to attempting to scrap new regulation.”

Tristan Smith, a professor of energy and transport at UCL, is quoted arguing that LNG demand and the ship-financing ecosystem are “significantly linked to pressure exerted on the IMO’s negotiations,” and he says the stance of the LNG-exposed group “raises significant risks for a fair, equitable and effective resolution of the current impasse in the IMO’s debates.”

The Guardian also says several countries with strong national LNG interests disrupted the talks last year, “chief among them the US, Saudi Arabia and Qatar,” and that they were joined in opposing key aspects of the carbon regulations by Liberia and the Marshall Islands.

The report further ties this to flag registries, explaining that Liberia and the Marshall Islands’ national flag registries are “strongly correlated with LNG exposure” because shipowners can pay a fee to be registered in a certain country.

In a separate account of the IMO’s work, The Nautilus says MEPC 84 concluded with “a commitment to rebuild consensus on global shipping emissions,” with IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez stating: “We are back on track, but we must rebuild trust.”

While the Guardian highlights LNG-linked pressure, other reporting focuses on the technical structure of the IMO’s Net-Zero Framework (NZF) and the specific negotiation milestones ahead of MEPC 84 and beyond.

“(Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 84), 27 April – 1 May 2026; photo courtesy IMO Press Office) The Marine Environment Protection Committee 'back on track' toward consensus on global shipping emissions”

Il Nautilus

Economia del Mare says that ahead of MEPC 84, scheduled “27 aprile – 1° maggio,” the Clean Shipping Coalition welcomed progress in this week’s intersessional meeting and urged member states to “mantenere la linea contro coloro che cercano ancora una volta di interrompere e ritardare” the NZF.

It describes the NZF as aiming to reduce ship greenhouse gas emissions “in linea con la Strategia GHG 2023,” and it says the framework includes a global fuel standard (GFS) requiring ships “di ridurre progressivamente quanto inquinante può essere il carburante utilizzato.”

Economia del Mare adds that the NZF also includes a mechanism to price GHG emissions produced by ships to incentivise reductions in line with the GFS.

The same source reports that during the intersessional working group meeting “ISWG-GHG 21, 20-24 aprile,” member states “hanno proseguito con successo nella definizione delle basi per l’adozione del Net-Zero Framework (NZF) entro la fine dell’anno,” providing clarity requested during MEPC/ES.2 in October.

It quotes Delaine McCullough, President of the Clean Shipping Coalition and Director of the Shipping program at Ocean Conservancy, saying: “Durante la riunione intersessionale, siamo stati lieti di vedere gli Stati membri impegnati attivamente nel definire i dettagli del Net Zero Framework,” and it adds her warning that during MEPC 84 members must “mantenere la linea contro chi cerca ancora di ostacolare e ritardare.”

In parallel, The Nautilus reports that MEPC 84 adopted a new Emission Control Area in the Northeast Atlantic with stricter limits on “nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulates (PM, Particulate Matter),” setting an effective date of “September 1, 2027” and entry into force in “2028.”

Climate Home News describes how the NZF negotiations are being pushed into a late-2026 timetable after governments failed to substantively negotiate measures earlier in the year, with the fossil-fuel opposition led by the US and Saudi Arabia.

It says “the future of the global shipping industry – and its 3% share of global emissions – will be decided in three weeks of talks in the third quarter of this year, after a decision taken in London on Friday,” and it reports that at IMO headquarters “governments largely failed to substantively negotiate” the controversial measures to penalise polluting ships and reward clean-fuel vessels.

The Guardian

The article states that “The green shipping plan has been aggressively opposed by fossil fuel-producing nations, in particular by the US and Saudi Arabia,” and it recounts that countries delivered statements outlining their views in a session “from Wednesday into Thursday” before discussing “when to negotiate these measures and what proposals they should discuss.”

After a debate, governments agreed to hold “a week of behind-closed-door talks from 1 September to 4 September and from 23 November to 27 November,” followed by “public talks from November 30 to December 4.”

Climate Home News links the schedule to a previous derailment, saying “Last October, talks intended to adopt the NZF provisionally agreed in April 2025 were derailed by the US and Saudi Arabia,” which persuaded a majority to vote to postpone by a year.

It quotes Em Fenton of Opportunity Green saying the NZF “has survived but survival is not a victory” and calling for adoption “later this year” in a way that maintains “urgency and ambition, and delivers justice and equity for countries on the frontlines of climate impacts.”

It then describes the opposing bloc’s proposal, saying Liberia, Argentina and Panama proposed weakening emission targets and ditching “direct revenue collection and disbursement,” with Argentina arguing the NZF concerns “cannot be solved “by magic with guidelines” and that “the NZF itself needs to be fundamentally re-negotiated.”

The sources converge on the idea that the next steps at the IMO depend on rebuilding trust, aligning on medium-term measures, and deciding whether the NZF will be adopted without being weakened.

“Editing:Sebastian Rodriguez The future of the global shipping industry – and its 3% share of global emissions – will be decided in three weeks of talks in the third quarter of this year, after a decision taken in London on Friday”

Climate Home News

The Nautilus says MEPC 84 was “back on track” toward consensus and that the committee concluded with “a commitment to rebuild consensus on global shipping emissions,” while Arsenio Dominguez urged delegates: “I encourage you to maintain this momentum through your intersessional work and to prepare proposals that can unite the members.”

Climate Home News

It adds that the committee will resume its Second Extraordinary Session on Friday, 4 December 2026, with confirmation by MEPC 85 scheduled for 30 November–3 December.

The same report says the committee agreed to establish an intersessional Working Group to address concerns and promote “broader convergence on a global measure ahead of MEPC 85 in six months,” and it describes monitoring of “the origin and movement of fuels along the supply chain” to ensure emissions are “properly tracked and verified.”

Economia del Mare frames the stakes in terms of what it calls “un accordo inferiore” as a “fallimento climatico e un vicolo cieco politico,” and it says MEPC 84 offers three opportunities to progress while minimising fuel consumption and overall transition costs, including strengthening and making applicable the Carbon Intensity Indicator.

It also quotes Anaïs Rios of Seas At Risk saying “Oceano, clima e persone ne pagheranno il prezzo,” and it quotes John Maggs that “La tariffazione delle emissioni di GHG è l’elemento chiave” for applying rules and closing the price gap between fossil fuels and “energie a zero emissioni.”

In the Guardian, the stakes are tied to the LNG industry’s continued investment and the risk that LNG tankers will face “oversupply” under “1.5C and 2C climate scenarios,” with Ella Minty of the International Gas Union saying “LNG will remain a critical fuel to meet global energy demand growth” and that “the growth in vessels aligns with LNG expansion plans.”