Wei Jie Lau, Director, Partnerships, Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD), recently shared with Manifold Times his thoughts on GCMD’s perspective on green fuel assurance frameworks, near‑term opportunities in biofuels and energy efficiency technologies, the emerging ammonia ecosystem, and what shipowners and the bunkering sector can do today to meet IMO 2030 and 2050 goals with confidence:

MT: As green fuels scale up, how important is transparency in emissions verification across the value chain, and what frameworks are needed to ensure that “green fuel” truly delivers climate impact?

Transparency in emissions verification is fundamental to the integrity of green marine fuel supply chains.

Without transparency, there is a material risk of double-counting emissions reductions, or overstating GHG emissions savings.

This risk is further amplified as green fuels span the full value chain—from fuel production, transport, storage, bunkering, and final consumption—where reporting standards, certification schemes, and lifecycle boundaries can differ, potentially creating inconsistencies in how emissions are accounted for overall.

Recognising these risks within the green fuel marine supply chain, GCMD is developing a comprehensive assurance framework to safeguard green fuel use. This framework is grounded in empirical data from our end-to-end biofuel supply chain trials conducted under commercial operating conditions, and it focuses on three key aspects:

• Quantity – accurately measuring the amount of green fuel blended and delivered
• Quality – ensuring the use of green fuels is reliable, stable, and compatible with existing operations
• GHG abatement – verifying that green fuels deliver genuine emissions reductions through robust traceability and authentication, followed by accurate GHG emissions accounting.

These pillars will help enable transparency in emissions verification and ensure that the use of “green fuels” truly deliver climate impact, strengthening user confidence and enabling their scalable adoption.

MT: Where does GCMD see the biggest opportunity for cross-industry collaboration over the next 1–2 years to accelerate maritime decarbonisation?

Creating a new supply chain for zero-carbon fuels requires an ecosystem-wide approach, as the maritime industry cannot decarbonise in isolation. This transition depends on close coordination with adjacent sectors, including fuel and energy producers, traders, logistic players such as port operators, and storage terminal owners.

In the next one to two years, GCMD sees the greatest opportunities for cross-industry collaboration in three areas: ammonia, biofuels, and energy efficiency technologies.

Ammonia

As ammonia engines enter the market, the immediate priority is to help build the enabling ecosystem to support safe adoption by frontrunners. This includes understanding bunkering requirements and sharing this know-how globally to develop a network of ammonia-ready ports.

Delivering this will require collaboration across the value chain. For example, GCMD is working with shipowners, charterers, fuel suppliers, operations and service providers, regulators, standards bodies, and ports to close technical and operational gaps in safety procedures, operational protocols, and emergency response measures.

With the first ammonia-fuelled bulk carrier expected to enter service by the end of this year, bunkering capabilities will be essential. GCMD’s step-by-step approach to closing critical gaps will help build ecosystem confidence and accelerates the adoption of ammonia as a marine fuel.

Biofuels

Biofuels is a critical near-term pathway because they can be deployed using existing vessels and infrastructure.

Biofuels derived from alternative feedstocks, such as cashew nut shell liquid and tallow, can help augment the limited supply of UCO. However, these newer feedstocks are not yet well understood in marine applications and require different testing regimes to verify their compatibility with marine engines. Against this backdrop, GCMD is collaborating closely with shipowners, fuel testing laboratories, and fuel suppliers to assess the properties and attributes of these new fuels for their compatibility as a drop-in alternative with existing fossil fuels and UCO-derived biofuels and their use under real-world conditions.

Energy efficiency technologies (EETs)

EETs are another critical near-term lever. They can deliver immediate emissions reductions by lowering fuel consumption for vessels today and for ships transitioning to alternative fuels, which are expected to be more costly and have lower energy density.

However, adoption has been constrained by uncertainty around their real-world performance, as fuel savings vary significantly with operating conditions. In addition, performance is difficult to measure due to the lack of standardised methodologies.

In parallel, commercial and financial considerations further affect uptake: split incentives between shipowners and charterers weaken the business case, while the upfront capital required for retrofits is often too small for traditional ship mortgages yet too large for unsecured financing.

Addressing these challenges requires cross-industry collaboration.

On the technical front, GCMD is working with shipowners and technical partners—including classification societies, equipment manufacturers, and maritime analytics providers—to support performance assessment and provide third-party verification of fuel savings.

To address commercial barriers, GCMD is working with the finance sector to launch the Fund for Energy Efficiency Technologies (FEET), which combines high-resolution operational data from EET pilots with a blended investment fund structure. By pooling projects into a portfolio, risks can be diversified and fuel savings statistically verified.

MT: How is GCMD forging partnerships to accelerate maritime decarbonisation globally (including examples of successful joint projects or innovations enabled by GCMD partnerships)?

As an international independent action tank, GCMD brings together stakeholders across the maritime value chain to trial and de-risk decarbonisation solutions in real-world operational and commercial settings, tackling barriers that no single actor can solve alone.

A good example is Project CAPTURED. GCMD brought together partners across the value chain—including shipowners, stakeholders involved in Ship-to-Ship (STS) offloading, receiving and storage, regulators and an industrial end user—to demonstrate a complete carbon value chain for onboard captured CO2. This project yielded real-world insights into the climate benefits of OCCS, from capture to utilisation, and has helped inform IMO OCCS guidelines and LCA methodologies.

Another example is the Fund for Energy Efficiency Technologies (FEET), which we launched last year. The launch of this $35 million fund comprising blended finance from institutional lenders brought together maritime technical, industrial, and financial partners to address barriers that has impeded the large-scale adoption of energy efficiency technologies (EETs).  For the first time, this approach aligns the interests of shipowners, manufacturers, investors and lenders, enabling them to share performance risks and rewards.

As the fund’s decarbonisation advisor and a catalytic equity provider, GCMD helps quantify fuel savings from vessel retrofits with statistical confidence. With payments linked directly to these savings, GCMD and AIM Horizon Investments, as fund manager, were able to bring in financiers such as DBJ, DBS, and ING, as well as legal partners, to establish a viable financing platform.

MT: What is the best route a shipowner (one with a new fleet, other with an aging fleet) can take to save cost while ensuring his floating assets meet IMO2030/2050 goals?

For newer fleets and newbuilds, the priority is to build in optionality. This includes investing in vessels with dual-fuel capability, enabling owners to adapt as fuel availability, regulations, and charter requirements evolve. Operationally, these vessels can also incorporate lower-carbon fuels such as biofuels to reduce emissions in the near term while maintaining flexibility for future transitions.

For ageing fleets, the approach is more pragmatic. According to the GCMD-BCG Global Maritime Decarbonisation Survey, vessels older than 10 years are unlikely to justify major engine retrofits for alternative fuels. Instead, the focus should be on “drop-in” solutions and incremental upgrades. Biofuels offer an immediate pathway to reduce emissions without significant capital investment, while EET retrofits—such as hull, propeller, and engine efficiency improvements—can be implemented during scheduled five-year dry-dock cycles to deliver measurable fuel savings.

At the same time, onboard carbon capture and storage (OCCS) is gaining traction. As regulatory clarity on OCCS improves, retrofits may become an increasingly viable option, particularly for ships already installed with scrubber systems

Ultimately, there is no single “best route” for the entire industry. The most effective pathway will depend on vessel type and age, trading patterns, and access to alternative fuels and infrastructure at ports of call. This complexity underscores the importance of industry-wide collaboration—bringing together shipowners, technology providers, fuel suppliers, and financiers—which is why GCMD is working across multiple fronts to help de-risk and scale practical decarbonisation solutions.

MT: What steps can the bunkering sector take to ensure plans to integrate new green marine fuels in their product portfolio are commercially successful? 

A primary hurdle for the bunkering sector is the “chicken-and-egg” dilemma: fuel producers are hesitant to scale alternative fuel production without long-term offtake agreements, while shipowners are reluctant to commit to new fuels without assured supply. This lack of clear demand visibility makes it difficult for the bunkering sector to justify the capital investments required for supply infrastructure, such as storage tanks and specialised bunker vessels.

Enhancing greater collaboration between adjacent industries and the shipping sector can provide stronger demand signals for the bunkering sector. Singapore’s ammonia power generation and bunkering project on Jurong Island is a good example. By linking zero-carbon ammonia power generation with marine bunkering, it creates a larger and more stable demand base that supports investment in import, storage, and distribution infrastructure. This, in turn makes green marine fuel offerings more commercially viable.

Photo credit: Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation
Published: 7 April 2026