FuelEU

OceanScore reveals ship segments set to feel EUR 1.3 billion sting of FuelEU penalties

Container segment will bear the brunt of FuelEU costs, accounting for 29% of gross penalties, followed by RoPax on 14% with tankers and bulkers each on 13%, says firm.

Published

2 years ago

July 12, 2024

Admin

OceanScore Managing Director Albrecht Grell

Hamburg-based technology platform OceanScore on Tuesday (9 July) said the financial impact of FuelEU Maritime is focusing the minds of shipping companies as they face potential penalties for non-compliance with greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity reduction targets – and OceanScore has identified those segments set to be hit hardest.

The following is an article by OceanScore elaborating on the matter:

Vessels in the passenger/cruise, container, RoPax, bulker and tanker segments will have significant cost exposure from the complex regulation due to be implemented from 1 January next year, despite a relatively modest initial target of a 2% cut in GHG intensity, according to OceanScore.

The firm’s data analytics team has calculated that shipping will rack up total FuelEU penalties of €1.345 billion in 2025 through analysis of the 13,000 vessels over 5000gt trading within and into the EU/EEA that are subject to the regulation. This is based on data on trading patterns and fuel mix from 2022 – the last full year currently available.

Containers bear burden

The team has been able to determine FuelEU compliance balances and resulting penalties for each vessel using OceanScore’s proprietary data modelling incorporating AIS data, Thetis emissions data, bunker intelligence and advanced analytics/AI. It has factored in the likely fuel mix for each vessel between EU ports and to/from the EU, as well as in ports.

Vessels will be hit with a penalty of €2400 per tonne of VLSFO-equivalent for failing to meet the initial 2% reduction target relative to a 2020 baseline for average well-to-wake GHG intensity from fleet energy consumption of 91.16 gCO2e per megajoule (MJ) – or emissions per energy unit. The GHG intensity requirement applies to 100% of energy used on voyages and port calls within the EU/EEA and 50% of voyages into and out of the bloc.

As with the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), it is the container segment that will bear the brunt of FuelEU costs, accounting for 29% of gross penalties, followed by RoPax on 14% with tankers and bulkers each on 13%.

“It is critical for shipping companies to determine a baseline for expected FuelEU costs to secure proper planning and budgeting processes to compare different mitigation options, as well as to decide what to do with outstanding compliance balances,” says OceanScore Managing Director Albrecht Grell.

“This will require, to a higher degree than the EU ETS, a corporate strategy to determine how to reduce the compliance balance/deficit, how to commercialise a surplus and deal with deficits that remain.”

Wide spread of vessel liabilities

OceanScore has found that liabilities per vessel will differ widely across the various segments due to increasingly diversified fuel choices, including greater uptake of biofuels and LNG. Passenger vessels will be penalised the most with an average of €520,000 per vessel annually, followed by RoPax at €480,000 and RoRo at €314,000, with an average penalty for container ships of only €214,000, according to OceanScore.

Grell points out there are also massive discrepancies between vessels within these segments, with a number of ships in the passenger and RoPax segments exposed to penalties of between €1.8m and €2.5m, and payment obligations for some container ships approaching €1m. This is driven by higher energy consumption simply due to vessel size and trading profile.

While penalties will arise from so-called compliance deficits for vessels using conventional fuels, surpluses totalling an estimated €669m will be generated mainly by vessels fuelled by LNG and LPG with significantly lower carbon intensity.

LNG carriers will account for 78% of the total market surplus and gas carriers 8%, while a further 8% will be generated by container ships that have seen a modest uptake in alternative fuels in recent years.

Pooling can halve costs for the industry

Taking into account this estimated compliance surplus, the net cost of FuelEU penalties for shipping from 2025 would be €680m, which indicates that pooling of vessels can roughly halve the gross burden for the industry.

Penalties will, in segments typically using conventional fuels with comparable carbon intensities such as HFO, LFO or MDO, be roughly proportional to the overall fuel consumption, thus correlating with the EU ETS cost.

Initial costs of FuelEU for most conventionally fuelled vessels, prior to pooling, will be around one-third of those associated with the EU ETS next year when the latter regulation will have 70% phase-in. But ultimately FuelEU is likely to prove a much more costly affair as the requirement for GHG intensity cuts rises to 6% by 2030 and then accelerates to reach 80% by 2050.

“It is therefore incumbent on shipowners to define their strategies not only towards fuel choices and the use of onshore power but also towards handling of residual compliance balances such as pooling, banking and borrowing of balances, to mitigate the financial impact of FuelEU. However, pooling will also come at a cost, while banking and borrowing will incur interest costs and only push liabilities into the future,” Grell explains.

‘Sound administrative processes’

He further points out that pooling compensations paid between different shipping companies will effectively divert cash flow away from the EU that it would otherwise have earned from FuelEU penalties – but that this effect is intended by the regulator to “reward” early adopters of clean fuels.

Another factor that will curb potential income for the EU from this regulation is that the compliance gap has been reduced to only 1.6% by 2022, as average GHG intensity from shipping has come down by 0.4% to 90.82 gCO2e per MJ, mainly due to increased LNG carrier calls to Europe after gas supplies via pipelines from Russia were halted when the latter invaded Ukraine. Given this trend and increasing adoption of biofuels, the 2% compliance gap will probably be closed before the first tightening of reduction targets in 2030.

Grell says the priority for shipping companies, especially at this early stage while cost exposure is relatively low, is to get to grips with the complexity of the regulation and tackle the risks arising from the fact the party liable for penalties – the DoC holder, or possibly shipowner – is not the one responsible for emissions, which is typically the charterer.

“As well as having costs oversight, companies require reliable monitoring and reporting mechanisms with high-quality emissions data. They must also have in place complex contractual arrangements and sound administrative processes to manage compliance and mitigate the financial consequences of the new regulation,” Grell concludes.

Photo credit: OceanScore
Published: 12 July, 2024

Up Next

UECC “Auto Achieve” receives first LNG bunker fuel delivery by barge in home country

Don't Miss

Methanol Institute: Innovative developments and strategic collaborations (Week 27, 1-7 July 2024)

FuelEU

Marine Fuels Alliance partners with TidalIQ on website emissions calculator

Emissions calculator helps users estimate vessel or fleet compliance positions, potential penalty exposure, pooling requirements and the indicative value of surplus compliance

Published

2 weeks ago

July 6, 2026

Admin

Marine Fuels Alliance partners with TidalIQ on website emissions calculator

Marine Fuels Alliance (MFA) on Friday (3 July) said it has connected with TidalIQ, which has provided an emissions calculator for its website.

MFA said the FuelEU Maritime has turned vessel emissions performance into a commercial issue. Operators now need to understand whether their fleet is in surplus or deficit, what that means financially, and whether pooling can reduce cost or create value.

“The emissions calculator helps users estimate vessel or fleet compliance positions, potential penalty exposure, pooling requirements and the indicative value of surplus compliance,” the alliance said in a social media post.

From there, the TidalIQ platform helps users move from calculation to action: managing fleet compliance, identifying pooling opportunities, generating standardised documentation and maintaining a clear audit trail for verifiers and internal records.

“For operators facing deficits, TidalIQ helps identify a more cost-effective route to compliance. For operators with surplus, it creates a clearer path to monetising better-performing vessels,” it added.

“FuelEU compliance is no longer just a regulatory task. It is a commercial decision – and TidalIQ helps the market make that decision confidently.”

Note: The emissions calculator can be found here.

Photo credit: Marine Fuels Alliance
Published: 6 July, 2026

Port & Regulatory

EmissionLink calls for clarity as EU moves to prevent double carbon charges

The emissions management firm welcomed EC’s commitment to avoid duplicate emissions charges but says shipping urgently needs practical guidance on how EU and IMO carbon regimes will work together.

Published

3 weeks ago

June 30, 2026

Admin

The following is a commentary by Philippos Ioulianou, Managing Director of EmissionLink, on how the maritime sector needs clear guidance on how how EU and IMO regulations will be reconciled to avoid duplicate carbon costs for shipowners:

The European Commission’s commitment to prevent shipping companies from being charged twice for the same emissions is a welcome step, but the maritime sector now needs clear guidance on how this will work in practice, according to integrated emissions management service EmissionLink.

The principle of avoiding double charging is clear, but the practical reality is far more complex. Shipping is already navigating a crowded regulatory landscape. EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime are now in force, while the IMO is moving towards its own global Net-Zero Framework. Each system has a different scope, timeline, calculation method and commercial logic. Without detailed guidance, avoiding duplicate carbon costs will not be straightforward.

A vessel trading into Europe may be exposed to EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime and future IMO carbon rules. However, the obligations will not always sit with the same party, emissions data may not always be calculated in the same way, and costs may not be recoverable under existing charterparty terms.

According to EmissionLink, the risk for shipowners is not only paying twice for the same emissions. It also includes reporting twice, calculating twice and building parallel compliance processes that increase cost, complexity and confusion.

“The industry needs to know how EU and IMO obligations will be reconciled, how equivalent payments will be recognised, and what evidence shipowners will need to prove that the same tonne of emissions has not been penalised more than once,” said Philippos Ioulianou, Managing Director of EmissionLink. “This will determine whether carbon regulation is seen as a fair transition tool or simply another cost burden.”

Accurate and auditable emissions data will be more important than ever, but data alone is not enough. Owners and operators also need the expertise to interpret that data across different regulatory schemes and make informed commercial decisions. EmissionLink has already supported the delivery of accurate FuelEU emissions data for more than 600 vessels, giving it first-hand insight into the complexity of compliance across different vessel types and operating profiles.

“Every vessel has a different operating profile, every voyage has a regulatory consequence, and every compliance decision can affect cost exposure, penalties, pooling options, charterparty recovery and future planning,” said Mr Ioulianou. “The challenge is no longer simply submitting the right figure into the right system. It is understanding how current and future emissions schemes interact, how they affect the business, and how to avoid double penalties, duplicated processes and unnecessary costs.”

The company also highlights that carbon pricing will only retain credibility if revenues are clearly directed back into maritime decarbonisation. Speaking at a ShipEnergy forum during Posidonia, Mr Ioulianou argued that EU member states must set out a clear pathway for the use of revenues generated through EU ETS and FuelEU-related mechanisms.

“These funds should be directed back into the maritime sector,” he said. “They should not become a general revenue stream for governments. Demanding that shipping pays more while failing to invest in the infrastructure needed to make decarbonisation possible is not a transition strategy. It is taxation with a green label.”

Whilst the European Commission is right to recognise the risk of duplicate carbon costs, the industry now needs practical, transparent and enforceable rules that support compliance while helping shipping transition to lower-carbon operations.

“Shipping cannot decarbonise on promises alone,” said Mr Ioulianou. “The sector needs clarity, consistency and confidence that regulation will support the transition rather than simply adding cost and complexity.”

Photo credit: EmissionLink
Published: 30 June, 2026

FuelEU

Hafnia Pools surpasses 170 vessels, achieves FuelEU Maritime compliance

In announcing the company’s Q1 2026 financial results, it said five vessels joined Hafnia Pools during the first quarter of the year, bringing the total number of Pool Partners to 24 across segments.

Published

4 weeks ago

June 26, 2026

Admin

Hafnia Pools surpasses 170 vessels, achieves FuelEU Maritime compliance

Singapore-headquartered tanker operator Hafnia on Wednesday (24 June) the company closed Q1 2026 with more than 170 vessels trading across its pool platform.

Since November 2025, vessels entering the Pools have had an average age of six years or younger, further strengthening the competitiveness and earnings capability of the platform.

This continued inflow of modern tonnage supports Hafnia’s focus on maintaining an efficient and attractive fleet profile, while enhancing the long-term value proposition for Pool Partners.

In Hafnia’s MR Pool, six owners now each have three or more vessels committed.

During Q1 2026, Hafnia Pools successfully met the EU’s FuelEU Maritime requirements for 2025. Across the Pool, 108 vessels collectively exceeded the emissions limits; however, by working together under a “pooling” system, this was balanced out. By using cleaner vessels, biofuel, and purchased emissions credits, the Pools avoided penalties and achieved meaningful cost savings for partners.

This outcome reflects strong collaboration across Hafnia’s commercial, operational, and compliance teams, as well as constructive engagement with all Document of Compliance holders as regulations such as FuelEU come into full force.

In June 2026, Hafnia Pools further strengthened Partner engagement and alignment through its bi-annual Pool Board meeting, taking place during Posidonia in Greece.

Peter Kolding, VP Chartering Regional Trades & Pool Management, said: “As we move further into 2026, our focus remains on delivering consistent commercial results, strengthening the value proposition for all Pool Partners, and continuing to build on the close cooperation between our Chartering and Operations teams that underpins the success of the Hafnia Pools.

“I am encouraged to see that our commercial performance and efforts in staying close to our partners are paying off as we enjoy growing support from many of those same partners. It indicates that we are on the right path and energizes us to continue doing everything we can to improve even further.”

Photo credit: Hafnia
Published: 26 June, 2026