The pivotal vote on the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Net Zero Framework (NZF) at the extraordinary session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC/ES. 2) is fast approaching, with its outcome uncertain due to fierce debate and geopolitical pressure. This situation is being shaped by contrasting views from major industry players and an explicit threat of retaliation from the U.S. government.
The Vote on the Net Zero Framework
The final decision on adopting the IMO Net Zero Framework (NZF), proposed as mandatory amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, is set to take place at the MEPC/ES. 2 meeting in October 2025. Adoption requires securing a two-thirds majority vote from the Contracting Parties to the Annex who are present and voting. The NZF includes a global fuel standard aimed at gradually reducing emissions intensity, coupled with a market-based mechanism that introduces emissions pricing. If adopted, the framework is designed to enter into force automatically in March 2027, with implementation starting in 2028. The difficulty of reaching the required majority, combined with intense political opposition, underscores the uncertainty surrounding the final decision.
Key Industry Voices: Conflict Between Ambition and Reality
The framework has drawn sharp distinctions between industry advocates pushing for rapid transition and those concerned with feasibility and implementation costs.
- Getting to Zero Coalition’s Position: This powerful alliance of over 180 maritime, energy, and finance companies is a staunch supporter of the NZF, issuing a call for member states to adopt the framework. The Coalition argues that IMO-led regulation is the most effective way to ensure a “fairly, efficiently, and globally” managed transition. They emphasize that failing to adopt the framework would create “prolonged uncertainty” and jeopardize the massive investments required for the shift to zero-emission fuels.
- American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) Concerns: Christopher J. Wiernicki, Chairman and CEO of ABS, has voiced significant caution, suggesting a “timeout” is needed. ABS contends that the framework lacks clarity on “green fuel availability and scalability and infrastructure support.” Wiernicki warned that the industry and the IMO are on “different trajectories” and that the current framework risks unfairly penalizing transitional fuels like LNG. He called for a framework that “marries ambition with reality” before full adoption.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Seatrade Maritime
