Maritime decarbonisation: which levers to meet the IMO 2050 target ?
Efficiency, LNG, biofuels, e-fuels and wind assistance: the concrete levers to reach the IMO's 2050 net-zero target for shipping.
The problem: climate urgency and the IMO's 2050 target
Maritime transport accounts for roughly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, a figure that looks modest but rests on a massive fleet. More than 100,000 merchant vessels ply the world's oceans, together burning close to 300 million tonnes of fuel oil every year.
In response to this challenge, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has set a clear target: achieving net-zero emissions from the sector by 2050. This objective requires a fundamental transformation of the energy mix, vessels and fuel supply chains, within a timeframe that leaves little room for delay given the average lifespan of a vessel.
What does this mean in practice for shipowners?
For shipowners, the 2050 target first and foremost means the announced end of heavy fuel oil as the default choice. This gradual phase-out forces a rethink of fleet investment, whether in newbuilds or retrofits, at a time when alternative technologies are neither fully mature nor available everywhere.
Added to this technical pressure is regulatory uncertainty. A global carbon levy is regularly discussed as a way to fund the transition, but it faces strong geopolitical resistance: an attempt to reach agreement within the IMO failed in October 2025, largely due to pushback from the United States and several oil-producing nations.
For shipowners, this means moving forward without full visibility on the future economics of decarbonisation. Investment decisions therefore need to rest on solid operational criteria rather than on waiting for a single, definitive regulatory signal.
What options make up the maritime energy mix?
Efficiency and operational optimisation
The most immediate and least costly lever remains vessel-level efficiency. Cutting speed by 10% reduces emissions by 19%, a disproportionate effect driven by the cubic relationship between speed and fuel consumption. Hull hydrodynamics and waste-heat recovery are technical prerequisites that improve efficiency before any fuel switch even happens.
LNG, biofuels and e-fuels
LNG cuts CO2 emissions by 20 to 25% compared with fuel oil, but it carries a critical drawback: methane slip, a gas with 25 times the warming potential of CO2. Its real climate benefit therefore depends heavily on controlling these fugitive emissions across the whole supply chain.
Marine biofuels can deliver real emissions reductions, but available biomass volumes are structurally insufficient to cover the entire global maritime transport sector. HVO (Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil), a renewable XTL fuel compliant with the EN 15940 standard, has the advantage of being a drop-in fuel: it can be used on existing vessels without major modifications, making it a rapidly deployable transition lever, within the limits of available volumes.
E-fuels, chiefly e-methanol and ammonia, offer a near-zero emissions lifecycle when produced from renewable electricity. Ammonia is relatively easy to transport but highly toxic, which imposes strict safety constraints on board and in port. Their main barrier remains economic: these fuels still cost 2 to 5 times more than heavy fuel oil.
Hybridisation and wind assistance
For short-sea routes, electrification is advancing quickly: up to 52% of European ferries could be electrified by 2035. Wind assistance, whether through sails, rigid wings or kites, delivers a 5 to 15% fuel saving on existing vessels and up to 35% on newbuilds designed to integrate it from the outset.
How to choose the right solution for a fleet
There is no universally suitable fuel or technology: the right choice depends on each fleet's specific profile. Three criteria shape the decision and should be assessed together rather than in isolation.
- Operational constraints: short routes lend themselves more to electrification and wind assistance, while long-haul voyages point toward biofuels or e-fuels.
- Port availability: whether a given fuel can actually be bunkered at ports of call determines its real feasibility, regardless of its technical merits.
- Total cost of ownership: the premium on e-fuels, 2 to 5 times the price of heavy fuel oil, needs to be weighed against transitional options such as HVO or operational optimisation.
A fleet of regional ferries will therefore not follow the same trajectory as a fleet of transoceanic container ships. The right method is to map out actual usage patterns before selecting a combination of levers, rather than betting on a single technology.
How Heeding can support this transition
Heeding is a sustainable fuels marketplace that provides access to offers from multiple producers and distributors, without selling fuel under its own name. For a shipowner, this means being able to compare prices, availability and volumes on a single platform rather than contacting each supplier individually.
The platform also helps reduce reliance on a single supplier, place orders directly online, and retrieve the traceability documents associated with each order — a key point when demonstrating decarbonization efforts to stakeholders. Before purchasing, the Heeding Flash Diagnostic analyzes a fleet and its operations to identify the most relevant transition solutions.
Comparing offers and securing supply on a single platform cuts the time spent hunting for suppliers and reduces the risk of relying on a single one.
