The difficult detail of how shipping deals with carbon pricing and the ultimate impact that could have in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions hangs in the balance. The debate regarding which combination of measures gets agreed is going to be a difficult and highly political one, but this week’s edition of the podcast argues that case for keeping in mind the end goal and not getting lost in climate finance agreements that raise revenue, but fail to reduce emissions

There is a growing body of opinion across shipping that is routinely referring to nuclear, alongside carbon capture technology, as the only real options on the table that will allow shipping to fully decarbonise by 2050. Has the previously fringe option of nuclear-powered ships become sufficiently mainstream for the industry to consider leapfrogging ammonia and hydrogen as a more pragmatic solution?

Is the outbreak of pragmatism at Posidonia this year a genuine shift towards a more realistic conversation and a long overdue resetting after the greenwashed ambitions that never really had any substance? Or are we starting to feel the environmental, social, and governance backlash playing out and pulling back on the difficult substance of what lies ahead in terms of the energy transition?

Green shipping finance is not currently that attractive, or green. But new banking regulations and tightening decarbonisation targets mean that capital is increasingly only going to flow in the direction of those companies prepared to make the ‘right’ decisions. This week’s edition of the podcast discusses why green targets will ultimately determine who has, and has not got access to capital