A landmark deal to clean up the global shipping industry’s emissions has been postponed for at least a year, after a successful campaign by the US and Saudi Arabia to delay its adoption.
In April 2025, governments provisionally agreed the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Net-Zero Framework (NZF), which would penalise high-emitting ships around the world and use the money to fund the transition to cleaner vessels and fuels.
An extraordinary set of talks was called in London this week where the plan was for the new system to be formally adopted. But, after a bad-tempered four days of discussions, governments voted narrowly for a Saudi Arabian proposal to postpone the decision for a year.
The NZF was scheduled to set emissions reduction targets for ships starting in 2028. But this – and the rest of the framework’s timeline – have now been plunged into doubt. Although some technical work can continue, political progress will have to wait until October 2026 when delegates will next take up the issue of whether to adopt the NZF.
-
Countries must confront fossil fuels head-on in their NDCs
Other nations should follow the rare example set by Colombia and Vanuatu, whose climate plans contain explicit goals for cutting back on oil, gas and coal -
COP30 president hints Brazil may be open to a cover decision in Belém
André Corrêa do Lago tells Climate Home News the COP30 talks could conclude with an additional text on key outcomes if countries want it – something Brazil has so far resisted -
Paris Agreement helping to avert dozens of hot days each year, scientists say
Emissions cuts under the 2015 climate accord are stemming the number of hot days globally, highlighting the treaty’s role in tackling global warming, according to new study
‘Catastrophic’ for confidence
Ralph Regenvanu, minister of climate change for the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu, said the decision to delay the NZF is “unacceptable” given the urgency of accelerating climate change. He added that, according to a recent ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), climate action is not optional under international law.
“The IMO’s failure to adopt the framework this week marks a failure of this United Nations agency to act decisively on climate change. This makes the road to Bélem and beyond more difficult. But we know that we have international law on our side and will continue to fight for our people and the planet,” said Regenvanu.
Climate campaigners and researchers also lamented the delay. University College London shipping professor Tristan Smith said the decision was “catastrophic for confidence, and therefore also for the equitable and ambitious decarbonisation we need”.
“Those with the means must step up and lead more than ever, until this multilateral process can regain its composure,” he added. The European Union, for example, is implementing its own regulations similar to the NZF, called Fuel EU.
John Maggs, the Clean Shipping Coalition’s representative at the IMO, said that “governments serious about climate action must spend the next 12 months rallying every nation that supports the framework, convincing those who are on the fence, or opposing, that its adoption is the only sane way forward.”
The World Shipping Council, an international trade association, emphasised the importance of using the year ahead to clarify and develop the IMO Net-Zero Framework, adding that the IMO’s greenhouse gas strategy and the industry’s investment trajectory “remain aligned toward net-zero by 2050”.
“A globally agreed framework is needed to provide a level playing field to get there,” it added in a statement. “The liner industry is committed to the goal of net-zero by 2050 and has invested $150 billion in ships designed to run on green fuels.”
Trump’s threats
Ahead of the meeting, the US government had threatened a series of measures targeting government officials who supported the NZF and threatening to make it difficult and expensive for those countries’ ships to call at US ports.
A joint statement by the US transport and foreign ministers said: “We will fight hard to protect our economic interests by imposing costs on countries if they support the NZF. Our fellow IMO members should be on notice.”
And on Thursday, President Donald Trump tried to intervene directly in the IMO process, urging countries to vote against what he called “this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping” and “a Green New Scam Bureaucracy”. In a post on his Truth Social platform, he suggested that the NZF would lead to higher prices for American consumers, adding that the US “will not adhere to it in any way, shape, or form”.
After the vote was postponed, Bob Ward from the Grantham Institute on Climate Change criticised “the bullying by the United States government” which he said “proves that the Trump administration is a threat to the well-being and prosperity of people across the globe.”
A week of procedural politics
Back in April, governments voted 63 to 16 in favour of the NZF – with several Pacific countries abstaining as they said it lacked ambition. But many of the nations that backed the NZF in April supported the postponement of talks this week.
They included major economies like China, India, Colombia and Kenya, but also many small nations reliant on their shipping registries such as Liberia, Bahamas, Panama and Saint Kitts and Nevis. Others – like New Zealand, South Korea, Japan, Cyprus and Greece – abstained.
Those opposing the postponement were mainly European and Pacific countries as well as pro-climate action Latin American nations like Chile, Brazil and Mexico.
The four days of talks were marked by procedural wrangling, with the US and Saudi alliance trying to block the adoption of the agenda on the first day, and then attempting to amend the procedure for adopting the NZF on the second and third.
At the start of Friday – the last day of talks – Brazil’s negotiator proposed a vote on the NZF itself. Singapore then raised the prospect of voting for an adjournment of talks, before Saudi Arabia called for a vote on that plan.
The two sides debated for hours – first in the open meeting and then privately with the head of the IMO Arsenio Dominguez at the front of the room – which vote should be taken first.
After a break for lunch, the IMO decided to hold the postponement vote first. While 49 nations voted against, 57 voted to postpone the decision for a year, giving them the majority. Twenty-one countries abstained and eight were not present.
2030 target to cut emissions still in place
Brazil’s proposed vote on the NZF never took place and their lead negotiator politely declined to be interviewed by Climate Home News as he left the venue, after consolations from negotiators on his side of the debate.
While its adoption has been delayed, technical work on the NZF will continue, starting next week. Issues to be discussed include how the emissions intensities of different fuels should be judged and how the money raised by the levies on fuels should be spent and governed.
Speaking to journalists after the adjournment, IMO head Arsenio Dominguez remained upbeat. “The framework is still there and the member states are still talking,” he said, adding that the target agreed in 2023 to reduce global shipping’s emissions by 20% – while striving for 30% – on 2022 levels by 2030 remains in effect.
The post US-led alliance wins a year’s delay in adoption of green shipping deal appeared first on Climate Home News.
US-led alliance wins a year’s delay in adoption of green shipping deal
It smells like rotten eggs, releases toxic gases, endangers sea life and scuttles vacations. Scientists, startups and communities are trying to figure out what to do with it all.
From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Aynsley O’Neill with Inside Climate News’ Teresa Tomassoni.
Why Beaches Are Swamped With Sargassum, the Stinky Seaweed Menace
Osprey Orielle Lake is founder and executive director of The Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) and a steering committee member of the Fossil Fuel Treaty.
Around the world, women are leading some of the most powerful efforts to stop fossil fuel expansion and implement the just transition the climate crisis demands.
In the Ecuadorian Amazon, Nemonte Nenquimo, an Indigenous Waorani woman, led a successful lawsuit for the Waorani against the Ecuadorian government to protect their territory and the Amazonian rainforest from oil extraction. Ecuador’s courts ruled in favor of the Waorani, setting a legal precedent for Indigenous rights and prompting similar legal fights worldwide.
In the heart of Cancer Alley in the Gulf South of the United States, Sharon Lavigne, founder of Rise St. James, took on fossil fuel polluters and won. After stopping a Formosa petrochemical facility in her parish, she continues to organize communities to stop fossil fuels, bringing awareness to the severe health impacts caused by the industry.
An initial cornerstone for an upcoming government convening on fossil fuel phaseout is the Fossil Fuel Treaty, which was founded by Tzeporah Burman. She won the 2019 Climate Breakthrough Award for her bold Treaty vision, which has now taken center stage in international climate action.
These women are not anomalies, they are part of a broader movement. Women the world over are stopping harmful projects and building regenerative futures. They are defending land, water, climate, and health. They are redefining what leadership looks like in a time of crisis.
-
How women transformed a Vanuatu community with off-grid solar
Stories coming out of Vanuatu tend to focus on the adverse impacts of the climate crisis – but amid the disasters, a powerful narrative of resilience is being written, led by women -
Women must be a starting point, not an afterthought, for adaptation
When women and girls participate fully in climate adaptation efforts, entire societies benefit – but COP30 fell short in strengthening their inclusion
Research has found that countries with higher representation of women in parliament are more likely to ratify environmental treaties. One prominent cross-national study found that CO2 emissions decrease by approximately 11.51 percent in response to a one-unit increase in each countries’ scoring on the Women’s Political Empowerment Index. When women are incorporated into disaster planning or forest management, projects are more resilient and effective.
Yet because of persistent gender inequality, women – particularly Indigenous, Black and Brown women and women in low-income and frontline communities – are often disproportionately harmed by fossil fuel extraction and pollution. At the same time, they are also indispensable leaders of equitable solutions.
Bold, transformative solutions needed
Although the climate crisis may not be in the headlines recently, the crisis is increasing at lightening speed. From 2023 to 2025, the world crossed a dangerous threshold, marking the first three-year global average that exceeded the crucial 1.5°C guardrail, the very limit scientists identified as critical to avoid the worst catastrophic tipping points.
This is not a eulogy for 1.5°C, but an alarm about a narrowing window. The data makes clear that we still have an opportunity to hold long-term warming below that life-affirming threshold. What is required now is not incrementalism and business as usual but bold and transformative solutions from grassroots movements to the halls of government.
At the top of the list in tackling the climate crisis is the urgent need for a global phaseout of fossil fuel extraction and production. Coal, oil, and gas remain the primary driver of the climate crisis, and fossil fuel pollution is responsible for one in five deaths worldwide. The simple but challenging fact is, there is no way forward without a phaseout.
In 2023, at the U.N. Climate Summit in Dubai (COP28), governments agreed for the first time to “transition away from fossil fuels.” The language was historic but nonbinding, and implementation has been severely hindered. Most governments are doubling down and increasing production across coal, gas, and oil. At COP30 in Brazil, while 80 countries called for fossil fuel language in the final outcome text, governments ultimately left without any commitments to a phaseout.
Women’s assembly for fossil fuel phaseout
In response to this stalled progress, Colombia and the Netherlands are convening the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, bringing together governments committed to advancing cooperation toward a managed, equitable phaseout. Occurring outside the formal UN climate negotiations, the gathering reflects a growing recognition that progress often requires voluntary alliances of ambitious nations.
The urgency of this moment demands more than policy tweaks. It calls for a restructuring of the systems that fueled the crisis such as economic models that externalize harm, energy systems that prioritize profit over people, and governance structures that marginalize frontline communities. How we navigate this transition will shape the world our children inherit, and evidence shows that women’s leadership is vital to ensure a healthy and equitable outcome.
Colombia aims to launch fossil fuel transition platform at first global conference
As governments, civil society and global advocates prepare for the conference in Colombia, women’s leadership must not be an afterthought. It needs to be central to the agenda, inspired by equity, justice and care.
That is why the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network is convening global women leaders to advance strategies, proposals, and projects at the public Women’s Assembly for a Just Fossil Fuel Phaseout to be held virtually on March 31 to call for transformative action in Colombia. All are welcome.
A livable future depends on bold action now, and on women leading the way at this critical moment.
The post Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels appeared first on Climate Home News.
Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels
American farmers are drowning in health insurance costs, while their German counterparts never worry about medical bills. The difference may help determine which country’s small farms are better prepared for a changing climate.
Samantha Kemnah looked out the foggy window of her home in New Berlin, New York, at the 150-acre dairy farm she and her husband, Chris, bought last year. This winter, an unprecedented cold front brought snowstorms and ice to the region.
On the Farm, the Hidden Climate Cost of the Broken U.S. Health Care System
Why Beaches Are Swamped With Sargassum, the Stinky Seaweed Menace
Why women’s leadership is central to unlocking the global phaseout of fossil fuels
On the Farm, the Hidden Climate Cost of America’s Broken Health Care System
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits