Scope 3 emissions increasingly factor into procurement decisions.
Traceability: how emission benefits are determined.
Terms like avoided emissions create different expectations.
Develop methodology, verification logic and customer communication together.
The growing pressure from cargo owners for green shipping products is not a moral appeal — it is regulatorily driven. The EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) obliges large companies from 2024 to disclose their Scope 3 emissions. For companies transporting goods by sea, shipping falls under Scope 3, Category 4 (upstream transport and distribution).
In concrete terms: an automotive manufacturer, a chemical corporation or a retailer must include the CO2 emissions of its sea freight in its own sustainability report. When the carrier offers a green product that demonstrably generates lower emissions, this directly improves the cargo owner's balance. This renders green shipping products a procurement criterion, not a nice-to-have.
The technical basis of these products varies. Maersk's ECO Delivery rests on the use of green methanol — the emissions reduction is allocated via a book-and-claim system under which the customer receives the environmental certificates, even if their container is not physically transported on the methanol vessel. Hapag-Lloyd's Ship Green uses biofuels as its basis. CMA CGM's offering combines LNG with biomethane certificates.
The methodological challenge lies in allocation. When a carrier operates a single methanol vessel within a fleet of 700 conventional ships, the question arises: how are the emissions benefits distributed? Are they attributed to the carrier overall or only to the customers who booked the green product? The book-and-claim system resolves this by separating the physical supply chain from the emissions allocation — analogous to green electricity certificates in the energy market.
For the cargo owner, what matters is: which methodology underpins the product? Is it verified by an independent body? What emissions reduction is promised, and on what basis — well-to-wake or tank-to-wake? These questions must be answered before a green shipping product can flow into one's own sustainability report.
The development of green shipping products requires more than a marketing decision. Three operational building blocks are indispensable:
Methodological foundation: The emissions calculation must rest on recognised standards — typically IMO guidelines, the GHG Protocol or GLEC frameworks (Global Logistics Emissions Council). The methodology must be documented, transparent and reproducible.
Independent verification: Cargo owners increasingly accept only verified claims. Classification societies such as DNV, Lloyd's Register or TÜV offer corresponding verification services. Without independent review, a green product remains vulnerable to challenge.
Customer communication: The cargo owner must be able to incorporate the emissions reduction into their own reporting. This demands clear documentation: which container, on which route, with what emissions reduction, on the basis of which methodology. Standardised certificates and digital interfaces are decisive here.
A frequent error: carriers use terms such as "carbon neutral" or "avoided emissions" without clear definition. "Avoided emissions" typically describes the difference between actual emissions and a hypothetical baseline — but which baseline? A conventional vessel? The fleet average? The IMO reference value? Without this precision, greenwashing risk arises.
The market for green shipping products is growing but remains small. Maersk reports that ECO Delivery is booked by over 200 customers — a fraction of the total customer base but a growing number. Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM publish similar growth figures. Cargo owners' willingness to pay is rising but remains constrained: typical premiums for green products lie between 10 and 30 per cent above the standard rate.
Demand is concentrated in specific industries: automotive, consumer goods, technology and chemicals. These sectors face particular pressure from ESG reporting obligations and investor expectations. In the bulk segment, demand remains lower, as end customers are less visible and price pressure is higher.
An important trend is standardisation. The Smart Freight Centre initiative, supported by GLEC, is working on uniform methods for calculating and allocating transport emissions. If these standards achieve broad acceptance, the threshold for cargo owners to book green products falls — because comparability increases and reporting is simplified.
For carriers developing a green shipping product or improving existing offerings, the following framework applies:
Clarify emissions basis: Well-to-wake or tank-to-wake? FuelEU Maritime mandates well-to-wake — products measuring only tank-to-wake are becoming regulatorily insufficient.
Choose allocation method: Book-and-claim, mass balance or physical allocation? Each method has advantages and limitations. Book-and-claim is most flexible but requires robust certificate systems.
Ensure verification: Independent verification by a recognised body is mandatory, not optional.
Automate customer documentation: Cargo owners need standardised evidence for their reporting. Manual processes do not scale.
Formulate claims precisely: No overextended terms such as "carbon neutral shipping". Instead: "X per cent emissions reduction against baseline Y, verified by Z."
A cargo owner booking a green shipping product for the first time is effectively purchasing a claim, not a physical service, and the contract should reflect that. Before signing, the cargo owner should ask for the exact methodology document underpinning the emissions reduction, not a summary – including which baseline is used for comparison and whether the figure is well-to-wake or tank-to-wake. Without the underlying methodology in hand, the buyer cannot defend the number if a customer, auditor, or regulator later questions it.
The contract should also specify what happens if the underlying fuel supply falls short – for instance if the carrier cannot source enough certified biofuel or green methanol in a given period and must either substitute conventional fuel or scale back allocations. A buyer who has already reported the expected reduction in their own sustainability disclosure needs advance notice of any shortfall, not a retroactive correction. The certificate issued for each booking should also carry a unique identifier tied to a specific shipment, preventing the same environmental benefit from being claimed by more than one customer – a risk that becomes real once several buyers draw on the same underlying fuel pool.
Free initial consultation – we analyze your situation and find the best path forward.
Request Consulting