It must be translated into concrete vessel classes, fuel contracts and steering logic.
Newbuilding programmes, fuel sourcing, training and technical standards.
Fuel volumes, certification and cost trajectories must be coordinated over many years.
How large carriers translate targets into concrete steps.
A net-zero target for 2040 sounds like a distant commitment. Operationally, it is the opposite: every order placed today, every maintenance contract concluded today and every crew training programme planned today must already be evaluated in the context of this target.
Maersk’s fleet comprises over 700 vessels (including chartered tonnage). To achieve net-zero by 2040, a substantial proportion of this fleet would either need to operate on zero-emission or low-emission fuels or be replaced by newbuilds that can. With a typical vessel lifespan of 25 years, this means: every vessel built after 2015 and intended to remain in service by 2040 must either be convertible or follow a defined phase-out pathway.
Fleet renewal: Maersk has directed a significant share of its new orders towards methanol dual-fuel. These vessels are equipped with MAN ME-LGIM engines capable of switching between methanol and VLSFO. In normal operation, they start with a methanol share of perhaps 30–50% (because insufficient green methanol is available) and are intended to increase this share incrementally to 100% as supply grows.
Existing fleet: The greater challenge lies with existing vessels. Retrofit options for methanol exist but are complex and expensive. For vessels with a remaining lifespan of less than 10 years, a retrofit frequently does not pay. Here, Maersk must rely on efficiency measures, operational optimisation (slow steaming, route optimisation) and possibly carbon offsets to bridge the gap.
Fuel sourcing: Even if all newbuilds are methanol-capable, the question of fuel supply remains. Maersk’s net-zero target requires green methanol in quantities not currently produced. The group has concluded long-term offtake agreements with several producers, but these cover only a fraction of projected demand. Investments in new production facilities are announced, but realisation timelines are uncertain.
Measurement and reporting: Net-zero requires end-to-end emissions recording across the entire fleet. This means: every vessel needs a reliable system for recording fuel consumption by fuel type, nautical miles sailed and cargo tonnage. The EU MRV regulation and IMO DCS provide a framework, but Maersk’s internal reporting must go beyond these to credibly demonstrate net-zero progress.
Time pressure: 2040 is 14 years away. A container vessel newbuild has a lead time of 3 to 4 years from order to delivery. This means: orders placed in 2030 will only leave the yard in 2033–2034 – and will then have only 6–7 years to contribute towards the net-zero target. The windows for effective decisions are narrowing rapidly.
Maersk’s net-zero commitment has signal effects well beyond the group itself. For charterers, it means: anyone chartering Maersk vessels will increasingly face emissions requirements. Maersk integrates emissions data into its contract structures – through so-called green surcharges or environmental fuel fees.
For port operators, Maersk’s course signals that methanol bunkering infrastructure will become mandatory in the coming years for any hub port wishing to remain relevant. Rotterdam and Singapore have already responded; other ports are under pressure to follow.
For insurers, the risk profile changes. A fleet progressively transitioning to alternative fuels introduces new risk categories: methanol leaks, dual-fuel switchover errors, crew errors in handling new systems. Insurance premiums will need to reflect these risks – and the data basis for risk assessment is only now being built up.
For competitors in the container segment, an imitation pressure arises. CMA CGM has likewise placed LNG and methanol orders. MSC pursues a mixed strategy. Hapag-Lloyd is evaluating various pathways. The industry is moving – but not in lockstep, and not with the same level of commitment as Maersk.
Maersk’s net-zero pathway has already achieved measurable milestones: the Laura Maersk has operated on methanol since 2023, the first large methanol container vessels are on order, and long-term fuel contracts have been concluded. At the same time, considerable gaps remain.
The most obvious gap is supply security. No industry expert expects sufficient green methanol for Maersk’s entire dual-fuel fleet to be available by 2030. Maersk will therefore operate a significant proportion of its dual-fuel vessels partly on conventional fuel for years – which slows the net-zero pathway.
A second gap is the existing fleet. For the hundreds of conventional vessels in Maersk’s fleet, there is no straightforward decarbonisation pathway. Efficiency measures and operational optimisation can reduce CO₂ output by 10–20% but cannot bring it to zero. The honest answer to the question “How does the existing fleet reach net-zero?” is: probably not – it will be replaced by newbuilds.
Operators using Maersk’s net-zero strategy as a reference point should note three dimensions:
Scalability: Maersk’s strategy works because the group has sufficient market power to influence infrastructure. For operators with 5 or 50 vessels, the calculation looks different.
Time horizon: 2040 as a target allows a gradual transition. Operators with shorter planning horizons must prioritise more aggressively.
Regulatory framework: Maersk’s strategy anticipates increasing regulatory tightening (EU ETS, FuelEU, a possible IMO carbon levy). If this tightening comes more slowly than expected, the economics may shift.
Free initial consultation – we analyze your situation and find the best path forward.
Request Consulting