Amongst the hundreds of attendees at London International Shipping Week recently was a strong turn out from what appears to be the fastest growing sector of the shipping community – the consultants, AI developers and assorted spin doctors all offering solutions on the path to decarbonisation. In the midst of all the discussion and revelry was the news that the group of shipowners who opposed the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Net Zero Framework announced in April has now grown to a coalition of 1,200 ships. Has the shipping industry turned its back on its emission targets? Certainly not, and amongst the shipowners who are opposing the IMO’s greenhouse gas regulations are plenty who have already invested millions in alternative fuels and been a step ahead in reducing their emissions. The opposition from experienced shipowners is not the same as the wholesale rejection of the IMO proposal by the United States but more a case of objecting to how the proposed rules disadvantage LNG as a future fuel after the industry has invested substantially in LNG as a viable future fuel. Not for the first time, it appears the first movers and innovators could be penalised. A recent Splash article stated: “Today’s fascination with dual fuel vessels and alternative fuels highlight the risk of premature adoption….Upfront costs are steep, regulations fluid and infrastructure is uncertain.” Whilst that particular article went on to promote AI-driven analytics as a way to enhance performance and cutting costs without the massive investment in retrofits or new ships, one of the big questions, which this column has asked on several occasions, remains how do we pay for it all? It is now 10 years since the Paris Agreement saw 195 countries meet and as the New York Times recently reflected, ‘hammer out a plan to save the world’ and almost without exception, they were united in their desire to curb climate change. Yet in recent years, we have seen many initiatives rolled back, including the Biden era climate bill and claims that the drive to net zero is an unaffordable luxury. The Paris Agreement put the politics of climate change at centre stage, now it is the economics of climate change which are dominant. For shipping, a recent sale of an eight-year-old bulk carrier gave credibility to some of the scepticism surrounding investing in green technology. The 2017-built kamsarmax TR Lady achieved a price of $24m recently and the ship was notable for being equipped with rotor sails. The sale came only three weeks after a one year older but otherwise similar vessel achieved $23m, but that earlier sale was not equipped with rotor sails, which it is claimed can give 8-9% a year fuel savings. Little evidence therefore that these energy saving devices generated a premium in the asset value for the owner who installed them, although let’s hope they enjoyed some savings on their fuel bill. Clarity on regulation, continued investment in infrastructure and trying to get back to the unity of purpose seen in Paris a decade ago are now needed, but there are plenty of triumphs to be celebrated. The incremental gains shipping has seen through a host of developments in better paint systems, propulsion management and AI-led voyage planning amongst others have seen significant efficiencies which affect the bottom line of even the smallest shipowner who is not in a position to consider huge investments in newbuidings. Beyond shipping, the 200-fold increase in solar power i