In the EU ETS for shipping, the system for the exchange of EU emission allowances that the European Commission has proposed to extend also to the maritime transport sector from 2023, the entire footprint should be taken into account climatic of fuels, from their production to their combustion. This is highlighted by an open letter to the representatives of the institutions of the European Union, which are currently defining the essential aspects of the new regulation, which has been sent by the World Shipping Council (WSC), the association of The world's leading containerized shipping companies, from shipowners' associations of Denmark, Holland and Sweden - Danish Shipping (DS), Royal Association of Netherlands Shipowners (KVNR) and Swedish Shipowners' Association (SSA) -, from Renewable Hydrogen Coalition (RHC), the organization that promotes hydrogen from energy renewable energy as a fuel suitable for achieving the long-term decarbonisation of the EU, and by the Methanol Institute (MI), the trade association of the methanol industry

"Green fuels - explain the six organizations in the letter - are essential for the maritime sector complies with the Paris Agreement and the EU Green Deal. Technology To produce and use the new green fuels exists, but the Their production and distribution must be significantly enhanced. To start the necessary investments today, policymakers need to Providing certainty about tomorrow's fuel requirements agreeing - specify the organizations - a based approach on the life cycle within the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). Renewable fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBO), How e-methanol and e-ammonia will play a key role in order for the maritime sector to comply with the objective of limit the increase in global temperature to less than 1.5 degrees. Today there are engines for ships that use e-methanol and are Engines for e-ammonia are being tested. So that the maritime transport reduces its emissions - specify WSC, DS, KVNR, SSA, RHC and MI - these fuels must be produced and distributed in much larger quantities. To obtain a Success Political commitment will be needed to unlock the huge investments required'.

With regard to the need to take in Consideration of the entire life cycle of fuels in order to assess their impact on the climate, the six organizations observe that "the fuels of the future can be produced in more of a way. An example - they explain - is methanol, which can be produced sustainably or from fossil energy. While both production paths lead to the same product, The impact on the climate is very different. When defining regulations - emphasize WSC, DS, KVNR, SSA, RHC and MI in the Letter - Politicians should consider the full picture for Accurately identify the impact of new fuels on climate. Life cycle assessment of fuels includes the climate impact of production, transport and combustion of fuel. The EU ETS proposal aimed at including shipping in the ETS sets a price only for greenhouse gas emissions from combustion. However - highlight the six organizations - some RFNBO release greenhouse gases during combustion that have been captured upstream during production. In this way the RFNBOs avoid release more carbon into the atmosphere than fossil fuels. Including a cycle-based approach life, the ETS encourages the use of green fuels and sets a price for new types of fossil fuels. In addition, the current Proposal taking into account only direct emissions could encourage the use of emission-emitting fuels significant during production but no emission if used on board ships'.

"Investments are needed - continues the letter - to long-term to produce the renewable fuels of the future in larger quantities. The lack of an approach in the ETS life-cycle based postpones investments in the production of Green fuels because those who develop them, before choosing a fuel, awaits certainty on the implications".

Referring then to the perplexities expressed by more Parts on the need to take into account the whole cycle of life of fuel, WSC, DS, KVNR, SSA, RHC and MI detect that if the Focusing on direct emissions ensures that emissions are not counted twice in the EU ETS, given whereas EU-based fuel producers and refineries are subject to the ETS, "is correct when it comes to fossil fuels'. "Instead - they specify - the RFNBO fuels are produced from renewable energy sources and They have no upstream emissions. Given that the EU ETS is fundamentally designed to penalize emissions - they observe WSC, DS, KVNR, SSA, RHC and MI - is not suitable to reward the elimination of emissions in the production line of the fuel, which could be taken into account through a Lifecycle approach. We therefore call on politicians - concludes the letter - to unlock green investments agreeing that the Maritime Transport ETS should take account of of life-cycle emissions'.

Summarizing the reasons that led WSC, DS, KVNR, SSA, RHC and I send the letter to the representatives of Parliament, the Council and Commission of the EU, the Environment Officer for Europe of the World Shipping Council, Jim Corbett, said that there is concern that the current formulation of the EU ETS for shipping unintentionally favors source fuels fossil fuels that increase greenhouse gases, while it would be important, in the pricing for fuel emissions, which fuel is not considered green if during the phase of its Extraction and production has released a climate footprint Significant.