Baltic Transport Journal 5/2026 by Baltic Transport Journal

№ 5/2026 (133), SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER

ISSN 1733-6732

bimonthly-daily companion

Journal

Baltic Transport S U S TA I N A B I L I T Y How access to shared, verifiable data is changing the emissions performance debate Ferry decarbonisation in the Central Baltic – lessons from the REISFER project LO G I S T I C S Building resilience (before a crisis strikes) E CO N O M Y Key takeaways from ECA’s Special Report on the Western Balkans Investment Framework – and a few op-ed remarks

OFFICIAL MEDIA PARTNER OF:

The Port of Opportunities The Port of HaminaKotka is a multipurpose seaport serving trade and industry. This major Finnish port is an important hub in Europe and in the Baltic Sea region. Welcome to the Port of HaminaKotka!

haminakotka.com

EDITORIAL

Dear Readers,

y goodness, this issue is heavy on sustainability! We have lined up stories on port machinery electrification, shipping’s impact on ocean health, how data shapes the emissions performance debate, the ‘secret sauce’ for decarbonising small ferries in the Baltic, shipyards’ role in the energy transition (and how it can be pronounced), how modern operational simulation ensures that green design genuinely translates into more sustainable operations, and the lessons other regions can learn from the Baltic when implementing an emission control area (and what our region needs to keep tabs on to lead). All of this is a welcome coincidence as we can officially share that 2027 will see our brand-new event setting sail – and quite literally so! The one-of-a-kind GREEN SHIPPING CORRIDORS will combine a conference and a study visit. We have partnered with Finnlines to take you aboard one of their cruise ferries plying the picturesque Naantali-Kapellskär crossing to personally ‘touch’ how the push for decarbonisation is reshaping transport and logistics in the Baltic Sea region and beyond – both on- and offshore. Speaking of which, we’ll also see some cold ironing in action. During the ‘under-sail’ gathering, we’ll put the spotlight on the green shipping corridor concept (naturally!) – but also see whether there aren’t other colours on the horizon. We will then ask how to design a ship that’s green today – and stays such in (or around) 2050. The agenda will also focus on hinterland affairs such as combining shore power with battery storage, setting up an off-the-grid port, connecting capital to carbon, and making an innovative business case out of waste. Mark your calendar for 20-21 May 2027 to become part of this unique experience! Ship – and conference – ahoy! But the autumn issue also has other articles in store, including a follow-up to our hard-hitting piece on the EU’s mega-transport projects. This time, we investigated the bloc’s investments in the Western Balkans. Included here are a few uninvited remarks on the current state of the EU and its future – to which the European Commission will never respond (similar to how the European Court of Auditors never hears from the EU executive regarding the watchdog’s

reports…). This reminds me of a bittersweet joke. One guy says to another: you should always say what you think. Because honesty is the best policy? No. Because nobody listens anyway.

Marine avec bateaux à voiles (1925) by Léon Spilliaert (fragment); photo: Artvee

Fortunately, we listen – and give voice to a diverse range of topics. The 5/26 edition also updates you on the changes to the Estonian flag, how to improve on-board life for seafarers through quality food, and, on land, how to build an evolving digital portal for employee development. There is also a comprehensive argument for adding transport capacity, with the Middle Corridor in focus – you know, just in case yet another local-turned-global disruption hits the fan... Last but not least, we covered as many as three events this time around – the Baltic Ports Conference (the agenda of which I had the pleasure of crafting this year), the Euromed Convention of the Grimaldi Group, and the ECG Conference of the Association of European Vehicle Logistics. Przemysław Myszka

Baltic Transport Journal Publisher

BALTIC PRESS SP. Z O.O. Address: Aleja Zwycięstwa 96/98 81-451 Gdynia, Poland office@baltictransportjournal.com

www.baltictransportjournal.com www.europeantransportmaps.com President of the Board BOGDAN OŁDAKOWSKI

Managing Director

PRZEMYSŁAW OPŁOCKI

Editor-in-Chief

PRZEMYSŁAW MYSZKA przemek@baltictransportjournal.com

Contributing Writers

GÉRALD BAIWIR, ANDREI BAROTOV, FREDRIK FUGLESANG, ALEXA IVY, KADI KASEPÕLD, CHRISTIAN LORENZ, MISKA MERIKUKKA, KRISTIINA PETERSON, ANTTI PÖSÖ, IRENE ROSBERG, FITZWILLIAM SCOTT, BARRY SULLIVAN, ANDRZEJ URBAŚ

EWA KOCHAŃSKA

DANUTA SAWICKA

№ 5/2026 (133), SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER

ISSN 1733-6732

bimonthly-daily companion

Journal

Head of Marketing & Sales PRZEMYSŁAW OPŁOCKI po@baltictransportjournal.com

If you wish to share your feedback or have information for us, do not hesitate to contact us at: editorial@baltictransportjournal.com

Proofreading Editor Art Director/DTP

Cover

Port of Odense

PRZEMYSŁAW OPŁOCKI tel.: +48 603 520 020

E CO N O M Y Key takeaways from ECA’s Special Report on the Western Balkans Investment Framework – and a few op-ed remarks

OFFICIAL MEDIA PARTNER OF:

Subscriptions

Go to www.baltictransportjournal.com and click: SUBSCRIPTION or contact us at subscription@baltictransportjournal.com

5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 3

Port of Oxelösund. Your shortcut to smarter logistics. Logistics in the Baltic Sea region are being reshaped. At the Port of Oxelösund, we’re leading that transformation. We’re investing nearly SEK 700 million in one of the largest port development projects in modern times. We call it Oxchange. An extended quay, new cranes, and a dredged harbour basin will enable larger vessels to call directly at Sweden. The Port of Oxelösund is evolving from a traditional bulk port into a flexible hub capable of handling a wider range of cargo. This gives our customers greater freedom to diversify their sourcing and build more resilient supply chains, with fewer transshipments through European logistics hubs. With an annual cargo handling capacity of 10.5 million tonnes and seamless connections between sea, rail, and road, we’re creating the conditions for shorter lead times and more reliable deliveries — today and for the future. Learn more at oxhamn.se/oxchange.

CONTENTS

REGULAR COLUMNS

3 Editorial 8 BTJ calendar of events 9 Safety news 10 What’s new? 12 Map news 14 Venture forth 18 What’s in the Cabinet 17 Chart of the issue: DHL Innovation Center’s Logistic Trend Radar 8.0 52 Events: We’re not waiting for the future – XXVII Euromed Convention from Land to Sea, 24-27 September by Przemysław Myszka and Przemysław Opłocki 54 Events: The speed of change – ECG Conference 2026, 15-16 October, Copenhagen by Przemysław Myszka 58 Who is who

SAFETY

18 Sending a signal – How shipping’s approach to business-critical equipment is changing with real-time condition monitoring by Barry Sullivan

SUSTAINABILITY

20 Ambitious yet logical – How HHLA is driving the e-transition forward by Christian Lorenz 22 Full steam, half speed – Shipping’s strides in environmental protection are genuine – just nowhere near fast enough by Ewa Kochańska 26 The certification backbone – How access to shared, verifiable data is changing the emissions performance debate by Gérald Baiwir 28 The most important sustainability technology? – Ferry decarbonisation in the Central Baltic – lessons from the REISFER project by Kadi Kasepõld 30 From infrastructure to capability – Why shipyard optimisation is critical to accelerating global energy transition by Miska Merikukka 32 The first voyage happens far from the sea – How modern operational simulation is changing the way ships are being designed by Antti Pösö 40 Paper rules? – The Baltic wrote the rulebook on ECAs – now it needs to show enforcement can keep pace by Fredrik Fuglesang 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5

Moves a lot. Changes everything. With a maximum lifting capacity of 1,600 tons, our travelling cargo crane TCC 78000 will drive your heavy-duty projects to success. www.liebherr.com

Maritime cranes

CONTENTS

ECONOMY

36 A blind spot the size of a continent – Key takeaways from ECA’s Special Report on the Western Balkans Investment Framework – and a few op-ed remarks by Przemysław Myszka

46 Highlights from the Baltic Ports Conference 2026 by Andrzej Urbaś

48 42

MARITIME

42 Shipping 2.0 – How Estonia prepares for the next phase of EST Flag’s growth by Andrei Barotov and Kristiina Peterson 44 Home at Sea – Rethinking the everyday experience of on-board life by Fitzwilliam Scott

NEWSLETTER BPO

TECHNOLOGY

48 Beyond ticking off a course – How to build an evolving digital portal for employee development by Alexa Ivy

LOGISTICS

50 Building resilience (before a crisis strikes) – Shipping is not running out of routes – but out of easy choices by Irene Rosberg 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 7

BTJ CALENDAR OF EVENTS TransLogistica Poland, 3-5 November, Warsaw, translogistica.pl/en

IAPH World Ports Conference 2026, 3-5 November 2026, London, iaphworldports.org

Transport Week 2027, 8-9 March, Gdynia, transportweek.eu

transport logistic 2027, 26-29 April, Munich, transportlogistic.de/en/trade-fair

Green Shipping Corridors, 20-21 May, Naantali-Kapellskär (aboard Finnlines’ cruise ferry), green-shipping-corridors.subscribepage.io

TOC Europe 2027, 25-27 May, Hamburg, tocevents-europe.com

Baltic Ports Conference 2027, 8-9 September, Riga, balticportsconference.com

8 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

SAFETY NEWS NEW CARGO SECURING GUIDANCE – RELEASED Lloyd’s Register (LR) has worked with Jurong Port in Singapore to revise its Best Practice Guidelines for Stowage and Securing of Steel & General Cargoes, placing personnel safety at the heart of cargo operations. “Despite advances in vessel design and cargo handling, poor stowage, inadequate securing arrangements, and inconsistent cargo presentation continue to contribute to cargo damage, operational delays, and safety incidents. As supply chains become more complex, and project cargoes and steel products continue to grow in size and value, ensuring cargo is prepared correctly before it reaches the port has become increasingly important,” LR said in a press briefing. The new guidance’s practical recommendations, covering the whole handling process, seek to address these challenges by promoting a more consistent and practical approach to cargo

preparation, stowage, and securing. “LR’s review focused on the practical realities of transporting and discharging general cargoes, covering areas such as cargo accessibility, segregation, dunnage arrangements, bundling methods, lashing practices, and the presentation of cargo for safe and efficient stevedoring operations. The revised guidance also incorporates lessons learned from operational experience and common deficiencies observed in general cargo shipments,” the class underlined. Its Regional Advisory Lead, Taylor Wamburg, added, “The industry continues to see avoidable cargo damage, safety risks, and operational disruption resulting from poor stowage, inadequate securing arrangements, and insufficient consideration of discharge requirements. Good guidance bridges the gap between regulatory requirements and the practical realities of cargo operations.”

CREW WELLBEING CHECKLIST FOR HULL & MACHINERY INSURERS – LAUNCHED The International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI) has published the human element-focused Checklist in question to complement the risk assessment process. “Research increasingly demonstrates that crew well-being is not only a welfare issue but also an important business risk factor. As human error is a contributor to hull claims, creating the conditions for a healthier and more resilient crew materially helps loss prevention and mitigation,” IUMI underscored in a press release. The Checklist was developed by IUMI members, including former seafarers, to help insurers incorporate concrete data on crew welfare considerations into their underwriting, risk modelling, and claims-handling processes. “Hull

underwriters assess machinery, class, age, management, and claims history. Yet, the safety and performance of every vessel ultimately depend on its crew. Crew well-being deserves a more prominent place in hull risk assessment,” commented Ilias Tsakiris, CEO of the American Club (Europe) and Chair of IUMI’s Ocean Hull Committee. He furthered, “Fatigue, stress, excessive workloads, inadequate rest, and poor living conditions can negatively affect decision-making and situational awareness, increasing the likelihood of human error. Since such errors contribute to a significant proportion of marine casualties, improving crew well-being can help reduce both the frequency and severity of incidents on board.”

HIDDEN PATTERNS BEHIND MARITIME ACCIDENTS – REVEALED New research from ShipIn Systems and NorthStandard shows that vessel-based risk is not only concentrated among a smaller proportion of ships, but can also be identified through measurable operational patterns. The Maritime Risk Report 2026 found that 29% of vessels accounted for nearly 70% of reported accidents. “The finding challenges uniform approaches to fleet safety and points to a more targeted model: identify where risk is concentrating and direct attention there first,” the parties said in a press briefing. Vessels with FleetVision scores below 75 recorded accident rates 5.7 times higher than those scoring above 85. Lower-performing ships also generated significantly more recurring deviations across bridge operations, deck safety, mooring activity, and PPE compliance, showing that everyday operating patterns can provide early indicators of elevated accident risk. “Safety is still too often measured after the fact,” commented Osher Perry, Founder and CEO of ShipIn Systems. “What this research shows is that risk is visible much earlier,

embedded in everyday operations. When operators can see where those patterns are developing and which vessels they are concentrated on, they can act before they become incidents.” The report also shows that those patterns can change. Across a separate cohort of 250 vessels monitored continuously for 12 months, average operational deviations fell from approximately 230/ship/month to eight. Improvements were sustained across bridge, deck safety, and PPE activity. “The implication for fleet managers is direct. If risk is concentrated, safety attention should be concentrated too,” ShipIn Systems and NorthStandard highlighted. “The industry does not lack operational data. The challenge is turning that information into timely, practical action,” shared Colin Gillespie, Global Head of Loss Prevention at NorthStandard. He added, “Our goal is to help our members identify and address risk earlier. When ship and shore teams can see the same evidence, they can address the emerging risk together and reinforce a proactive safety culture across the fleet.”

NEW VOLUME OF GUIDELINES FOR COLLECTING MARITIME EVIDENCE The latest release examines how evidence from on-board systems should be identified, recovered, and preserved, and how it can be used to understand the circumstances surrounding a maritime casualty. “Originally published in 2019, the updated edition reflects the rapid development of on-board technology and the changing duties, responsibilities, and risks faced by masters, officers, crew, and ship managers when an incident occurs. The increasing availability of digital information provides investigators with opportunities that would have been unavailable to previous generations, but it also creates new challenges,” shared The Nautical Institute in a press briefing on its newest publication. The second edition brings together expertise from across the maritime, technical, insurance, and legal communities. Subjects include electronic evidence recovery, evidence following fires and machinery failures, cargo deterioration, digital tools and ethics, visual reconstruction and

analysis, evidence gathering for prosecution, the P&I perspective, average adjustment, and evidence in the Admiralty and Commercial Court. It also examines the opportunities and risks associated with AI. A further theme is the role of a just culture in casualty investigations. The guidance argues that effective learning depends on maritime professionals being able to provide safety-related information openly and fairly while recognising systemic factors as well as individual actions. Simon Daniels, Technical Editor of Guidelines for Collecting Maritime Evidence – Volume 2, said, “Ships now produce an extraordinary amount of digital information, but having more data available does not automatically mean that the circumstances of an incident will be easier to understand. The quality of an investigation still depends on knowing where relevant evidence may be found, acting quickly enough to preserve it, and understanding the limitations of the systems that produced it.”

5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 9

For more news items please visit: www.baltictransportjournal.com

Africa’s first Liebherr LPS – from the Baltic

New grain warehouses in Muuga

Marsa Maroc’s bulk cargo port operations in Casablanca will be strengthened with a rail-mounted portal slewing crane, manufactured by Liebherr at its Rostock site. The electric-drive LPS 550 model offers a 48-metre boom. The machinery joins three mobile harbour cranes of the LHM 550 design that arrived in Marsa Maroc’s fleet in 2024. “Marsa Maroc already operates Liebherr cranes at several locations, and the addition of an LPS 550 further broadens that relationship. For us, this project is particularly noteworthy because it introduces a new Liebherr crane type into an established fleet, demonstrating how different products from our maritime portfolio can be matched to specific terminal requirements,” underscored Andreas Ritschel, General Manager Sales Mobile Harbour Cranes at Liebherr-Rostock. The manufacturer added in a press briefing, “Marsa Maroc’s investment programme extends beyond Casablanca, with additional Liebherr cranes scheduled for delivery to terminals in Nador and Tangier.”

Linas Agro’s operations in the Port of Tallinn’s Muuga Harbour grew with two new 4,000 m² halls, adding some 30,000 tonnes of storage capacity. Bulk & Tank was responsible for coordinating the entire process – including securing the site lease, obtaining permits, arranging financing, managing contractors, and overseeing construction works. The warehouses, supplied by Best-Hall Baltic, were commissioned in two months – in time for the 2026 harvesting season. “A project of this scale requires partners that can make fast decisions and find practical solutions as circumstances evolve. What started as a concept on paper quickly became reality. From the very beginning, every decision was made with the end user in mind and with the goal of ensuring the best possible service experience,” commented Urmas Peterson, Member of Bulk & Tank’s Management Board. The Port of Tallinn added in a press briefing, “Initial market response has been strong, with much of the first storage cycle booked before the harvest season officially began.”

ADP and PFA eye setting up another dry port

Photo: Liebherr Maritime Cranes

SPEED’s new Mantsinen 300 The stevedore’s operations on the Vistula Quay in Gdańsk’s Inner Port have been upgraded with the Finnish hydraulic crane, able to handle 1,300 tonnes of dry bulk per hour with its 14 m³ grab (manufactured by Pakiet). The crane’s 40-metre outreach makes it possible to serve Panamax and Handymax vessels. SPEED’s Mantsinen 300 arrived in parts in early September 2026 and was assembled in around nine days.

After developing Taulov Dry Port, currently 300,000 m² of warehouses and logistics facilities in south-eastern Jutland, the partners now aim to bring Fyn Dry Port to life in the Municipality of Middelfart. Construction works could kick off in 2029, adding some 300,000 m² of logistics capacity on the Danish island of Funen. “The ambition to lay the groundwork for a dry port in Middelfart is a natural continuation of the success we are seeing in Taulov, which has contributed positively to the local area around Fredericia while also serving as a sound investment for PFA’s customers,” said Peter Morgan, Head of Real Estate at PFA. Christian Herskind, Chairman of the Board at Associated Danish Ports (ADP), also commented, “ADP is in a sound position because we have followed a clear strategic direction for several years. The results show it works, and we are therefore continuing the development aimed at ensuring long-term growth and value creation. Dry ports play a central role in this. Experience from Taulov shows that, together with strong partners, we can create attractive solutions that deliver significant value for customers, municipalities, and society alike. Consequently, the development in Middelfart fits naturally into ADP’s long-term strategy and future ambitions.” In the meantime, Taulov Dry Port will grow with an additional 220,000 m² following the Hertugens Kvarter (The Duke’s Quarter) project, which will, however, exhaust the available room for growth.

A.P. Moller Capital to buy a majority stake in Euroports The fund manager, part of the A.P. Moller Group, will acquire a 53.35% stake in Thaumas N.V., the company that indirectly owns Euroports, gaining access to 40 sea and inland terminals across 10 European countries and China. The shares are being acquired from R-Logitech and its co-shareholders, Belgian public investment companies SFPIM and PMV, who will nevertheless continue to hold stock in Euroports. Completion of the transaction is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including receipt of regulatory and other third-party approvals. “The company handles more than 70 million tonnes of dry bulk, break-bulk, and liquid bulk cargo each year, including fertilisers, agribulk, sugar, fruit, forest products, metals, and minerals,” Euroports detailed in a press briefing. The Belgium-headquartered operator further underlined, “The company also operates and manages Manuport Logistics, an independent freight forwarding business active in more than 20 countries. Manuport Logistics will continue to operate under its own brand and pursue its growth plan as part of the wider Euroports platform.” The brief also reads, “The new consortium, led by A.P. Moller Capital’s majority ownership, will jointly support Euroports, while preserving the company’s existing management structure, governance framework, and strategic direction. The current management team has successfully achieved stable growth over the years and will continue under the new ownership structure.” Kim Fejfer, Managing Partner and CEO, A.P. Moller Capital, commented, “In a changing world, resilient supply chains and secure trade flows are increasingly essential to economic stability and growth. As one of the largest non-containerised port-infrastructure operators in Europe, Euroports plays a critical role in facilitating the movement of essential commodities through infrastructure that underpins European industry, food systems, and manufacturing. We see significant long-term value in combining Euroports’ strong operational platform with A.P. Moller Capital’s industrial expertise and long-term investment approach. Together with SFPIM, PMV, and the management team, we look forward to developing Euroports’ position as a leading provider of critical logistics infrastructure and helping ensure that important trade flows remain efficient, reliable, and resilient.” In the Baltic Sea region, Euroports is active in the Finnish ports of Loviisa, Kemi, Oulu, Kaskinen, Hanko, Hamina, Rauma, and Pietarsaari, as well as Rostock in Germany (across a range of eight different cargo operations). 10 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

WHAT’S NEW? Estonia’s multipurpose workboat – ready for launching After 30 months of design and construction, KRATT was officially christened on 12 August 2026 in Saaremaaa ahead of her autumn service entry (the ship’s name refers to a legendary creature in Estonian folklore, portrayed as tireless, industrious, and capable of carrying out a wide range of tasks). The 38-by-10 metres hybrid workboat features four 350kW gas generators, running on biomethane, and a 400kWh battery system. In electric mode, KRATT can sail up to two hours at five knots – or provide electrical power for 10 hours at anchor. The vessel can operate at sea for up to a week without replenishing supplies, providing accommodation for six crew members and up to 10 researchers (who have at their disposal a 50 m² laboratory). The Ice Class 1C KRATT is also equipped with a 15-tonne lifting capacity crane, mobile and portable pollution containment and recovery gear, and search and rescue support equipment. “[…] the multipurpose workboat will enter service in Estonian waters this autumn, carrying out a wide range of maritime tasks, from buoy maintenance and fairway services to marine research, pollution response and rescue operations. Its flexible design enables one vessel to perform tasks that would traditionPhoto: Robert Markus Liiv ally require several specialised platforms,” the Estonian State Fleet, KRATT’s operator, detailed in a press briefing. Kuldar Leis, Minister of Infrastructure of Estonia, also shared, “KRATT is a milestone for Estonia in moving towards more sustainable shipping and a good example for others to follow. This new vessel shows how a state fleet can become both more capable and more environmentally sustainable at the same time. We need to develop our fleet intelligently – one vessel should be able to perform as many different tasks as possible while doing so with a lower environmental impact. I am particularly pleased that this innovative workboat was designed and built here in Estonia.” With KRATT’s hull supplied by Damen’s shipbuilders in Gdańsk, the Estonian Workboats was in charge of putting together the €22 million workboat (financed through the EU’s NextGenerationEU Recovery Fund). Margus Vanaselja, Chairman of the Management Board of Baltic Workboats, said, “When building this vessel, it was essential to find a solution that combines high work capacity, versatility, and a lower environmental impact. Combining biomethane and electricity offers strong opportunities to achieve this and makes the vessel unique in its solutions on a global scale.”

POH_205_x_133.5_.qxp_(BTJ Package) 09.02.24 17:46 Seite 1

HAMBURG YOUR PORT portofhamburg.com info@portofhamburg.com @portofhamburg

global transPORT solutions

5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 11

For Europe-wide maps news on ro-ro & ferry container intermodal please visit: www.europeantransportmaps.com

Gothenburg-Malungsfors service rolls Fiskarheden saw the first shipment of timber going southwards on the new rail service to APM Terminals’ container terminal in the Swedish seaport for worldwide export. “Initially, trains will depart every other Monday, carrying 44 40-foot containers per departure. The service can be expanded if demand grows,” the Port of Gothenburg shared in a press release. Joakim Limberg, CEO of Fiskarheden, commented, “We want to move as much of our inland freight as possible by rail, so it feels very good to be back at the Port of Gothenburg. TFK Logistics has developed a cost-effective and flexible solution that suits us and is also open to other companies in the region [Dalarna County]. We are talking to businesses […] about shipments in both directions. That would make the service even more valuable to local businesses.” Richard Mellgren, Senior Business Development Manager at the Port of Gothenburg, also said, “Fiskarheden’s decision to use rail to reach the Port of Gothenburg again is a good example of what Railport Scandinavia can offer. Rail gives inland exporters an efficient way to access international shipping.”

New intra-Denmark container service The Port of Aalborg and APM Terminals have joined forces to connect the former with the latter’s container facility in the also Danish Port of Aarhus via a weekly rail service. “The new rail service expands the logistics options available to businesses in Northern Jutland. Going forward, they can use both the direct feeder service to Hamburg and the direct rail connection to Denmark’s largest container port in Aarhus and the international transport networks linked to it,” the parties said in a press briefing. Michael Rosenkilde Lind, Sales Manager at the Port of Aalborg, also commented, “We are very pleased to see freight trains return to the port. Businesses in Northern Jutland compete in a global market, which makes access to efficient transport solutions essential. The new rail service gives businesses more options when moving goods into and out of the region, while strengthening the link between Northern Jutland and international supply chains.”

Nurminen Logistics ups the frequency of its Italy-Sweden service Photo: Port of Gothenburg

Stena Line orders two E-Flexers The hybrid ferries, to be constructed by shipbuilders from China Merchants Industry Weihai, are scheduled to enter service on the Frederikshavn-Gothenburg crossing in 2030. Each 214.5 by 27.8-metre ro-pax will offer room for 1,500 passengers and 2,750 lane metres for cargo (across three decks, one for passenger vehicles and two for freight). “They will also be prepared for conversion to 100% electric operation once the necessary charging infrastructure is in place,” Stena Line underscored in a press briefing. The newbuilds, the sixth and seventh E-Flexer in Stena Line’s fleet, will replace Stena Danica (2,274 pax/1,640 lm) and Stena Jutlandica (1,500/2,100). China Merchants Industry Weihai Shipyard has to date constructed 15 E-Flexers. “This is a historic investment for Stena Line, giving us the opportunity to take further steps towards the sustainable modernisation of our fleet. The two new ferries will strengthen our customer offering by taking the travel experience to a new level. At the same time, we are future-proofing our own CO₂ reduction targets while preparing for the stricter environmental requirements ahead,” said Niclas Mårtensson, CEO of Stena Line.

Photo: Stena Line

12 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

Since the first week of October 2026, trains cross the Castelguelfo-Frövi route twice a week. “The company will also deploy a more versatile wagon fleet, increasing the service’s flexibility by accommodating a wider range of container types and enabling the transport of dangerous goods,” Nurminen Logistics added in a press briefing. The company’s VP, International Rail Operations and Sales, Marjut Linnajärvi, also underscored, “The second weekly departure gives customers more capacity and flexibility in planning their supply chains. More frequent departures reduce waiting times, support smoother connections to road and maritime transport, and improve delivery predictability.” She furthered, “Customers increasingly want one logistics partner to manage the entire transport chain. By combining rail transport with first- and last-mile services, terminal operations, and documentation, we make international freight flows easier and more efficient to manage.” It takes about two and a half to three days for a train set to travel between Castelguelfo in northern Italy and Frövi in central Sweden. The service launched in late February this year in co-op with the Italian Lanzi Trasporti. TX Logistik provides traction – at around 2,500 kilometres, it’s the longest continuous corridor in the company’s European network.

MAP NEWS Smyril Line’s brand-new ro-ro sets sail Shipbuilders from CIMC Raffles Yantai have delivered Skipanes to the Faroese shipping company, which will place her on trade between Denmark, the Netherlands, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland. The GT 30,301 newbuild is 189.5 metres long and 27.2 metres wide, offering 3,300 lane metres across four decks. The freighter, designed by Knud E. Hansen, features methanol-capable engines and a battery pack. Skipanes’ carbon footprint is estimated to be 60% lower than Smyril Line’s older tonnage. CIMC Raffles Yantai is also working on the sister ship, Akranes.

Photo: Smyril Line

ONE swaps Zealand ports In early October 2026, the Japanese container shipping line changed the port of call at the Danish island within the Scandinavia Express (SCX) rotation – from Copenhagen to Kalundborg. Penang Bridge, a feeder offering room for 1,708 TEUs, made the maiden call on 4 October (ONE also lists the 1,118-TEU Ballata on the route). The new SCX links the ports of Rotterdam, Gothenburg, Helsingborg, Aarhus, Kalundborg, and Antwerp on a weekly basis. In Kalundborg, APM Terminals serves ONE’s feeders. “With ONE on board, we are taking an important step toward our ambition of making Kalundborg Zealand’s largest container terminal. At the same time, we are strengthening local businesses’ access to international supply chains with a direct connection to Rotterdam,” commented Bent Rasmussen, the Port of Kalundborg’s Director. Dan Miura, Marketing and Commercial Director for ONE’s EUA Region, also shared, “The transition to Kalundborg is a strategic upgrade of our SCX service aimed at building a stronger and more resilient logistics network in the Danish market. We are confident that with this move, we will be able to provide our customers with significantly improved service and operational flexibility. Most importantly, this move is initiated by our Danish team, which proves our commitment to offer a customer-oriented and sustainable logistics network for the region.” Mikael Gutman, CEO of APM Terminals Denmark, highlighted, “ONE’s choice of Kalundborg is a recognition of the investments we have made in productivity, sustainability, and efficient terminal operations through Green Zealand Gateway [electrified quay and yard equipment, among others].”

Aarhus added to Diamond Line’s BSX The 868-TEU capacity Dina Trader now connects Zeebrugge and Helsingborg with APM Terminals’ facility in the Danish seaport on a weekly basis within the Belgium-Scandinavia Express (BSX) service. “With Diamond Line’s new service, Danish businesses gain a stronger and more direct connection to global markets. The service supports more resilient supply chains and contributes to growth, activity, and jobs, benefiting both Aarhus and Denmark as a whole,” said Ulrik Andersen, the Port of Aarhus’ CEO. His counterpart at APM Terminals Denmark, Kåre Spange, also commented, “We are very pleased to welcome Diamond Line’s new service to Aarhus. This agreement enhances Aarhus’ connectivity to key European markets and supports our ambition to be Denmark’s preferred gateway for containerised trade.” The Hamburgbased Diamond Line is a daughter company of the European chapter of COSCO SHIPPING Lines. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 13

VENTURE FORTH AALBORG INVESTS IN A HYBRID OPS-BESS SETUP • The Danish seaport has contracted Leap Solutions, also from Denmark, to deliver a mobile system comprising two containerised battery packs and three shore power units. The battery energy storage system (BESS) will offer 10MWh of capacity, while the onshore power supply (OPS) units will be in the 400-600V range, including one 2MW-6.6kV. The order also includes a central energy management system and a 10kV switchgear installation in the Port of Aalborg’s East Harbour, where the entire facility is set to become operational by the end of 2027. “When a ship is berthed in Aalborg, it no longer needs to run on its auxiliary engine. But that is really only one part of the story. That same mobile battery capacity is what enables us to electrify our cranes. It also paves

the way for us to replace diesel-powered port equipment with electric solutions in the future, as we become ready to do so,” said Mikkel Kalmo Guldhammer, Business Development Manager at the Port of Aalborg. He also underlined, “This isn’t just a single project – it represents the infrastructure underpinning a broader electrification of the port.” Emil Krog Kruse, CEO of Leap Solutions, commented, “Ports are facing increasing demands to reduce emissions and electrify their operations. That is why we have developed a solution that combines shore power and energy storage in a flexible setup adaptable to various port environments. We are proud that the Port of Aalborg has chosen us as a partner for a project that could help set new standards for future port operations.” •

TRELLEBORG’S BESS – IN PLACE AND READY FOR TESTING • The Swedish seaport saw the installation of a containerised 4MWh battery energy storage system (BESS), testing of which will take place this autumn. “Having the battery storage system in place marks another important step in the development of our energy system. It will enable us to make even better use of the renewable electricity

we generate ourselves [17 million kWh/year from two wind turbines], reduce peak loads, and support the continued electrification of the port. We are now looking forward to the testing phase and, once completed, putting the system into operation,” said Håkan Nilsson, Technical Development Manager at the Port of Trelleborg. •

MOLSLINJEN INVESTS IN QUAYSIDE BATTERY STORAGE • Tyrfing, the brand-new electric ferry of Molslinjen’s subsidiary Samsølinjen, will charge from a 12-MWh battery energy storage system (BESS) at the Port of Ballen on the Danish island of Samsø. Construction is set to begin this autumn/winter, with the BESS expected to come online in March 2027. BOS Power will supply the batteries, while Hybrid Greentech advised

Molslinjen on the project. Beyond fast-charging the ferry, the facility will help stabilise the island’s grid in day-to-day operation and serve as an emergency power supply in crisis situations. Featuring a 3.8-MWh battery pack, Tyrfing offers room for 600 passengers and 188 vehicles, operating the Ballen-Kalundborg route with up to five daily round trips. •

CO₂ STORAGE IN HALMSTAD • The Swedish seaport, part of the Ports of Halland, will expand with infrastructure for interim storage of carbon dioxide. The 10,000 m² facility, initially able to store around 5,000 tonnes of CO₂, is expected to come online in 2029. The investment has already secured its first client, the Swedish energy company Öresundskraft. “This is an important step for the Swedish industry’s climate transition,” commented Henrik Nanfeldt, the Ports of Halland’s Commercial Director and Deputy CEO. “Across Sweden, the energy industry and other industrial players are investing in carbon capture. For the companies to make the next step, a new logistics chain must be created, where the captured CO₂ can be transported for interim storage ahead of storing it permanently,” his company shared in a press briefing. “When the interim storage is commissioned, Halmstad will become an important link in that chain,” furthered Nanfeldt. “Here the captured CO₂ can be received, stored, and gathered for further shipping. It creates new possibilities

for companies that want to advance their climate efforts.” Stefan Håkansson, CEO, Öresundskraft, also said, “We are pleased now that there is a concrete plan to provide interim storage of captured CO₂ in southwestern Sweden. It is important to us that infrastructure is established to support carbon capture and storage projects that are under development now. The solution set up in Halmstad fits well into our timetable and forms a crucial part of a value chain that’s indispensable for the realisation of our and other CCS initiatives.” Nanfeldt summed up by saying, “We have a tangible plan, our first customer, and a date for the interim storage to become operational. It gives companies facing considerable investment decisions valuable certainty. Our job is to see the infrastructure in place when clients need it – and we’ll be prepared.” Halmstad’s CO₂ storage will be built, owned, and operated by an external party. The Ports of Halland will provide the harbour infrastructure and logistics conditions. •

ESL SHIPPING-STEGRA TRANSPORT DEAL • The two have reached an agreement, following which the Finnish shipping company will handle the transportation of raw materials and finished steel products for the new steel mill under construction in Swedish Boden. The €6.5 billion project, backed by the EU Innovation Fund with €250 million, will be the world’s first large-scale near-zeroemission steelworks – and Europe’s first mill in half a century. The 270-hectare facility will use hydrogen (700-megawatt electrolyser) and renewable electricity to cut its CO₂ footprint by 95% vs blastfurnace steelmaking. The mill aims to see its first output in 2027 and reach an annual production of five million tonnes of green steel by 2030. “Securing a long-term agreement with Stegra is an important 14 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

achievement for ESL Shipping. We are pleased to support Stegra with reliable maritime logistics and look forward to building a successful long-term partnership. The agreement is a strong endorsement of our ability to serve demanding industrial supply chains in Northern Europe,” commented Mikki Koskinen, Managing Director of ESL Shipping. Jenny Marin, Head of Logistics, Stegra, added, “Maritime transport is a critical part of our logistics network, and having the right partners is essential to our success. ESL Shipping’s experience in Northern Europe and our shared ambition for decarbonisation and sustainability make the company an important partner in the seagoing supply chains supporting our operations in Boden.” •

WHAT’S IN THE CABINET Sustainability-turned-commercial advantage Lloyd’s Register (LR) has released A Forward-Looking Framework for ESG Disclosure, a report arguing that organisations should treat ESG (environmental, social, and governance) as a framework for enhancing resilience, improving transparency, and supporting sustainable long-term growth rather than just a compliance obligation. “Companies that align ESG performance with business strategy will be best placed to unlock new opportunities as the industry continues its transition towards a lower-carbon future,” claimed LR. The publication identifies decarbonisation, alternative fuel readiness, energy efficiency, workforce development, and supply chain transparency as some of the ESG areas creating the greatest opportunities for those prepared to act early. “Companies that can demonstrate reliable performance data and clear transition pathways are expected to be better positioned to secure financing, meet growing charterer requirements, and maintain the value and competitiveness of their assets,” said the class. Beyond these, the Framework points to growing opportunities to create value through improved crew welfare, workforce development, digital assurance, cybersecurity, and supply chain oversight. “The report also highlights several emerging areas that are expected to gain importance over the coming decade, including biodiversity impacts, climate resilience, AI governance, and value chain emissions,” LR added in a press briefing. The document opens a series of LR Advisory guidance notes on maritime ESG. Future publications will address sector-specific topics, including ESG governance planning, emissions performance and verification, social and labour standards, and transition planning.

New Swedish maritime strategy “Sweden’s seas, coasts, and archipelagos are part of our national heritage. They are also strategic resources for jobs, security, transport, energy and food supply, recreation, and innovation. The government strives for a maritime Sweden that stands strong in a turbulent world while looking to the future – a Sweden that fosters the development of maritime industries and ensures a vibrant, healthy sea,” the Swedish cabinet said in a press briefing. The maritime strategy clarifies and summarises the government’s existing work regarding the sea as a whole. Specifically, the strategy focuses on four areas: strengthening the competitiveness of the shipping sector and enabling its energy transition; offshore energy, maritime tourism, and innovations within maritime industries; robust and sustainable seafood production; and balancing a healthy sea with a vibrant coast and archipelago.

Photo: Government Offices of Sweden

The EU Industrial Maritime Value Chains Alliance

Photo: Lloyd's Register

16 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

The European Commission-launched initiative is tasked with bringing together maritime manufacturers, shipowners and other downstream users, EU Member States and their regions, investors, and social partners to help strengthen Europe’s maritime industrial and technological sovereignty in identified lead markets – notably segments with the potential to bolster the continent’s capacity in maritime manufacturing. “The Alliance will help to create business cases for scaling up production and deployment in market segments and technologies relevant for the EU manufacturing base and address the needs of the shipping, ports, and other segments of the maritime sector. In addition, this Alliance will prompt targeted investment, public-private synergies, and industrial collaboration towards joint action and concrete projects, while addressing market, trade, and competitiveness challenges in a more comprehensive manner,” Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs said in a press briefing. A call for applications, which will remain continuously open, has been published, inviting stakeholders to join the Alliance.

CHART OF THE ISSUE

DHL Innovation Center’s Logistic Trend Radar 8.0

HIGH IMPACT

LOW IMPACT

ADOPTION

Revolutionary applications that are potentially disruptive.

Evolutionary changes with incremental improvements.

The common way of operating and doing business in logistics.

5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 17

How shipping’s approach to business-critical equipment is changing with real-time condition monitoring

Sending a signal by Barry Sullivan, Senior Technical Service Engineer, Castrol

Condition monitoring has always underpinned reliability and uptime in shipping. Oil analysis is the industry’s trusted way to track the condition of the assets that matter most – the ones that earn money or cause real pain when they fail. Real-time, continuous oil monitoring – also extending beyond the main engine – becomes essential the farther and longer a vessel operates away from shore.

hat counts as business-critical differs by owner and vessel type. For a dredging operator such as CEMEX, it typically means the main engines and the dredging hydraulic power units. For a ferry operator such as Stena Line, it is the main engines themselves. For an LNG carrier, it can be the cargo compressors. Today and into the future, used oil analysis (UOA) remains the industry’s default tool. A sample is taken on board, sent to a shore laboratory, and results are back within days or weeks. For many applications, this approach remains effective. The context, however, is changing. On average, vessels are getting older with a greater risk of fault. Due to regulations, they are starting to operate on new fuels that introduce greater complexity in the engine room. And crews are balancing varying roles, grappling with increased reporting and documentation. In zones such as the engine room, these multiplying pressures converge. The low threshold for failure in the engine room means that we can’t tolerate things going wrong. According to the Swedish Club, the average claim cost for lubricant-related failures runs to £430,000, and an internal analysis from Everllence suggests around 70% of such failures are detectable in the oil itself. 18 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

This lag between sampling, knowing the result, and providing the fix is a limitation increasingly exposed by that shift. Real-time monitoring is built to close it, covering whichever of those assets a given owner cannot afford to lose. The engine is one entry point into that story, not its outer limit. Under pressure The first increasing pressure is the economics of asset life. Newbuild orders continue, but high prices and long lead times mean owners must increasingly extend the working lives of existing tonnage alongside any new acquisitions rather than simply replacing like-for-like. The trend is striking across short-sea shipping, reports Kuehne+Nagel, with some segments of gearless coasters in the 2,600-4,500-deadweight range now averaging 26.3 years. Demolitions are so rare that they occur roughly once per sector every two years. And the deep-sea picture tells a similar story, with the global bulk carrier fleet’s average age climbing toward 13 years. The second pressure relates to crew time. Today’s seafarers manage more – sophisticated systems, documentation, and regulatory requirements – than previous generations. Anything that lessens manual

burden without compromising oversight is worth serious consideration. The practical value of that is well illustrated by CEMEX UK’s experience aboard one of its dredger vessels, where Castrol SmartMonitor detected a water ingress event early enough to limit repair costs to £12,600, against an estimated £150,000 in potential engine damage. The system did the watching; the crew could act on a clear signal rather than needing to search for one. The third pressure is the growing use of alternative fuels. Methanol, LNG, and biofuel blends each introduce their own contamination and lubrication challenges across the fleet. As a result, the engine room is getting harder to manage, and the consequences of getting it wrong – such as deposits, corrosion, and lubricant breakdown – can develop long before a periodic sample would catch them. As more vessels enter service on these fuels, the case for continuously monitoring lubricant condition becomes more compelling. A widening gap between data and insight UOA remains the industry’s default tool for tracking equipment health and, in many applications, is sufficiently effective. But the process – a sample taken on board,

SAFETY

Photo: Castrol

shipped to a lab ashore, results returned days or weeks later – comes with logistical constraints that are increasingly difficult to work around. The longer a vessel is at sea, the further from port, and the leaner the crew, the harder it becomes to act on information that arrives weeks after the sample is taken. That gap matters more the longer a vessel is at sea. A short-sea operator calling at port every few days can act on a delayed result relatively quickly. A deep-sea vessel several weeks into an ocean crossing cannot. If a UOA sample takes up to six weeks to come back, which it still can, the issue it was meant to catch may already have escalated, or the voyage that prompted the test may be over before the result arrives. Stena Line’s experience shows what continuous monitoring can catch that periodic sampling could miss. Castrol SmartMonitor, introduced across three of the company’s ferries on the Irish Sea, picked up two separate water ingress incidents and a leak discovered during a cylinder head removal – in each case in time for the crew to act before the damage spread. A third issue, a leaking purifier allowing water back into the sump, was caught and resolved the same way. “The ability to monitor oil quality in real time has been a game-changer for us,” shares Michael Thomson, Vessel Superintendent at Stena Line. On a ferry making daily crossings, that might mean a faster turnaround. On a deepsea vessel mid-ocean, with higher asset values

and no nearby port to divert to, the same early warning can be the difference between a planned repair and a major failure. From data to decision – in minutes rather than weeks This is not an either/or debate. UOA continues to do a job that real-time tools are not designed to replace. What digital condition monitoring adds is visibility in the gaps between samples, the ability to catch a problem developing before it needs a sample at all, and the efficiency gains that come from engineers spending less time on manual checks and more time acting on clear, continuous data. That distinction is central to how a contamination sensor module works. Sensor data is tracked continuously, allowing the system to separate a gradual change the crew has time to plan around from a sudden one that needs immediate attention. Sean Chambers, Head of Research Ship Engineering at NOC, describes how the system responds to different fault profiles: “It provides trend data to determine whether we’re observing a small incremental change, which gives us time to react. If we

see a sudden change, the ship’s engineer and captain are notified immediately.” The ecosystem is starting to catch up Confidence in continuous monitoring is growing beyond the owners already using it. Insurance pricing does not yet reflect lower risk profiles, nor do management fee models directly reward early fault detection. But both are beginning to come into focus as the next frontier. As those structures evolve, the business case for real-time monitoring will only strengthen. For deep-sea owners weighing up where to start, the direction of travel is clear. The engine track record set out above is a proof point, not the limit of the story; the same case applies to whichever asset a given owner cannot afford to lose. Real-time monitoring does not replace the judgment of experienced crew or the long-standing value of UOA. It gives both a faster, clearer signal to act on and builds the kind of documented, continuous performance record that will matter more as insurers and managers begin to reward it. The longer and further from shore a vessel travels, the more that signal is worth.

Castrol, a wholly-owned subsidiary of BP PLC, is a worldwide leader in high performance lubricants for the automotive, industrial, marine, and aerospace industries. The company carries over 100 years of experience working in the marine industry, with support spanning over 820 ports globally. Head to castrol.com/marine to learn more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 19

How HHLA is driving the e-transition forward

Ambitious yet logical by Christian Lorenz, Editor-in-Chief, HHLA

Speaking at the 2026 Petersberg Climate Dialogue, Germany’s Federal Minister for the Environment, Carsten Schneider, emphasised the need to advance electrification in international climate policy. He said this was a “global megatrend” with rapidly growing markets. Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA) is at the forefront of the transition to electric mobility. Its Container Terminal Altenwerder (CTA) in the Port of Hamburg has already been operating highly efficient equipment powered by renewable electricity for years. This concept is now being rolled out to other terminals.

HLA recognised this trend early on and incorporated it into a long-term climate strategy, aimed at reducing carbon emissions. The European logistics company, headquartered in Hamburg, has already reduced its specific CO₂ emissions at its container terminals by 58.5% since 2008 – through increasingly electrified systems and processes powered by renewable electricity from certified sources. Cleaner and more efficient – and with less hustle This has been the case for all of HHLA’s Hamburg sites since 2024. The 20 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

ship-to-shore container cranes have been designed to operate on a continuous direct power supply for decades. At the Container Terminal Burchardkai (CTB) yard, a block storage system is also increasingly replacing diesel-powered straddle carriers. This new solution has almost doubled the storage capacity and made storing containers more energyefficient and environmentally friendly. For similar throughput figures, diesel consumption fell by around three million litres – saving approximately 8,000 tonnes of CO₂ when setting 2025 operations against the initial 2010 phase. For a company that takes care of six million

TEUs across Hamburg’s quays yearly, shaving each gram off a container’s carbon footprint counts. The switch from straddle carriers to automated guided vehicles (AGVs) is also well underway at CTB. The prototype for today’s standard electric AGV was developed in collaboration with the German manufacturer Gottwald for CTA, making Altenwerder a global pioneer in this technology. All AGVs there have been battery-powered since 2023, saving up to six million litres of diesel thus far. But battery-powered AGVs (first tested in 2009) aren’t only better for the environment – they’re also more efficient and

SUSTAINABILITY

of lithium batteries (NMC cells) offers greater performance and that the battery management system is more reliable. Battery-powered operations offer additional advantages in places like Hamburg, where the port is located close to the city. Local emissions – including CO₂, soot, and nitrogen oxides – are eliminated. And with no diesel engine required, the noise level is considerably lower. The same applies to HHLA’s employee and visitor transport fleet, most of which is now electrified.

Photos: HHLA/Thies Rätzke

less prone to defects. From around 25% overall efficiency for a diesel-electric AGV, this figure has been improved to over 70% for a battery-electric AGV. The economic principle underlying the transition to electric mobility is obvious: the direct use of electricity enables greater efficiency. These machines are also much easier to service, as many components – such as the diesel engine, generator, rectifier, and motor control system – are no longer needed. As almost all equipment at CTA is now electric, workshop operations have

become cleaner and quieter. “Instead of adjusting valves and relying on intuition and experience to find faults, we’re now measuring insulation values and using diagnostic tools to analyse system log files,” shares team leader Sebastian Thiess. He also mentioned that the new generation

From project to project The transition to electrically powered machines and processes is being driven forward in various projects. While most of CTA’s heavily used tractor units already run on electricity stored in batteries, battery-powered hoists are being tested at several HHLA terminals. Through these efforts, HHLA is targeting at least a 90% reduction in scope 1 and scope 2 emissions at the group level by 2040 – an ambitious yet logical goal that aligns with the environmental principles underpinning the company’s business model.

As a European network logistics provider, we at HHLA ensure the smooth, reliable functioning of our daily lives and economies. Together with our clients and partners, we create resilient, efficient, and sustainable logistics solutions, building on smart concepts and the power of our networks. Go to hhla.de/en to discover more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 21

Shipping’s strides in environmental protection are genuine – just nowhere near fast enough

Full steam, half speed by Ewa Kochańska

The maritime sector has made measurable progress in reducing its impact on global oceans, but it remains well short of the scale and pace of change needed to meet its 2030 ambitions, according to the first Shipping and Ocean Health 2026 progress report. This extensive publication, which shows where the industry stands on ocean health and biodiversity, found both positive and concerning developments. A bright spot is that tighter international limits on underwater noise and ship recycling are taking effect, while investments in green vessel tech continue to ramp up. There is also a clearer grasp of shipping’s total footprint, backed by a fast-growing market for eco-conscious funding. On the other hand, measures to protect marine life are advancing too slowly, funding for ocean protection is subpar, and issues ranging from pollution and biofouling to marine spatial planning need much more attention. The report concluded that the industry possesses sufficient tools and knowledge to have a more considerable impact and should now channel its notable successes into coordinated, industry-wide action.

he 2030 Marine Biodiversity and Ocean Health (MBOH) Breakthrough and Roadmap, a United Nations Climate Change Conference COP29 initiative, provided specific actions and milestones for the maritime sector to deliver on by the decade’s end to ensure that the achievement of a sustainable ocean economy by mid-century is possible. The Shipping and Ocean Health 2026 report analysed where the sector stands now regarding the initiative’s goal of reducing “the impact of international shipping on marine biodiversity by 30% by 2030,” based on its three objectives: reducing impact on marine biodiversity, developing effective marine spatial planning, and establishing systems for sustainable ocean governance. Uneven waters The first objective covers four areas where the industry’s day-to-day operations impact ocean health: voyage and port planning, emissions, vessel efficiency, and pollution. The report found that here, progress is mixed. In voyage planning, underwater noise is receiving greater attention, with the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) work, national initiatives, and improved monitoring gradually bringing 22 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

the issue into focus. Investment in quieter technology is also increasing, bolstered by the fact that many measures also reduce fuel consumption. Also, actions in areas such as just-in-time arrivals and guidance on avoiding marine mammals appear to be working well. However, reliable regional data remains patchy, particularly in less developed parts of the world, and so is cooperation between shipping and other ocean industries. Decarbonisation offers perhaps the clearest opportunity to deliver environmental gains beyond cutting greenhouse gases (GHG). Cleaner propulsion and lower fuel consumption can also reduce pollutants like nitrogen and sulphur oxides, black carbon, and particulate matter. Yet, even here there is much to be done, according to the report. Work to improve emissions data is progressing well while infrastructure for zero/ near-zero fuels is being developed at key ports; what remains lacking is investment in the vessels and technology needed to use these fuels (due to demand uncertainty). International policy is moving forward, but divergent national approaches are compounding uncertainty. In contrast, improvements in ship design are already producing advantages; for example, aside from consuming less bunker, more efficient hulls and propulsion systems can also contribute to quieter vessels and less mechanical disturbance.

Pollution presents a more fragmented challenge. The publication points to established environmental damage from greywater, scrubber discharges, artificial light, plastics, invasive species carried by ships, and vessel recycling, to which the sector’s response has often failed to match the scale of the problem. There have nevertheless been some notable improvements; for example, in June 2025, the Hong Kong Convention on ship recycling came into force, and the risks associated with greywater, scrubber effluent, and invasive aquatic organisms are increasingly well documented. Lagging are light pollution and plastic waste, where further research and stronger sector-wide responses are still needed. The report also notes that research into the environmental impacts of new marine green fuels is progressing more slowly than studies on their GHG-reducing benefits. Investment represents the weakest area in tackling pollution beyond what regulations require. Although rules have helped curb some of the most damaging discharges, the report finds little evidence of substantial global spending on measures addressing ballast water, scrubber effluent, greywater, or plastic waste beyond regulatory minimums. Ship recycling is similarly awaiting a meaningful increase in investment following the introduction of the new regulatory regime.

SUSTAINABILITY

Photos: Canva

Biofouling stands out as an exception: spending is growing because keeping hulls clean brings a direct commercial return through lower resistance and fuel consumption. More broadly and unsurprisingly, the report found that environmental measures are most likely to advance when they also make operational and financial sense. Taken together, the findings show an industry that has begun to address many of its effects on marine ecosystems, but at very different speeds and in a somewhat piecemeal fashion. Measures that overlap with bunker savings, decarbonisation, or established regulation are generally further ahead, while issues with fewer obvious commercial incentives continue to drag behind. The challenge now is to turn existing solutions into routine practices, strengthen cooperation beyond the maritime sector, and find a way to attract capital to environmental problems that may not offer financial payback right away. Protection pending The second objective, to develop effective marine spatial planning, is an area where progress has been notably slower. The report found that at present, only 9.8% of ocean territory has protected status (it should be 30% by 2030), and existing commitments are not enough to close the gap. Even where protections have been introduced, there is uncertainty surrounding their effectiveness: only 1.62% of protected ocean areas have been assessed for their effectiveness. The sheer size of the zones involved, limited enforcement resources,

and concerns over whether protection is distributed fairly add to the problem. Shipping has nevertheless been involved in marine conservation planning for decades, most notably through the IMO’s designation of 19 Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas. The BBNJ Agreement (the Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, also known as the High Seas Treaty) could provide a fresh incentive by creating an international framework for safeguarding ocean biodiversity, but much of the supporting work is still at an early stage. Research and enforcement capacity in developing countries has yet to palpably improve, while broader cross-sector knowledge exchange between maritime and other high-seas sectors remains limited. As with pollution, the report suggests that progress has been slower partly because marine spatial planning has fewer direct links to the industry’s decarbonisation drive. Putting money where the ocean is The third objective turns to the frameworks and capital required to enable ocean protection at a global level. The report described a system that remains fragmented, with national, regional, and international rules often centred on individual industries or localized threats rather than the ocean as a whole. For shipping, the IMO remains the main regulatory body and has delivered significant advances on emissions and pollution. The next challenge is to connect maritime policy more closely with the decisions being made across other ocean industries and conservation initiatives.

There are some signs of movement in that direction. The maritime sector’s early involvement in discussions around the BBNJ Agreement is encouraging. However, creating a genuinely coordinated approach will require shipping to have a clearer role in emerging international arrangements and closer links between maritime regulation, the management of ocean space, and broader environmental priorities. For now, the report classified this work as in progress rather than fully institutionalised. Finance presents a much larger obstacle. An estimated $175 billion a year is required to meet global ocean health goals, yet just $10 billion was committed across all sectors in 2015-19. The report found no dedicated funding mechanism operating at anything close to the scale required, while the proposed One Ocean Finance Facility, one of the few international initiatives intended to address the shortfall, is not scheduled to launch until 2028. This leaves the sector facing a substantial gap between environmental ambitions and the capital available to deliver them. There has been more movement in the financial industry itself, as environmental considerations are gradually finding their way into disclosure and investment frameworks. New guidance published in 2025 by the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures includes maritime industries, while other initiatives are beginning to encourage banks, regulators, and investors to consider the health of marine ecosystems alongside more established environmental measures. Even so, such thinking remains 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 23

SUSTAINABILITY

largely absent from standard practice in lending, insurance, and chartering decisions that influence much of shipping’s behaviour. Blue finance is another area showing potential, although its applicability to shipping remains unclear. Issuance under blue bond programmes rose from $110 million in 2018 to around $1.5 billion in 2023, with further growth expected, particularly in Asia. The maritime industry has been an early participant, but the report found there is still little evidence of blue loans and bonds being adopted across the sector at scale. Hence, while financing tools are beginning to emerge, turning them into a meaningful source of capital for shipping’s environmental transition is a challenge. From plans to practice Looking ahead to 2026 and 2027, the report maintains that the 2030 target remains achievable, but only if the industry moves much faster from isolated initiatives to widespread implementation. Many of the necessary technologies and practices already exist, so shifting the emphasis from innovation to implementation of proven solutions would be more beneficial. At the same time, unresolved data gaps need to be addressed and stronger commercial incentives created, ensuring environmental protection becomes embedded in routine operations rather than an additional, costly consideration. The report underscored in its recommendations the need to bring ocean health into the financial and commercial 24 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

decisions that shape shipping. Lending, insurance, chartering, and corporate risk assessments already exert considerable inf luence over investment with too little concern for the wider effects on marine ecosystems. The publication proposed incorporating biodiversity and other ocean-related criteria into financing agreements, charter negotiations, and long-term investment strategies, alongside some climate measures already gaining ground. This would also help prepare for upcoming requirements in areas such as underwater noise and biosecurity, instead of waiting for regulation to force action. Better access to environmental information at sea is another priority. Considerable data already exists on migratory routes, sensitive habitats, voluntary speed restrictions, and areas where vessels should take particular care around marine mammals; however, much of it is not readily available through on-board navigational systems. Integrating this information directly into electronic charts could allow crews to make relatively minor adjustments to routes or operations without complicating voyage planning. The report also highlighted the opportunity to maximise environmental co-benefits from the billions already being spent on decarbonisation. Investments made primarily to cut emissions can often address several other problems at little additional cost. Propeller designs can lower both fuel consumption and underwater noise, for example, while non-toxic antifouling systems can improve efficiency and reduce the spread of

invasive species. The message is that climate and biodiversity investments need not compete for the same envelope if projects can be designed with both in mind. For its part, the MBOH Breakthrough initiative plans to concentrate on helping to turn these ideas into action. Over the coming year, it intends to work with financiers, insurers, and charterers on marine health indicators that could coexist with GHG-reducing measures in commercial decision-making, while strengthening links with established financial and sustainability frameworks. It also plans targeted pilots in areas where evidence, business incentives, or workable operating models are still suboptimal, with particular attention to resource-constrained regions facing significant biodiversity threats. Finally, the initiative wants to broaden participation beyond the organisations already engaged in this work. Shipowners, ports, charterers, tech companies, and financial institutions will all need to be part of the process, along with governments and civil society. Particular emphasis will be placed on bringing in regions that are both environmentally vulnerable and currently under-represented. Ultimately, the recommendations put forth in Shipping and Ocean Health 2026 underscore the need for a shift from ambition to execution: the sector already knows much of what needs to be done, but meeting the 2030 goal will depend on making those measures practical, investable, and routine across the global maritime sector.

How access to shared, verifiable data is changing the emissions performance debate

The certification backbone by Gérald Baiwir, Head of Environment, Aderco

Looking beyond compliance with environmental regulations, shipping companies are discovering that savings from on-board energy-efficiency measures can be converted into valuable, Gold Standard-backed carbon credits, allowing them to benefit financially while reducing emissions.

ntil recently, this process has been labour-intensive and resource-heav y. Operators have had to reconstruct their vessels’ performance data retroactively, often working with incomplete or inconsistent datasets. This has resulted in lengthy validation timelines, significant uncertainty around data accuracy, and, in worst-case scenarios, disputes over performance improvements. On the f lip side, genuine efficiency has often gone uncertified: not because the gains weren’t real, but because the data lacked the structure needed for certification. To address this, Aderco has rolled out a new ‘measure-as-you-go’ programme, 2055G+, which operators can use to ensure that the steps they take to improve energy efficiency are ref lected in accurate data. 2055G+ offers a single, transparent data framework that is continually updated, audit-ready, and accessible to stakeholders, including shipowners, operators, and charterers. 26 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

Verified data over estimates Performance data varies with route, weather, and load profiles. 2055G+ addresses these differences through vessel-specific baseline modelling, advanced benchmarking, and continuous data normalisation, ensuring performance is measured fairly and accurately, regardless of fleet profile. Its methodology follows an approach similar to the EU Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) Regulation, and the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS); it applies rigorous filters – linked to minimum sailing hours, sea state conditions, and ‘laden condition only’ – to ensure data quality and comparability. In this way, charter party negotiations over voyage performance rest on verified data rather than estimates, and users can be sure of their position with respect to the Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) and the EU’s MRV and ETS, among other regulatory frameworks. Ownership of emissions reductions – and, by extension, the voluntary carbon credits (VCCs) they generate – is clearly

defined from the outset. In short, 2055G+ replaces debate with shared, verifiable data. Once dataset quality is secured, the next step is monetising those verified reductions. Savings into credits In the first instance, the 2055G+ process is being applied to offer full transparency on the impact of Aderco’s 2055G additive in enhancing fuel performance and reducing CO₂. It establishes a fuel and emissions baseline using noon reports collected over the vessel’s full dry-dock cycle as the starting point for 2055G use under real operating conditions for a minimum of six months to optimise fuel efficiency and reduce emissions. Pre- and post-treatment fuel consumption is compared using operational data that is also verified by Adi Terra, an independent project developer. The resulting CO₂ savings are converted into certified carbon credits, delivering both financial returns and verifiable environmental impact. These credits are validated under the Gold Standard

SUSTAINABILITY

Retrofit Methodology, providing high liquidity and strong market value. The potential gains are far from theoretical. Even before qualifying for VCCs, adopters can realise instant fuel-related savings. Classification societies have independently verified that 2055G+ reporting consistently records reductions in fuel consumption and corresponding CO₂ emissions by 3-5%. Examples include a 3.25% reduction on a Capesize vessel, verified by RINA, and a 4.84% reduction on a reefer ship, verified by ABS. In many cases, this improved fuel efficiency is enough to raise a vessel’s rating by one band (for example, from C to B, or from D to C), preventing a downgrade as IMO requirements tighten. Because CII impact is highly ship- and operationspecific, 2055G+’s ability to continuously monitor performance is especially useful. Straightforward commercial logic The primary value of efficiency measures lies in reducing fuel consumption and associated emissions. However, under many commercial charter arrangements, these fuel savings are realised by the charterer rather than the vessel owner, creating a well-known

split incentive that can discourage investment in decarbonisation measures. The ability to generate Gold Standard VCCs addresses this by creating a new revenue stream for the party making the investment. Fuel savings therefore remain the operational foundation of the programme, while certified carbon credits provide an additional financial return that helps unlock investments that might otherwise not proceed. Under current voluntary carbon market conditions, these credits command strong demand and attractive liquidity. The commercial logic is straightforward: fuel savings improve operational efficiency, while carbon credits create an additional source of value for vessel owners, aligning commercial incentives with decarbonisation. These measures can take many forms, including (but not limited to) propeller

optimisation, anti-fouling hull coatings, and waste heat recovery systems. Better positioned Today, 2055G+ certifies fuel treatment. Tomorrow, Aderco’s ambition is broader: any retrofit measure that demonstrably improves vessel efficiency is a candidate for generating certified carbon credits. We are building the data and certification backbone that strengthens the business case for reducing emissions, whether stakeholders benefit through lower fuel consumption or via the parallel revenue stream from tradable carbon credits. As IMO CII, EU ETS, and the voluntary carbon market continue to evolve, shipowners who adopt this capability early will be better positioned to enhance asset value, accelerate compliance, and strengthen the business case for fleet decarbonisation.

Aderco delivers innovative, plant-based fuel treatment solutions that help industries run cleaner, more efficient, and more sustainable operations. Our ash-free, metal-free formulations improve fuel performance, cut emissions, and protect engines and equipment across the marine, mining, power generation, rail, and transport sectors. Go to aderco.com/en to discover more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 27

Ferry decarbonisation in the Central Baltic – lessons from the REISFER project

The most important sustainability technology?

by Kadi Kasepõld, Early-Stage Researcher and Project Manager, TalTech Estonian Maritime Academy For much of the past decade, the maritime industry’s decarbonisation debate has focused on technologies, fuels, and regulations. Discussions often revolve around alternative energy sources, batteries, shore power, emissions trading, and carbon intensity indicators. Yet, one critical element is frequently overlooked. New equipment and systems undoubtedly support the transition, but it is the people using them who translate environmental ambitions into measurable outcomes.

educing CO₂ Emissions in Island Ferry Traffic (REISFER), a project of the Interreg Central Baltic programme, has provided a unique opportunity to explore this challenge in practice. Bringing together ferry operators, researchers, and public authorities from Estonia, Finland, Sweden, and Åland, the project has demonstrated that the future of sustainable ferry transport depends as much on human expertise, collaboration, and organisational learning as on novel technology. A unique and complex challenge Island ferries rarely receive the same attention as large ocean-going vessels and international shipping routes. Their importance to coastal communities is, however, difficult to overstate. Across the Baltic Sea region, they provide essential links between islands and the mainland, supporting daily mobility, tourism, local economies, and access to public services (including education and healthcare), with around 63 million passengers travelling on board these ‘community connectors’ annually in the Central Baltic region alone. Unlike deep-sea shipping, island ferries operate under highly specific constraints. Routes are short, schedules are fixed, port calls are frequent, and the weather can change rapidly. Additionally, ferry operators must simultaneously maintain 28 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

safety, punctuality, and service reliability. This creates a unique challenge that is far more complex than many policy discussions acknowledge: limited opportunities for traditional fuel-saving approaches make successful decarbonisation largely dependent on operational practices and day-to-day decision-making. Environmental performance cannot be engineered Through interviews with captains, mates, and engineers across ferries operating in Estonia, Finland, Sweden, and the Åland Islands, REISFER has produced the first cross-border study focusing specifically on crews’ perceptions of decarbonisation. By giving the seagoing staff an opportunity to share their experiences and views, one of the strongest messages from the project emerged: decarbonisation cannot be viewed solely as a technological challenge. Across all participating countries, crews strongly supported emission reduction efforts. In practice, ferry crews are continuously making decisions that take into account weather conditions and passenger expectations, vessel characteristics, and operational constraints to balance fuel efficiency with safety and service reliability. The interviews revealed that efficient vessel operation is learned through experience and familiarity with specific routes, and it doesn’t rely on standardised procedures

alone. Slight adjustments in vessel handling and daily operations can collectively lead to meaningful reductions in fuel consumption. Many participants also highlighted the importance of learning from colleagues and exchanging experiences. This finding is particularly important because it challenges a common assumption in decarbonisation discussions: that environmental performance can simply be engineered into operations through technology. This suggests that the human element remains at the centre of maritime sustainability, even as vessels become increasingly digitalised. Tech helps, but people deliver the results REISFER has provided numerous examples of technical innovation. Hybrid ferries operating in Finland have demonstrated significant reductions in fuel consumption. Sweden has successfully implemented an electric ferry solution on the over 50-year-old Silverö. LED lighting and updated HVAC systems provide additional emission reductions by using less energy. Operators throughout the region are also experimenting with fuel monitoring systems and eco-sailing practices. These developments are encouraging by all accounts. However, the interviews reveal an important lesson: technology provides opportunities; people create outcomes. Captains and engineers consistently

SUSTAINABILITY

Photo: Scania

emphasised that monitoring systems only become valuable when crews understand how to interpret and act on the information they provide. As such, these solutions still do not replace professional experience. Similarly, successful electrification requires more than just installing batteries. It requires structured learning, training, and adaptation of new operational routines. In many cases, crews also highlighted the need to better understand why certain measures are introduced in the first place. When environmental goals are clearly communicated and linked with operational realities, acceptance and engagement improve significantly. Too complex to solve individually Perhaps the most important lesson from REISFER extends beyond technology altogether. It highlights the value of cross-border cooperation. The project has shown that ferry operators across the Baltic face remarkably similar challenges despite operating in different national contexts. Weather varies. Governance structures differ. Fleets range from aging diesel vessels to modern hybrids. Yet, crews consistently identified similar obstacles and similar solutions. The project has created opportunities for operators, researchers, and authorities to learn directly from one another. It is the collective knowledge that cannot be replicated through modelling or policy analysis alone. Practices that prove effective on a Finnish route may inspire solutions in Estonia. Experiences with electrification in

Sweden can inform future investments elsewhere. Åland’s operational insights provide valuable perspectives for decision-makers throughout the region. Maritime sustainability challenges are often too complex for any single organisation to solve independently. Collaboration accelerates learning and reduces the risks associated with innovation. One of the most valuable aspects of the initiative is creating a basis for future decarbonisation steps. Maintaining and expanding such cooperation networks may be just as important as developing new technologies. A transition – in knowledge, culture, and operational behaviour The ferry sector’s decarbonisation journey is far from complete. Experience from REISFER suggests that future success demands organisational adaptation, continuous learning, and effective collaboration among researchers, policymakers, operators, and crews. The Baltic region’s ferry operators already show that meaningful emission reductions are possible today. The next challenge is ensuring that the knowledge generated through projects such as REISFER continues to be shared, developed,

and translated into everyday practice across the maritime sector. Three priorities appear particularly important. First, involve crews early while introducing new technologies and operational procedures. Different vessels and different routes require different approaches, and crews possess first-hand experience. Second, training deserves greater attention. The maritime sector is investing heavily in new technologies, yet structured education on operational decarbonisation often lags. And third, policymakers and transport authorities should recognise the diversity of ferry operations when designing sustainability measures. Decarbonisation pathways for different routes must reflect operational realities. Future cross-border projects should continue fostering peer-to-peer learning. Lines learn exceptionally well from other ferry companies facing similar practical challenges. The maritime industry’s technological transition is equally a transition in knowledge, culture, and operational behaviour. As the ferry sector continues its path towards lower emissions, the human factor may prove one of the most important sustainability technologies of all.

Kadi Kasepõld is an early-stage researcher and project manager at the Estonian Maritime Academy of the Tallinn University of Technology. Her research focuses on maritime decarbonisation, socio-technical systems, organisational adaptation, and the human element in sustainable shipping. Visit centralbaltic.eu/project/reisfer to learn more about the Reducing CO₂ Emissions in Island Ferry Traffic (REISFER) project she coordinates within the Interreg Central Baltic programme. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 29

Why shipyard optimisation is critical to accelerating global energy transition

From infrastructure to capability

by Miska Merikukka, VP of Sales & Business Development, Elomatic Marine The maritime industry has spent much of the past decade focused on a fundamental challenge: identifying fuels and technologies to achieve net-zero. However, as the energy transition moves from strategy to implementation, another challenge is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. The sector may have identified much of the tech needed to reduce emissions, but does it have the industrial capability to build, retrofit, and maintain this new generation of vessels at the scale and speed required?

his question is becoming increasingly important beyond the energy transition itself. Across Europe and North America, governments are prioritising maritime sovereignty, supply-chain resilience, defence capacity, and the ability to maintain domestic shipbuilding capability, with significant public investment being directed towards rebuilding and expanding national maritime infrastructure. Yet, physical investment alone will not make shipbuilding competitive. New docks and fabrication facilities may expand capacity – but they don’t automatically deliver the engineering processes, production discipline, digital infrastructure, or organisational knowledge needed to use that capacity effectively. The answer depends on a vital enabler: those who actually build vessels. Shipyard regeneration needs to be considered in terms of capability, not simply infrastructure. The proper measure is not how many vessels a yard could theoretically build, but how reliably it can turn investment and available capacity into ships delivered on time, to specification, and at a commercially viable cost. Shipowners can commit to green methanol, ammonia, hydrogen, or multi-fuel propulsion systems, while bunker producers invest in new supply chains and regulators establish increasingly stringent emissions targets. However, between adopting a new technology and delivering the final vessel lies a complex industrial process involving intricate engineering, project management, procurement, fabrication, and integration. As vessels become more technologically advanced, a shipyard’s ability to manage this process efficiently and consistently, 30 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

at the requisite volume, will directly affect how quickly the maritime sector can transition. Managing integration complexity The scale of this challenge is already visible in the newbuilding market. Over 500 alternative-fuelled vessels were ordered globally in 2024, a 38% increase on the previous year. Around 95% of orders went to Asian shipyards, underlining the extent to which the industrial capacity to deliver tonnage running on alternative fuels remains concentrated within the Far East markets. For countries aiming to rebuild domestic shipbuilding capability, this presents a significant challenge. Having access to alternative-fuel technology is not the same as having the industrial capability to deploy it efficiently and at scale. Building a conventional vessel that incorporates a new fuel system introduces additional requirements related to propulsion architecture, fuel storage, safety systems, electrical integration, control systems, and regulatory compliance. The engineering challenge therefore extends considerably beyond selecting a different engine or fuel tank. A proven hull carrying a relatively new fuel system is, in practical terms, a modified design, requiring a different approach to construction, project management, and change control. The ability of a yard to manage these interactions without letting complexity cause delays is the difference in maintaining commercial competitiveness. The critical point Despite its importance, shipyard optimisation remains underrepresented in the wider decarbonisation debate. Much of the focus has been on the challenge of

developing viable clean technologies – such as wind propulsion, carbon capture and electrification, as well as alternative fuels – and securing supply and building the infrastructure needed to support them. However, the shipyard sits at a critical point in integrating these technologies into vessel operations, and where integration complexity determines how quickly the industry scales. As fuel technologies diversify and mature, shipyards will increasingly be required not only to build compliant vessels, but to integrate complex multi-fuel propulsion systems, manage retrofit programmes at scale, reduce build times for tonnage capable of zero/near-zero (ZNZ) emissions, and adopt more efficient, modular construction processes. Consequently, the energy transition’s pace could become constrained by shipyard production capacity and capability as much as by fuel availability. A shipyard that can deliver ZNZ vessels faster does more than improve productivity. It accelerates fleet renewal and enables fossil-fuelled vessels to be phased out sooner, creating an emissions impact that extends far beyond the efficiency gains achieved within the yard itself. This requires a shift from viewing optimisation as a collection of individual productivity improvements towards treating the shipyard as an integrated production ecosystem. Engineering, procurement, production, construction, and change management need to operate within a centralised project management environment, structured around repeatable processes that can accommodate new technologies without disrupting delivery. This is where experienced engineering partners add critical value. New-tech navigators can transform first-of-a-kind projects

SUSTAINABILITY

Photo: Canva

from high-risk exercises into structured, repeatable processes, allowing shipyards to build confidence, improve efficiency, and ultimately scale the energy transition. Once a vessel reaches the yard While newbuild ZNZ vessels dominate the current discussion, retrofitting the existing fleet will be equally critical to decarbonising maritime transport. As regulations evolve and carbon pricing increases, a growing number of ships will need to be adapted for alternative fuels, hybrid systems, or greater energy efficiency. However, retrofitting presents a fundamentally different set of challenges from newbuild construction. Existing vessels bring accumulated modifications, historic documentation, and often incomplete information regarding their current condition, further complicating change management processes. An unexpected finding in drydock can trigger engineering changes, procurement delays, and installation issues, creating knock-on effects across the wider project schedule. As modernisation of the existing global fleet remains a fundamental lever of industry decarbonisation, the sector cannot rely on reactive problem-solving once a vessel reaches the yard. Accurate and accessible vessel data, together with integrated planning, can shift uncertainty into the preparation phase, allowing potential issues to be identified and addressed before they become costly delays. Turning data into production capability While digital transformation is often framed around automation, improved operational efficiency, and reduced administrative workloads, its greater value may lie in connecting information that

has traditionally been fragmented across functions and systems. When engineering data, maintenance records, documentation, and production knowledge sit in separate environments, it becomes difficult to build a reliable, shared view of the vessel or project. A more connected data environment can bridge these gaps, giving engineering teams greater visibility of the whole project while allowing maintenance and asset information to feed directly into retrofit planning and execution. Over time, this also enables recurring issues to be tackled, with successful approaches being identified and incorporated into more standardised processes. The result is not simply a more sophisticated shipyard environment but a more predictable one. With structured, up-todate vessel data integrated into a unified planning ecosystem, dry-dock and retrofit activity can shift from reactive execution towards predictive planning, reducing costs and improving turnaround times to make large-scale retrofit programmes more manageable. Tools such as Elomatic’s Aura APM put this approach into practice by consolidating maintenance history, documentation, and permit management into a single planning layer, helping turn unexpected issues into more predictable, manageable costs. Similarly, the EU-funded SEUS project, with Cadmatic as technical coordinator, aims to deliver a 30% reduction in engineering time and a 20% reduction in

assembly time. Results are expected in late 2026 and could provide valuable yard-scale evidence of how digitalisation can translate into measurable production efficiencies. The one that can connect Maritime decarbonisation’s next phase demands broader industry understanding of the energy transition challenge. Developing clean tech, integrating sophisticated digital systems, improving vessel efficiency, and establishing harmonised regulatory frameworks will remain essential, but these efforts ultimately depend on an industrial system capable of delivering the vessels and modifications required at scale. Shipyard optimisation must therefore move beyond the traditional conversation around productivity. The competitive shipyard of the future will not necessarily be the one with the most sophisticated individual technology, but the one that can connect engineering, procurement, production, asset information, and people into a system capable of absorbing greater complexity, whilst maintaining project timelines and cost. For nations looking to accelerate the development of their maritime capabilities, the shipyard of the future must be considered not simply as a strategic asset that supports industrial policy but as a critical enabler of the maritime energy transition itself. Net-zero progress depends on fuels and clean technologies, yet its pace ultimately hinges on the industry’s ability to turn that innovation into repeatable industrial production at scale.

Elomatic is an international consulting and engineering company that provides top-level expert services, products and turnkey solutions to process, machinery, marine, energy and pharmaceutical industries. We are focused on continuous improvement and sustainable development, and we are committed to design solutions that increase the wellbeing of people and the environment. Go to elomatic.com to discover more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 31

How modern operational simulation is changing the way ships are being designed

The first voyage happens far from the sea by Antti Pösö, Product Owner Hull Form & Hydrodynamics, Design Solutions, NAPA

Ships are designed to a specification. Yet that starting point – calm waters, a single design speed, and constant draft – rarely mirrors the varied conditions encountered at sea. Operational simulation (OpSim) lets naval architects and engineers test a ship in realistic operating conditions already at the concept stage.

sk a naval architect how a new ship will cope with the weather on its intended route, and the answer will generally involve a percentage. Ship designers typically assess performance based on data from comparable vessels, using a limited set of metrics such as the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and contractual powering curves at design speed. To this, they will then add a sea margin, often between 15 and 25% to cover waves, wind, fouling, and everything else the ocean brings. This is a proven process, but it falls short when evaluating novel design concepts. Meanwhile, the EU Emissions Trading System, FuelEU Maritime, and the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) now all judge ships on how they perform in service, year after year. A design can clear its EEDI requirement at delivery and still be on course for a D or E CII rating once it starts trading. This quickly becomes a commercial and regulatory liability for shipowners, with limited cost-effective remedies available at that stage. The growing number of clean technologies competing for a place on board also makes the performance question harder to answer. Over 100 commercial vessels now carry wind-assisted propulsion systems, adding up to over six million deadweight (dwt) of capacity, according to the International Windship Association. 32 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

Air lubrication is also increasing in popularity. Each tech solution promises emissions and fuel savings, but those efficiencies depend on the route, the weather, and how the ship is sailed – and how each technology interacts with the others. Owners need certainty on which tech combinations suit their vessel for a specific trade route. The process works – with limits Simulating the performance of a vessel is not new. It usually involves three key steps, uses existing digital tools, and starts with creating a hydrodynamic model to reflect how a specific ship will perform at various speeds and in different sea conditions. The NAPA Performance Model, which has a baseline for all vessel types and sizes worldwide, offers a framework for hydrodynamic modelling, which can then be refined using new design data. The model is then further defined using an operational plan that reflects the areas the vessel will be operated in and the ports it will visit. It includes the range of speeds to be considered, as well as the loading conditions it will experience. This is easier for retrofitting projects, where we already have a detailed picture of a vessel’s operations. But for newbuilds, a lot of insight can be gained from AIS data, which is then analysed by AI to contextualise it by vessel type and size. This provides invaluable information about how ships tend to be operated in any given area and for any vessel

type. The final step involves simulating realistic voyages by bringing the hydrodynamic model and operational plan together (this can be done on NAPA Voyage Optimization to simulate multiple route variations). While functional, this approach has historically required separate tools, data preparation, and teams – and was rarely done at the concept stage, exactly when decisions with the greatest influence on lifetime fuel costs and regulatory exposure are made. Only as good as the data behind them Hydrodynamic calculations, voyage and routing optimisation, and hind-cast weather data are now being brought together in the design process using NAPA Operational Simulation. It works from the design model the team has already built as above, with nothing re-entered. The results include a projected CII trajectory, FuelEU Maritime compliance balance, and EEDI under realistic conditions. Design teams have not normally had these figures at the concept stage. Several design decisions change as a result when designers get the full spread of power the ship will need on its route. They can then size the main engine against a high percentile of that spread rather than a rule of thumb. Fuel tanks can be sized around expected consumption between bunkering ports. Hull form alternatives can be judged across the speeds and sea states the ship will really experience.

SUSTAINABILITY

Photo: NAPA

A wind-assisted propulsion or air lubrication system is tested in the same conditions the vessel will experience, so the projected fuel savings go beyond a supplier’s estimate. To show what this looks like in practice, we ran four configurations of a capesize bulk carrier on the Port Hedland to Pohang iron-ore route, across 11 voyages covering five months of real hindcast weather. The hull form is the Japan Bulk Carrier benchmark, extensively validated internationally, and the engine operating point was held constant, so differences come entirely from design and routing choices. The configurations were: baseline, baseline with optimised routing, sail alone, and sail with optimised routing. Weather routing alone reduced fuel use and cost by 1.6%. Sails without routing saved 6.6%. Sails and routing together cut fuel consumption by 8.0% and cost by 7.9%. The regulatory compliance predictions showed that, on this trade, the design’s attained CII was around 5.3 grams of CO₂ per dwt-nautical mile against a 2030 requirement of 2.27, which puts it in the E band. Its attained EEDI was 16% above the Phase 3 limit. Neither issue would emerge from a calm-water analysis. Identifying both at the concept stage allows time to adjust the powertrain, integrate wind assistance, or reconsider fuel selection. The headline numbers are promising but need careful evaluation. The gap between two configurations is a more reliable guide than any single fuel consumption figure,

and simulation at this stage is best used to compare options under identical conditions and to identify regulatory risk early, not to promise an exact outcome. Results are also only as good as the design data behind them, so uncertainty is higher for newer technologies such as wind propulsion, where the industry is still building up validation data. OpSim is a design tool, not a one-time assessment. Each iteration refines the inputs, and the performance model becomes more accurate as the design matures. A conceptstage simulation gives a directional answer; the same model, updated through concept to delivery, gives an increasingly precise one. Design-operational feedback loop Commercial teams are starting to acknowledge how OpSim can provide greater operational clarity earlier. The same design model can stay with the ship after delivery for operational benchmarking and retrofit studies, and data from vessels in service can then inform the next design. The long-term payoff is a feedback loop that unites design and operational data, which have long been separate disciplines with their own distinct tools. For owners making capital decisions that need to hold up for

25 years, that separation is turning into an expensive habit. The first contracts to include performance data are already on the market. In March 2026, NYK and Japan Marine United agreed on a crude tanker contract that guarantees performance in actual sea conditions. The deal also shares the benefits between the shipowner and yard according to how well the vessel performs. Another strong signal of interest has come from Samsung Heavy Industries (SHI). In June 2026, the company signed a memorandum of understanding with NAPA to use OpSim to implement digital twins of ship equipment and predict vessel performance from the initial design stage, building on a joint project active since May 2026 on SHI’s SAVER Wing wind-assisted propulsion system. These simulations make naval architects’ judgement even more crucial. They still need to decide which design variants are worth putting to the test, which inputs need sensitivity testing, and when a result looks more precise than its inputs justify. That remains the naval architects’ job and is a gauge of their experience. What changes is that the work gets done with much clearer data on the actual conditions the vessel will face at sea.

With over 35 years of operation, NAPA is a leading maritime software and data services provider to enable safe, sustainable and future-proof shipping. With 90% of new vessels built by NAPA customers, NAPA’s design software is the global standard. For ship operations, NAPA provides vessel stability and data management, and its cloud-based solutions for performance monitoring and optimization support shipping decarbonization. Visit www.napa.fi to see more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 33

The Baltic wrote the rulebook on ECAs – now it needs to show enforcement can keep pace

Paper rules? by Fredrik Fuglesang, CEO, SeaARCTOS

The Baltic Sea has a claim few other waters can make: it was the world’s first Sulphur Emission Control Area, designated in 2006 and tightened to today’s 0.10% limit in 2015. Two decades on, that head start is about to matter more than ever. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has adopted a new ECA for the North-East Atlantic, covering waters off Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Ireland, the UK, France, Spain, and Portugal, introducing the same cap limit from 2028 under Resolution MEPC.407(84). It follows the Mediterranean, which became a 0.10% ECA in May last year, and the Canadian Arctic and Norwegian Sea, where that same limit kicks in from March 2027.

dd the Baltic, North Sea, North American, and Caribbean ECAs already in force, and a growing share of the routes feeding Baltic ports now sit under the strictest sulphur controls available. That should be good news for a region that has spent over 10 years living with this regulation. But it also means the Baltic’s enforcement record is no longer a regional footnote. It is the closest thing the industry has to a preview of what awaits every new ECA now being drawn on the map. Credibility itself Sulphur emissions from shipping contribute to respiratory disease, cardiovascular illness, and premature mortality. Concentrated in the densely populated 34 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

coastal areas, seafarers and port workers carry a disproportionate share of that exposure. The disparity that justified ECAs in the first place has not gone away either – road fuel (diesel and gasoline) across the EU has been capped at 10 parts sulphur per million since 2009, while marine fuel burned outside an ECA can still run to 0.50%, 50 times higher. The core enforcement tools in most Baltic and European ports remain documentation review, such as bunker delivery notes and fuel records, and physical sampling that is accurate but slow, resource-intensive, and often conclusive only after the ship has sailed on. By the time a sample confirms non-compliance, the vessel may already be in the next jurisdiction’s waters, and the damage to

air quality and public health is already done. Consequently, the very credibility of the ECA itself erodes. That creates a genuine grievance for the operators who have invested in compliant fuel, scrubbers, and emissions management to trade into the Baltic. They are competing, at least sometimes, against vessels that calculate whether the odds of detection are low enough to run cheaper, non-compliant bunker and absorb the occasional fine. Where verification is inconsistent, it is compliant owners who pay the price for a ‘level’ field that’s anything but. Scaling this from one sea to eight ECAs multiplies the problem. Ships transiting from the Baltic into the North Sea and now the North-East Atlantic cross several

SUSTAINABILITY

Photo: Canva

enforcement regimes on a single voyage, each with its own inspection resources, sampling capacity, and reporting systems. Without improved coordination and better tools, a larger ECA network means more jurisdictional seams for noncompliant operators to exploit. This is where the Baltic is well-placed to lead rather than simply absorb the lesson. Continuous emissions monitoring and real-time digital verification are already moving compliance checking away from retrospective sampling and towards direct, ongoing measurement, transmitted to port state control and f lag administrations while the vessel is still underway. That closes the window between a breach occurring and one being identified, which is precisely the gap that documentation-based enforcement cannot catch up with. Tamper-proof This is no longer a pilot-stage idea – classification societies are starting to treat that approach as ready for real-world use. Lloyd’s Register this summer extended Type Approval to a continuous stack-monitoring

system for CO₂ reporting, adding to an SO₂ approval it granted the same technology earlier in the year. FuelEU Maritime, the EU Emissions Trading System, and the prospective IMO Net-Zero Framework are only as effective as the mechanisms used to enforce them. Consistent, tamper-proof monitoring gives compliant operators a real benefit too, since it exposes competitors cutting corners and reduces the risk of being penalised for emissions a ship never produced. Charterers, cargo owners, insurers, and financial institutions are increasingly asking for verified emissions data, not self-reported figures, to support environmental-social-governance disclosure and counterparty risk assessment. Poseidon Principles signatories, for instance, could draw on this kind of data to assess how far their ship-finance portfolios align with climate targets, and

greener vessels may secure preferential financing terms accordingly. A region demonstrating continuous, auditable compliance has a genuine commercial case to make to that audience, alongside the environmental one. Enforcing the ambition The expansion of the ECA network across Europe and the Arctic is a real achievement, and the Baltic can reasonably claim some credit for proving the model over the past decade. But a rule on paper is not the same as an enforced one, and the region’s own experience is sufficient evidence of that. The industry’s confidence in every new ECA now being adopted will rest on whether enforcement infrastructure catches up with regulatory ambition. Having gone first, the Baltic has the standing, and arguably the obligation, to step up on enforcement too.

SeaArctos provides a platform for continuous ship exhaust emissions monitoring. The ARCTOS-1™ unit is attached to a ship’s funnel in less than an hour, providing hourly SO₂, CO₂, and geolocation data stored in a cloud and available via a real-time emissions dashboard accessible from any device. Visit seaarctos.com to learn more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 35

Key takeaways from ECA’s Special Report on the Western Balkans Investment Framework – and a few op-ed remarks

A blind spot the size of a continent by Przemysław Myszka

Surely our sector’s favourite watchdog, the European Court of Auditors (ECA), has recently published a new transport-focused report – on EU investments in the Western Balkans to connect the region to the bloc’s Core Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T). While this one doesn’t curdle one’s blood like the one on EU mega transport projects, it provides insights into whether the European Commission (COM) knows what it’s doing when pouring hundreds of millions of euros into infrastructure – this time outside the EU’s borders. Well…

he story begins as far back as 2008, when the European Council prodded COM and international financial institutions (IFIs) to put their shoulders to the wheel of infrastructural projects in the west of the Balkans to help Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia eventually join the EU. Read: push the region, or at least certain states, out of the Kremlin’s orbit of influence, as well as counter China’s growing presence (in case anyone wondered what’s really at stake). The following year saw the launch of the Western Balkans Investment Framework (WBIF), a single entry point for donors’ money into the region. At the time of publishing ECA’s Special Report 16/2026, COM provided €898.6 million to the European Western Balkans Joint Fund from 2015 to mid-2025, accounting for 85.9% of all resources (so a hefty leverage). Of these, €527 million was earmarked for transport projects. In total, over the 2015-25 decade, COM committed just above €2.66 billion for 55 transport projects in the Western Balkans. But the Brussels purse is even more handsome than that. The EU’s 20212027 Economic and Investment Plan for the Western Balkans is worth €30 billion in investments, including €9 billion in grants for, among others, transport. One could therefore reason: with a lot of money, one could do a lot of good. If one knows what one’s doing, that is. No objection! ECA’s task was, as always when COM is involved, “simple” – to scrutinise whether the EU’s executive ensured WBIF contributes effectively to that connect-W-Balkans-toCore-TEN-T goal. Specifically, if COM had 36 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

put in place procedures for effective transport project selection, implementation supervision, and monitoring and reporting. The keywords here are ‘effectively’ and ‘effective.’ The chosen sample included 12 transport projects from across Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Serbia, altogether worth €341.6 million (overall, the EU committed just over €2.11 billion to these countries in 2015-25). The audit concerned five road projects, the same number of rail, and two inland waterways. “Overall, we conclude that the Commission ensured that the WBIF contributes to extending the Core TEN-T, as the funded projects in our sample are aligned with the connectivity priorities of both the Western Balkans and the EU,” reads ECA’s Special Report 16/2026. That’s that, end of story – can we present COM with a shining badge of honour in the field of transport infrastructure? As in life, the proof is in the pudding – and the devil likes to taste the details. Nobody requires COM to know everything. That is why the Western Balkans had to prepare national pipelines, a ranking of transport projects. Then again, the operational board (comprising representatives of COM, EU Member States, IFIs, and bilateral donors – tasked with screening, assessing, and approving projects eligible for the WBIF) did choose low-ranking projects because they appeared ready for implementation. Two of three such projects actually ran into a delay of more than one year (more on tardiness shortly). “In North Macedonia, the core rail corridor was not connected to one of its neighbours, and no agreement had been reached with neighbouring countries to ensure that the entire corridor was operable at the time the grant

was approved.” As the Unconnected railway section in North Macedonia figure shows, it’s a textbook ‘bridge to nowhere’ case. A piece of (Core TEN-T) infrastructure that doesn’t do its (Core TEN-T) job is no (Core TEN-T) infrastructure at all. That said, this investment puzzle at least includes an ember of hope that the railroad in question will get its missing piece, with the planned completion date of 2030 (unlike the Rail Baltica moai-like structures in Riga we discussed in Infrastructure delayed is transport denied, our previous ECA-fuelled investigation into COM’s proficiency in investing in transport infrastructure). ECA also remarked that COM did not prioritise sustainable transport in its selection. Whether a project contributing to the European Green Deal (“Europe’s ‘man-onthe-moon’ moment,” if anyone recalls that bombastic 2019 phrase by President von der Leyen) beats one that ‘merely’ moves goods and people in a smoother manner is debatable – but in the audited sample, the applications framed sustainability more in economic than environmental terms. The operational board approved six rail grants in the four countries in question, half serving routes still operated by diesel trains. It is a bit of a shame this area wasn’t contextualised more, leaving the reader with the impression that a less eco-friendly choice was made. As things stand today, a diesel locomotive is actually greener than an electrified one, given how coal-heavy the grids in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Serbia still are. In the Western Balkans, electrifying railways without cleaning the grid simply shifts emissions upstream – from the loco exhaust to the smokestack of a lignite plant. Things might, of course, change. Poland also used

ECONOMY

11 21 3

Bosnia and Herzegovina

4 51

Kosovo

71 8 9 10 11

Road corridor Vc

Connecting East to West

Rhine-Danube Core Corridor

Connecting North to South

Rail route 10

North Macedonia

Rail corridor VIII Connecting East to West

Serbia

Rail corridor Xc Rail corridor X Rhine-Danube Core Corridor

Adoption year

Amount of grant adopted, without implementation and administrative fees (thousand euros)

Network type

Connecting North to South

12 1

Core Network corridor

EU flagship

Beneficiary country

Project number

Tab. 1. List of sampled projects

Road – 10.7 km Road – 3.2 km Road – 6 km Inland waterways (harbour installations) and rail of 6.3 km Rail – 66.8 km

24,540 19,000 14,940

2015

3,020

2019

38,540

2015

Rail – 33.4 km

17,240

2016

Rail – 34 km Road – 13.2 km Road – 23 km Rail – 80 km Rail – 17.7 km Inland waterways – removal of 21 sunken vessels

68,626 2,470 13,508 43,730 80,150

2017 2018 2023 2016

15,850

2018

2022

EU/WBIF support received for the detailed design study

Fig. 1. Unconnected railway section in North Macedonia railway sections under preparation or construction sampled railway section under construction railway section under preparation with unclear conditions as regards connection with Bulgaria unconnected section

R6 *

Kyustendil

KOSOVO

Deve Bair

Kumanovo

VIII

Tetovo

VIII

NORTH MACEDONIA

Skopje

Štip

Veles

Gostivar

BULGARIA

Kičevo

Kavadarci

Strumica

Prilep * Kosovo - this designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence

Source: WBIF, as of the application date (2017)

to be a country where coal was almost everything. Counting from the early 1990s, it took at least three decades for electric trains to start outshining their diesel counterparts.

Taken literally, as the ability to sustain, some projects fell short. A 3.2-kilometre tunnel, outfitted with electro-mechanical equipment at the time of the audit, was still

disconnected from the nearby road networks. “There is a risk not only that the tunnel will remain unused for several years owing to delays in the adjacent road works, but also that it will require maintenance and protection against potential damage,” ECA warns. That is entropy at work, requiring energy expenditure to keep it at bay. The EU’s watchdog also detailed an ideal preparatory work breakdown before a project is implemented (Fig. 2), against which it analysed the project maturity of the sample. Long story short, it turned out that ticking off stage 1 was often the only step needed for a project to be stamped as mature (and one grant was approved even without a costbenefit analysis – because who needs that…). As most EU mega transport projects that had found themselves under ECA scrutiny sadly showed, it’s quite easy for what’s put on paper in stage 1 to quickly find itself far from ideal (or real, for that matter). From there, a detailed design is drawn up. And here’s the catch – IFIs, which COM tasks with project oversight, do not issue a ‘no objection’ statement when formally giving their thumbs up to the initial detailed design. As such, the doors are open for errors to transfer to the next phase. Then, during implementation, an IFI has to state that it does not object to adjusting the initial design. “This is a condition for the costs of the related works to be accepted,” ECA explained. If anything, it reads as a sure-fire recipe for delays and overshooting the budget. And even though COM-backed WBIF investments did not turn into money pits (as – yet again – some of the intra-EU mega transport projects), the average (median) delay for starting the sampled projects was 17 months after their grants were approved. Some were delayed by a few months ‘only,’ while three ‘achieved’ results of, respectively, 44, 59, and 64 months of delay. I could only imagine how it felt to sit in an office in Brussels, watching the clock on the wall tick past three, four, or even five years after giving a project its go-ahead. “At the time of the audit, delays were significant (more than two years) for six projects, mainly because detailed designs had to be changed during implementation, often exacerbated by delays in permit authorisations,” reads Special Report 16/2026. Project developers also had to wait until grant agreements were not only signed but also ratified by national authorities (e.g., in Bosnia and Herzegovina, this took a year). Solace could be found in that “apart from two projects where the difference is significant, […] the applications included cost estimates for works that were close to 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 37

ECONOMY Fig. 2. Preparatory work before a project is implemented Preparatory work

Pre-feasibility and/or feasibility studies and cost-benefit analysis

Detailed design

Preliminary design and environmental and social impact assessment

Implementation

Tender specifications

Procurement

Source: ECA, based on project documentation

Fig. 3. Delays in starting project implementation (planned vs actual start dates) Delay

(months)

Planned start date (grant application form) Projects ordered by implementation start date

2017

2018

Actual start date (contract signed)

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Project 7 Project 5 Project 10 Project 3 Project 2 Project 8 Project 6 Project 4 Project 11 Project 12

Note: Two other projects had already started before the grant application was submitted Source: ECA, based on grant documentation and project monitoring reports

Fig. 4. Delays in completing the projects compared to final/latest revised completion dates) Time necessary for (initial completion Estimated time necessary

Projects ordered by initial completion Projects ordered by date completion initial date

(months) Time necessary for completion (months) Initial Final

for completion Estimated time necessary for completion Initial Latest revised

Initial Final PROJECT COMPLETED

Initial Latest revised ONGOING PROJECT

PROJECT COMPLETED

ONGOING PROJECT

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

Project 1 Project Project 13* Project 5** 3* Project Project 8 5** Project Project 2** 8 Project Project Project 2** 4 Project 6 4 Project Project 9 6 Project Project Project 9 7 Project 10 7 Project Project 10

Note: The completion date for two projects has not yet been updated, and so is not included in this figure * Without technical assistance for the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) Note: The completion date for two projects has not yet been updated, and so is not included in this figure The contractors not yetfor provided updated estimates that reflect ***Without technicalhave assistance the Project Implementation Unit (PIU)actual delays ** The contractors have not yet provided updated estimates that reflect actual delays Source: ECA, based on contract documentation as of June 2025 Source: ECA, based on contract documentation as of June 2025

the initial contract prices, with a median deviation of 14% across all 12 projects.” 38 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

As a reminder, the cost of Rail Baltica ballooned by 291% from €4.65 billion to €18.19

billion – even though the project downgraded from two to a single track. There were, however, other shortcomings, such as not breaking down the costs to particular materials or services. Everything was bundled up, and ECA’s closer examination found that COM screeners missed ineligible costs, which in turn led to, e.g., one grant being over-calculated (by €900,000). On the flip side, another application did itemise the costs – based on outdated data, raising the total cost estimate by half. Some of the projects, in the meantime, didn’t have to vie for EU support in the first place. ECA found “three cases where loans and national contributions were already sufficient at the time of the grant applications to cover the projects’ investment costs, meaning that the grants were not essential for raising loans.” Furthermore, five of the 12 sampled grant applications were submitted after the loan contract was signed – including three applications submitted at least two years after loan-signing. “This created a deadweight effect, as the investment would have gone ahead even without the grant,” the EU watchdog underscored. Luckily, IFIs and project developers agreed to cut the committed loans by 30-52% once the grants were approved. Delays and money met again in cases where COM disbursed more money than warranted by actual progress. “For one project, the Commission paid the Joint Fund 63% of the total amount, corresponding to pre-financing of €52 million in October 2024 on the basis of the IFI’s forecast. However, this forecast was over-optimistic, as no costs had been incurred by the time of our visit in June 2025 because the works contract had not yet been signed.” This points to another ECA finding in its Special Report on the WBIF – COM’s abdication of adequate supervision. And yes, ‘adequate’ is the keyword here. Can’t someone else do it? COM might think it’s a business angel of sorts – backing projects that otherwise would struggle to secure financing (but we already know that’s not always the case with WBIF). Real business angels, however, more often than not get on board the boat they put their money into. COM does not. Again, COM doesn’t have to know everything. The EU’s executive reasons that IFIs – including such reputable names as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank (EIB), and the World Bank – know what they’re doing. “The Commission’s reliance on IFI supervision is based on a formal ex ante assessment

ECONOMY Fig. 5. Estimated and contractually agreed amounts for works – in million euros Estimated costs for works as per the application Costs of works as per initial contract Projects ranked by the magnitude of the gap as a percentage

+44 %

350 million euros 300 250 200

+109 %

150 100 50 0

Source: ECA, based on applications, initial contracts and – for one project – an accepted offer

of their systems, procedures and contractual provisions, including monitoring and reporting obligations,” says ECA – right before adding that COM “[…] is generally unable to address weaknesses in the financial institutions’ supervision of implementation risks and public procurement.” IFIs rely on the project developer to establish a project implementation unit (PIU), which – in theory – should consist of specialists, from project managers and engineers to lawyers. The IFIs required all projects but one to receive technical assistance supporting the PIU, which, however, in three sampled cases “[…] did not cover the entire implementation period. […] This insufficient mitigating measure negatively impacted the PIUs’ capacity and contributed to delays.” The issue with WBIF PIUs was that grant applications either did not detail

their composition, lacked a designer for the implementation phase or “[…] legal experts to handle the contractor’s numerous claims,” or did not set minimum requirements even though “[…] all 12 grant agreements specified […] that a PIU should include suitably qualified staff with adequate resources during the entire implementation period.” In short, “[…] neither the grant applications assessed by the IFIs nor the signed grant agreements systematically specified the PIU capacities to be fulfilled by the project developers.” So, you need and don’t need the right people at the same time. In the end, similar to COM, IFIs also relied on project developers to have people on the team who wouldn’t cause trouble. In doing justice to IFIs, ECA noted that they use a risk-intelligence database to “[…] identify risky individuals or entities so as to

Fig. 6. Time span between grant applications and the raising of loans

Source: ECA, based on project documentation

be able to exclude tenderers that had been sanctioned. The World Bank also keeps a public list of debarred and suspended firms and individuals that project developers need to check.” Then again, as if this cascading wasn’t enough, there were supervising engineers who reported to PIUs but to whom IFIs did not have direct access. Result? A September 2021 contract with a Russian supplier. Putting aside whether the materials couldn’t be sourced from elsewhere (the EU or the Western Balkans themselves, by any chance), the Kremlin attacked Ukraine the following year, thus making it impossible to transfer funds to a Russian bank. In June 2023, a tripartite agreement was signed to bring a second contractor aboard. “It also included higher prices due to inflated market prices and extended deadlines. However, the terms of the initial contract did not include a clause to revise prices,” ECA revealed. In November of that year, the contract was inflated even more as goods were damaged and had to be repaired. “Although the IFI’s grant agreement stipulated that items should always be insured against all risks, the project developer did not properly insure the financed component.” The final cost, certified by the supervising engineer and accepted by the IFI, went up by 27% vs what was tendered. Maybe it was bad planning or plain bad luck. Another example seems to have involved bad faith. One project had a budget of €1.05 million for planting and revegetation – of which €35,000 was used, as only discovered during ECA’s on-site audit. “Despite lower use of the budget for revegetation, the project developer planted a number of plants that exceeded the initial estimates. However, these were planted on a much smaller area and resulted in vegetation densities that are too high to be sustainable.” EU money spent on decay – sustainability at its finest, hands down! At least the remainder of the ‘revegetation’ budget went to buying something material – slope stabilisation nets. COM relies on IFIs’ reports – both annual and inaccurate. “For all but one of the sampled projects, we found that data such as dates, execution stage and amounts entered into the platform were not up to date,” shared the auditors. The IFIs’ reports also lacked detail on project progress and implementation issues, which – of course – led to delays. Since 2019, COM has been holding meetings with the IFIs twice a year, yet “[…] the brief minutes of these meetings do not adequately describe all key implementation problems.” There are also meetings with the project developers, also 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 39

ECONOMY Fig. 7. Delays between grant approval and signing of the grant agreement Projects ordered by the date of the operational board’s positive opinion on the GAF Operational board’s positive opinion on the grant application form (GAF)

2015

2016

2017

Approval by assembly of contributors

2018

GAF signed by the international financial institution (IFI)

2019

2020

GAF signed by the Commission

2021

2022

Grant agreement signed by the IFI and the beneficiary

2023

2024

Project 1 Project 5 Project 6 Project 10 Project 7 Project 2 Project 3 Project 8 Project 4 Project 11 Project 12 Project 9

Source: ECA, based on Commission and IFI information up to June 2025

twice-yearly, “[…] regularly postponed during implementation.” Consultants also work on WBIF projects (how could it be otherwise?). They supply COM with reports, too, and more frequently, for that matter. In practice, one project saw a number of works de-certified due to using unapproved concrete (in 2023). At the time of the ECA audit in mid-2025, there was still no decision about destroying these works (read: further delaying the project). COM wasn’t informed about the state of affairs – neither through IFI’s 2024 report nor in the monthly updates. Then again, another inadequateconcrete-quality case was brought before COM just two months after it was discovered. Procedures are one thing, nice to have them as a guiding star, but ultimately they are as effective as the people following them. Last remark on the human factor thread – ECA noted four alleged prohibited practices, involving “[…] supervising engineers potentially declaring more hours for payment than they actually worked.” Three of these claims were concluded as not credible, while one was still under investigation at the time of the audit. A small and watered beer compared with the corruption scale of China’s investments – transport infrastructure included – at home and abroad (direct interference in construction tenders, preselection of winners, under-the-counter gold bricks for tofu-dreg projects – such stuff). 40 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

ECA is no Johnny Law – that’s why it’s the European Public Prosecutor’s Office probing potential EU-fund abuse in the Novi Sad station case (after the fatal collapse of the station’s recently reconstructed canopy; the reconstruction was carried out under the Beijing-Budapest railway project by the Chinese consortium CRIC, with CCCC among many subcontractors). Two Serbian investigations also run in parallel, with 13 people under investigation, including former transport minister Goran Vesić. There is the Kičevo-Ohrid highway scandal – a China-financed project estimated to have cost the North Macedonian budget some €155 million through corruption and mismanagement (Chinese company involved – Sinohydro, which has graced the blacklists of the World Bank, the African Development Bank, and the EIB – the last one a 12-month exclusion, since expired – and was separately sanctioned by the US over dealings with Iran). What else? Maybe the Bar-Boljare highway in Montenegro, a €1 billion project that pushed the country to the brink of debt distress and forced a refinancing under EU auspices. And then there is the Pelješac Bridge in Croatia – EU-funded, but built by CRBC, and marked by technical defects, rushed construction, and compliance issues. Brussels’ money, Beijing’s methods…

Because some tunnels collapsed If COM’s sight is a bit hazy when it comes to choosing and supervising transport infrastructure projects, then maybe the EU’s executive at least excels in monitoring the impact of the taxpayers’ money it directs? There are many ways of calculating the outcome of an investment. For instance, a forwarding company could detail everything into a euro/kilometre ratio. This way, if the haulier buys a truck that the manufacturer swears is more fuel-friendly, then that assertion can be verified. Or, concerning external investments – say, if a highway is put in place – the forwarder can also see the impact of this investment through faster turnaround, less idling in traffic jams, etc. Better cargo-handling equipment on the quayside increases the hourly workload a stevedore can perform. A dredging project enables importers/exporters to cut the number of ship calls they need to get their goods over the berth, as larger vessels can now sail into the harbour. Energy efficiency measures lower a ship’s fuel consumption. Bunkering bioLNG makes it possible to capitalise on otherwise penalising regulations such as FuelEU Maritime. In short, figures you can put your finger on. With a workforce of 32,000-33,000 and a yearly administrative budget of almost €13.3 billion, COM surely has analytical tools that would make SimCorp or Bloomberg blush, right? “To monitor overall progress, the Commission has established three key indicators (GDP growth, the value of trade in goods and services, and a human development index), but it has never collected and reported on the data.” Because why bother anyway? First, these indicators are so broad that assessing whether a 6-kilometre road made an actual dent is nigh impossible. Second, a – give or take – zillion external factors influence these indicators; in the reported period, from 2015 to mid2025, such not insignificant events as the global COVID-19 pandemic, the recurring US-China trade wars, the 2021-23 inflation surge, a container ship wedging in the Suez Canal, or Ukraine being attacked by Russia. Moreover, “the Commission did not gather information on the completion of the Core European Transport Network in the Western Balkans, such as the degree of completeness (e.g., the length of completed and operational sections per corridor) and compliance with the standards of the network for the supported corridors.” Believe it or not, COM relied on yet another party to do its job, namely Transport Community, an international organisation

ECONOMY Fig. 8. ECA project assessments Satisfactory Some weaknesses

APPLICATION

IMPLEMENTATION

Significant weaknesses Sustainable transport

Not yet possible to conclude

Project number

Connectivity

Start of implementation as planned in the application

Mature at the time of the application

Timely completion as originally planned

Outputs achieved

Road 10.7 km long open to traffic, including a bridge and a crossing point open to traffic that is not fully functional

Road (tunnel) 3.2 km long built, but not open to traffic

Road 6 km long, including a toll station and a bridge open to traffic

Harbour installations in place and operational, but rail construction is ongoing

Rail tracks, stations, tunnels and bridges – rehabilitation ongoing

Rail tracks, stations and bridges – rehabilitation ongoing

Construction or rehabilitation of rail tracks, stations, tunnels and bridges ongoing, but signalling and telecommunication awaits contracting

Road 13.2 km long built and open to traffic

Cut slopes finalised and road open to traffic

Rehabilitation or construction of rail, tracks stations and bridges ongoing

Not yet started

4 out of 21 vessels removed

promoting regional cooperation in transport between the EU and the Western Balkans. Alas, Transport Community’s reports also do not contain such corridor data. “This information is available only when specifically requested, and was not used by the Commission to monitor the specific effects of WBIF funding,” reads Special Report 16/2026. So, the auditors sourced a few examples of Core TEN-T standard compliance in the Western Balkans. Rail network electrification went down from 73% in 2021 to 65% in 2024 (to the benefit of the environment, as we learnt). The minimum freight train speed of 100 km/h was possible on 60% of the network vs 72% in 2021. “In Kosovo, rail conditions at the time of the audit were worse than before the project started. Traffic has been disrupted since 2020 because some tunnels collapsed during the works.” ECA also “[…] found that the sustainability of seven sampled projects was not fully ensured due to pending administrative procedures, a lack of funds to continue with the investments, insufficient maintenance, or unused infrastructure.” GDP growth, swifter movements of (more) goods, better services, human development – that’s rich, Brussels, a bona fide ghost ship of a claim… Never heard of it “Given the increased contributions to the WBIF, we expect our findings to improve the way the Commission selects, monitors and reports on EU-funded WBIF projects,” summed up the authors of the Special Report on the Western Balkans Investment

Sustainability

Operational at the time of the audit, as planned

Framework. Taking the liberty of addressing this request on behalf of COM, I’d wager it’s a request with odds bordering on the poetic. Why? After writing Infrastructure delayed is transport denied, I had the dubious pleasure of addressing COM’s transport arm during a port-centered conference in mid-2026. When asked about the report underpinning the article, the DG MOVE representative stated they hadn’t seen it – as in ‘never heard of it’ in case somebody thought it was on COM’s Goodreads list, but they just hadn’t reached it yet. Let that sink in: the head of COM’s branch in charge of transport infrastructure admits they did not review what is arguably the most important report on the EU’s transport infrastructure in years… And now we have ECA’s Special Report 16/2026 that will also land in COM’s blind spot. In the end, who cares? Even the much more widely publicised Draghi report has steadily been accumulating dust… The mantra goes on: ports are important, transport infrastructure is important, cross-border connectivity is important, the future of European competitiveness is important, and a cosy pension of an EU Commissioner or a Director-General is certainly also important. Depending on where you sit, some of these may be more important than others. Infrastructure delayed is transport denied ended by comparing the 21st-century EU with 19 th-century Imperial Russia on the speed of railway project execution (guess who won). Let’s connect other dots this time to help us answer one of the

most fundamental questions around the modern EU: is there a pilot on board who actually knows how to steer this thing? There is a striking similarity between Europe and China. According to historical estimates, the latter produced roughly one-third of the world’s total economic output around 1820, remaining the world’s largest economy until the late 19 th century (manufacturing share of world output of 25-33% in 1500-1820). The Qing Empire saw the country’s share of global production plummet to 8-12% by 1900-1912. But all was well with the mandarins, more preoccupied with calligraphing sophisticated poems than with armed-to-theteeth-in-steel-ships-and-threaded-rifles Westerners taking advantage of a once mighty state in deep neglect. The EU’s manufacturing went from ~22-26% in 1991-95 to ~14-15% in 202123. We have got our own unhinged poetry, all those man-on-the-moon, fit-for-thisand-that moments that constantly bring Europeans towards a greener, fairer, more resilient Europe (just fix the image in your mind and let it echo all the way to kingdom come). Just as an example, the bloc’s car industry might disagree: since 2020, 22.5% of job losses in the automotive supply sector have resulted from company closures or bankruptcies, with most of the rest linked to internal restructuring (in efforts to reduce costs and address growing competitive pressures), reported the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) in mid-2025. “An industry under threat cannot deliver on Europe’s ambitions,” commented Benjamin Krieger, CLEPA’s Secretary General. One could, a bit perversely though, retort by saying: what gives? After all, the ambitions are becoming reality – the EU is greening by either exporting its factories or closing them down. Ask carmakers, chemicals, steel, cement, pulp and paper, glass, textiles. Where is Nokia, once upon a time one of the world’s most innovative companies and a mobile-phone superpower? Saab Automobile, which travelled via National Electric Vehicle Sweden into the hands of the China Evergrande Group (a property development company, of all things!) to resurrection-turned-extinction? Or if you really want to get under a Swede’s skin: where’s Volvo Car? We truly live in interesting times – in times of dissolution. A quiet one, unseen in the daily hustle, and certainly not so tragic in its dynamics as the decades-long civil war that ravaged post-imperial China. “How did you go bankrupt? Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.” 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 41

How Estonia prepares for the next phase of EST Flag’s growth

Shipping 2.0

by Andrei Barotov and Kristiina Peterson, Chief Specialists of Maritime Competitiveness, Estonian Transport Administration Launched in 2020 as part of Estonia’s broad-based Shipping Package 1.0, the Estonian Transport Administration devised the EST Flag initiative to create conditions favourable to growing the nation’s ship register. Its attractions support Estonia’s maritime growth strategy and include a businessfriendly regulatory framework and fully digital government services. Leveraging its ‘e-Estonia’ digital society initiative, the country’s cabinet is preparing to extend the digital reach of EST Flag’s ship registration services while also expanding its tonnage eligibility.

stonia’s tax structure consistently ranks among the most competitive in the OECD, holding the 1st place in the International Tax Competitiveness Index since its launch in 2014. Shipowners choose the Estonian f lag partly due to competitive tax rates on tonnage and seafarers (the EST Flag, which currently has two bareboat-chartered registers, employs a tonnage tax) and the ability to register quickly through the government portal. Significant efforts are now being made in Estonia to make the country’s f lag even more attractive to shipowners, with plans including the further streamlining of the registration process and the broadening of the vessel range eligible for registration. Balanced growth Rather than pursuing expansion at any cost, the development of the Estonian flag is focused on service quality in an increasingly complex regulatory environment. 42 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

This includes ongoing work to develop the regulatory and digital framework to simplify processes for users of the flag in support of long-term growth. The proposed changes would also make the Estonian flag available to shipowners and charterers worldwide (except for entities subject to international sanctions). Under revisions proposed as part of Estonia’s Shipping Package 2.0 reform, owners registered under the EST Flag and their charterers would no longer be required to have a place of residence, domicile, or business in Estonia, provided the vessel has an authorised representative located in the state. In another adjustment, vessels registered with the EST Flag will no longer need to make 50% of their voyages to international destinations. The measures, which could come into effect in 2028, are expected to make the registry applicable to a wider range of commercial ships – including demand driven by offshore (cable- and pipe-laying) vessels

potentially benefiting from the relaxation of the international voyage requirement. Work is also underway in Estonia to further develop the digital systems supporting EST Flag services, making them even more efficient and user-friendly, in a nation where data management, autonomous platforms, and even digital twins run through university courses, startups, and established businesses alike. The vast majority of the information regarding maritime services is already available in specialised electronic information systems, including the Ports Registry, the Seafarers Information System, and the Ship Information System. The next step is to achieve full interoperability between maritime, government, and business information systems, allowing data to move seamlessly between them. Flagging up the opportunities The progress made by the EST Flag should also be seen in the wider context

MARITIME

Photo: Canva

of Estonia’s comprehensive plan to develop its maritime industries. The Estonian Maritime Cluster, for example, has been expanding rapidly in recent months and now brings together around 70 companies. It serves as a unique collaboration platform connecting the full breadth of Estonia’s maritime value chain – from shipowners, shipyards, universities, and research institutions to fishing, technology firms, and IT companies. This integrated ecosystem not only strengthens existing industry capabilities but also provides a supportive environment for new shipowners by giving them access to expertise, partners, and innovation across the sector. At the same time, Estonia’s new €25 million government grant, covering 15-30%

of eligible green vessel retrofit costs, up to €5 million per project, is already beginning to deliver tangible results. Currently targeting vessels larger than gross tonnage of 300, the scheme incentivises the installation of hybrid or electric propulsion, renewable fuel technologies, and other efficient, low(er)-carbon solutions. The grant can be used for passenger and cargo ships, as well as port and auxiliary vessels. The first project involved two ferries of the Norwegian operator Vestlandske Trafikk,

who converted the vessels to electric propulsion at Netaman Shipyard in Tallinn. Estonia is also among the few countries that channel revenues from the EU Emissions Trading System back into the maritime sector. By reinvesting this income stream directly into fleet renewal, sustainability projects, and innovation, Estonia ensures funds generated through carbon pricing actively support the transition towards a greener and more competitive maritime future.

Estonia supports the international activities and development of shipping companies with a special package of laws, thanks to which shipowners, crewing companies, and technical management service providers can obtain more favourable tax conditions and benefits of the Estonian ship flag. Visit transpordiamet.ee/en/estonian-flag to learn more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 43

Rethinking the everyday experience of on-board life

Home at Sea by Fitzwilliam Scott

Ship supply has always been about ensuring the right products reach a vessel at the right time. But behind every order, delivery, and purchasing decision are the people who ultimately rely on those supplies, often while spending several months living and working thousands of miles from home. For seafarers, the things that make a difference to daily life can be surprisingly ordinary, from good food and familiar ingredients to clean drinking water and reliable access to essential supplies.

he details may get little attention when everything is working as it should, yet together they have a considerable influence on the on-board experience and, at a time when recruitment and retention remain major concerns for shipping, that experience is becoming increasingly difficult to overlook. Salary, leave arrangements, and career prospects will naturally remain important considerations for seafarers, but so too is the environment in which they are being asked to spend a substantial part of their lives. This is the thinking behind AVS Global Ship Supply’s Home at Sea campaign, which considers how food, provisioning, training, technology, and well-being can work together to make life on board better. “The industry rightly places enormous emphasis on the safe and efficient operation of vessels, but we also need to think about what those ships are like as places to live,” says Doğukan Şimşek, General Manager at AVS Global Ship Supply. “For seafarers, the vessel is not simply a workplace. For months at a time, it is also their home.” Logistics of taste Food is perhaps the most obvious example of how decisions made ashore can influence everyday life at sea, because meals do much more than provide nutrition. They break up the working day, give crew members an opportunity to spend time together, and, for someone who has been away from their family and country for several months, a familiar dish or ingredient can provide a welcome connection with home. 44 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

However, ship catering is rarely straightforward – especially when a single vessel carries crew from multiple countries, each with distinct tastes, dietary needs, and expectations. Cooks have to accommodate those differences while working with set stores, managing portions, maintaining nutritional balance, and keeping waste under control, which means that the quality and suitability of the provisions reaching the galley are especially critical. AVS Global Ship Supply uses what it calls a ‘Port to Plate’ approach, leveraging local supply networks where practical – rather than assuming every product needs to pass through a lengthy international supply chain. A vessel calling near Amalfi, for example, might receive locally grown lemons instead of produce that has travelled considerably further to reach the same port, an approach that can provide access to fresh ingredients and greater variety while also supporting producers in the communities surrounding ports. The ingredients themselves are, of course, only part of the equation, because ship cooks still have to turn whatever ingredients are available into meals that suit the people on board and effectively use provisions throughout the voyage. Through EKOL Maritime Training Center and its Learning Management System, AVS Global Ship Supply provides training in areas including menu planning, food safety, provisioning, and portion management, helping the catering personnel develop the practical skills needed to manage those competing demands.

Good planning can also help crews make better use of what is already aboard, reducing unnecessary purchasing and food waste without compromising the quality or variety of meals, and demonstrating how crew welfare, cost control, and environmental objectives can often support rather than compete with one another. The shopping list There is another side to provisioning that crews will rarely see, as shore-side purchasing teams can be responsible for thousands of products across multiple vessels and ports, while also dealing with schedules that can change at short notice. An ETA moves, a port call changes, or an unexpected requirement emerges, and the purchasing plan has to move with it, making access to accurate and useful information particularly valuable. This is where AVS+, AVS Global Ship Supply’s new digital customer portal, fits into the wider Home at Sea approach, bringing supply, catering, and contract information together so that onshore teams can gain a clearer picture of what is happening across their vessels. Managers can use AVS+ to establish catering policies covering areas such as dietary requirements, drink allowances, bonded stores, and festive meals – and then apply those policies to the appropriate vessels, with contract information managed centrally and searched by ship or IMO number. More importantly, procurement teams do not have to approach every new order as an isolated transaction, because when preparing a new one they can review previous purchases, supply frequencies,

MARITIME

Photos: AVS Global Ship Supply

and port histories. Knowing what a vessel normally orders, how regularly certain products are required, and what has been supplied in a particular port gives the purchasing team a much stronger baseline when deciding what is likely to be needed next. Historical purchasing and invoice data can also show which products were bought, where they were supplied and at what price, allowing organisations managing multiple vessels to identify purchasing patterns that might otherwise be difficult to spot when information is spread across separate records or systems. This can support more accurate forecasting and tighter cost control, also helping address the perennial challenge of getting quantities right, since over-ordering can result in unnecessary expenditure and spoilage while under-ordering can leave a vessel short and create a need for expensive last-minute purchases. Previous ordering information cannot remove the need for judgement, particularly when crew numbers, voyage patterns, or requirements change, but it can give procurement teams a more informed basis on which to make those decisions. A pinch of digitalisation For the crew themselves, much of this activity remains invisible, and a seafarer sitting down to dinner is unlikely to be concerned about which digital platform was used to order the ingredients or how the procurement team analysed previous purchasing patterns. What matters on board is that there is enough food, that meals are varied and suitable for the people eating them, and that essential requirements have been anticipated instead of becoming a problem halfway through a voyage. This is where the relationship between digitalisation and crew welfare becomes more intriguing. Technology in shipping is often discussed in the context of vessel performance, automation, emissions, or operational efficiency, even though

some of its most useful effects can be far less dramatic. If better purchasing data means fewer shortages, consistent catering, reduced waste, and smarter budgeting, then digitalisation already shapes crew experiences – even when the seafarers never see the technology behind it. The same principle applies to the relationship between ship and shore, as a meal served at sea may ultimately result from decisions involving a procurement team, a local supplier, a logistics provider, a port agent, and a catering team aboard. When those different parts of the chain work together, the result can appear effortless to the person sitting at the table, but if one part fails, the consequences can quickly become apparent. Home at Sea takes this broader view by looking at catering, provisioning, tech, training, and well-being as connected elements rather than separate activities, recognising that decisions made far from the vessel can ultimately shape the everyday on-board experience. A vessel can never replace home, but… Better provisioning cannot, of course, remove all the challenges associated with a career at sea, whether that is the time spent away from one’s closest, demanding work schedules, or the inevitable isolation that comes with life on board. It can, however, contribute to a better living environment and help ensure that some of the everyday pressures of being away from home are not made harder by avoidable problems with food, supplies, or support. “We cannot remove the distance from home that comes with a career at sea,” says Şimşek, “but what we can do is ask ourselves how we make that time better. Are people

eating well? Do they feel supported? Are we giving the people responsible for their welfare the right tools and training? Those questions should be part of how we think about the future of our industry.” Those questions have particular relevance for an industry concerned about where its next generation of seafarers will come from and how it will persuade experienced people to remain at sea. While no single welfare initiative or improvement in provisioning will solve that challenge, paying greater attention to the quality of on-board daily life should form part of the wider conversation about making maritime careers sustainable and attractive over the longer term. AVS Global Ship Supply has spent over 40 years in ship supply, but Home at Sea reflects how expectations of suppliers are changing as shipowners and managers look not only for reliable deliveries but also for greater visibility, better cost control, less waste, and more consistent support for the seafarers. Bringing together physical supply, catering management, training, and digital tools such as AVS+ is one way of responding to those changing expectations, while recognising that operational efficiency and crew welfare do not need to sit on opposite sides of the conversation. A vessel can never replace home, but when seafarers are spending months of their lives out in the open sea, the quality of the food they eat, the reliability of the supplies they depend upon, and the thought that goes into meeting their daily needs all matter. This is why improving life at sea can sometimes begin much further back in the supply chain than we might imagine.

Established in 1985, AVS Global Ship Supply is pioneering global, fast, and reliable solutions in ship supply, catering, management, logistics, and global procurement services. Our foundation rests on a network of 1,500+ ports in 126 countries, ensuring we deliver excellence in every service we offer. Head to avsglobalsupply.com to learn more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 45

Highlights from the Baltic Ports Conference 2026 by Andrzej Urbaś, External Consultant, BPO

This year’s edition of the Baltic Ports Organization’s (BPO) Baltic Ports Conference (BPC) was held in the Finnish Turku, on 2-4 September, bringing together maritime leaders, port authorities, and experts from the industry and beyond for high-level discussions. Under the guiding theme One Large Green Shipping Corridor, Day 1 tackled not only core industry transformations but also biodiversity, resilience, and diversity. Day 2 put the spotlight on existing and raising golden-goose opportunities – including wind energy and carbon capture & storage (CCS) – as well as on how modern tech is reshaping ports, terminals, shipyards, and much more.

he event began with a round of welcoming remarks, starting with Piia Elo, Mayor of Turku, and Minna Pirkkanen, the Port of Turku’s newly elected CEO, alongside Alan Aleksandrowicz, BPO’s Chair, Bogdan Ołdakowski, the Organization’s Secretary General, and Baltic Transport Journal’s Przemek Myszka, who crafted the BPC26 agenda. Together, they set the strategic tone for the audience’s 360-degree journey of the two conference days (September the 2nd was reserved for a welcoming aboard Suomen Joutsen, the historical full-rigged ship moored by the picturesque Aura River, a sax-themed party that offered participants a delightful preview of what Turku has in store). Day 1 was expertly moderated by Dominik Landa, an industry veteran who now operates his own consultancy, among other things. Ports in transition – pressures within, pressures without Those who wish to lead must get comfortable in the art of thinking the unthinkable. Leena Jokinen, coming from the University of Turku’s Finland Futures Research Center, emphasized that maritime futures require genuinely long-term perspectives to drive sustainable development and avoid unforeseen consequences. She argued that maritime industry players must act as catalysts rather than followers to shape upcoming trends within a decades-spanning horizon, navigating industry uncertainties while addressing current sustainable future trends such as environmental clean-up ships, land electricity challenges, transport synergies, energy flexibility, cybersecurity, and defense. The Port of Turku delivered a strong follow-up, offering a guide to applying theory and taking concrete steps toward a sustainable future. Minna Pirkkanen outlined the 46 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

seaport’s role as a flexible maritime hub with a strong turnaround time and hinted at the company’s environmental program. One of its most ambitious points is carbon-neutral port operations by 2029. But the star of the presentation was the new ferry terminal. Nicknamed Fregatti, designed with passenger comfort and adaptability in mind, it’ll serve all visiting ferries and feature an automated loading area. Additionally, the project incorporates a battery energy storage system and circular economy practices such as reusing waste concrete. The port industry faces a plethora of challenges, from strategic to routine. Oscar Egerström LLM, TT Club, highlighted some more hands-on risks ports face in relation to claims, such as fraud and theft, ship-related incidents, infrastructure damage, as well as all the practical risks seafarers and dockworkers are facing. He also directed the attention to the impacts of climate change alongside other escalating environmental challenges, like 2024 being the hottest year on record, a 30% increase in losses from the prior period, and global natural catastrophe losses exceeding $100 billion for the fifth consecutive year. But it is not all doom and gloom. Climate resilience can be strengthened, e.g., by avoiding focusing on a single risk, balancing short- versus long-term measures, or accommodating uncertainty in design. The internal and external pressures were taken into consideration once again during the following discussion panel. Given that ports face unique disruptions, slow adaptation is no longer viable; tailored approaches are essential. Ensuring resilience and competitiveness requires protecting dual-use infrastructure, frequent policy adjustments for challenges such as drones, and smart dialogue between policymakers and industry to keep sustainability actions workable.

How to make a shipping corridor green – exactly Linda Styhre, IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, defined green corridors as zero-emission routes reliant on net-zero life-cycle fuels, serving as catalysts for largescale logistics decarbonization, both off- and on-shore. She emphasized that their success depends on three core elements: the route, vessel, and bunker, while noting that high costs, low customer demand, and inadequate policy instruments remain some of the primary barriers to implementation. Anne Britt Høydal, DNV, went a step further, suggesting that in the end, green corridors lack a single fixed definition and are instead evolving (separate) ecosystems rather than simple port-to-port routes. She noted that achieving success requires aligning diverse stakeholders, including shippers, shipowners, ports & terminals, and financial institutions, all driven by different incentives. Here, seaports can act as futureenergy-hub enablers, unlocking funding and securing long-term competitiveness, among other vital functions. The discussion on the customers’ willingness to pay for green solutions concluded with a nuanced ‘yes/no’ since short-term positive attitudes have somewhat cooled, and maritime customer demand alone probably will not drive industry-wide greening. Panelists emphasized that greening transport requires a collaborative effort. Success does not rely on overcoming a single limiting factor (e.g., a technological drawback), but on creating a commercially viable and opportunity-rich environment. Jumping the cargo fence – biodiversity, resilience, diversity While operational knowledge has always been sufficient in the world of

transport and logistics, modern leaders must master the art of future multi-faceted investing, risk assessment, finance, geopolitics, and strategy, treating decarbonization as a leadership test under uncertainty where waiting for ironclad clarity risks arriving too late. Irene Rosberg, Copenhagen Business School, emphasized that maritime leaders have to develop proactive skills to anticipate constant disruption. Furthermore, a sign of a modern leader is one that evaluates the employees based on both merit and skills. Kirsti Tarnanen-Sariola, the Finnish Ports Association, outlined her organization’s Port Biodiversity Roadmap. This initiative aims to increase awareness of seaports’ impact on nature, both positive and negative, toward establishing measures for the protection of local biodiversity. In Finland, this is a teamwork, as several seaports are brainstorming their own as well as the overall roadmap. The closing panel made it clear – bio- and gender diversity isn’t a footnote anymore; it’s a rising asset driving transport and logistics forward. Panellists noted that implementing solutions requires strategic timing, choosing whether to wait for industry-wide standardization or act as a frontrunner. Embracing broader aspects of diversity, such as gender, age, and culture, fosters new perspectives, out-of-the-box problem-solving, and other organizational advantages. Wrapping up the first day, a partner spotlight featured a round of presentations by conference sponsors, beginning with Pål Espen Nordhaug, Hallgruppen, discussing flexible warehousing and bulk storage solutions for modern port logistics. The session continued with RiikaMaria Iljin from Forlog presenting industrial logistics and packaging solutions, and concluded with her brother, Lauri Iljin, Turku Stevedoring, highlighting the company’s role as the main crane and breakbulk operator in the Port of Turku. September 3rd wrapped up in style with an evening dinner at the wonderfully atmospheric Ruissalo Boatyard (Åbo Båtvarf) – once the biggest in the Nordics (and still bursting with character!). Guests cruised in by river ferry, soaking up a late-afternoon sunshine ride down the Aura River that felt like a mini holiday wedged into the conference schedule. With great food, drinks, history, and music, it was the cherry on top – the perfect, delicious finale to a jampacked-with-insights day.

Wind, carbon, and digitalization As the BPC26 entered its second day, moderated by Przemek Opłocki from the Baltic Transport Journal and its newest spin-off Port Gear, industry leaders shifted their focus from immediate green transitions to the operational and structural shifts reshaping the maritime sector. Joke Bamps, European Commission, missed her Day 1 flight but was fortunately able to join us. She brought forward the EU Ports Strategy. Built on pillars of competitiveness, energy transition, security, social skills, territorial cohesion, and investment, the Strategy intentionally avoids a one-size-fits-all model by serving as a f lexible toolbox that accommodates diverse port profiles. Key thematic priorities include strengthening critical infrastructure against disruptions, advancing military mobility through dual-use infrastructure investments, and carefully evaluating foreign investments. “We did it simply because the customer asked for it.” This was naturally just a ‘hook,’ as Jesper Bank, Port Esbjerg, dove into his seaport’s path to developing a logistics solution for CCS – after becoming the prime spot for anybody seriously thinking about erecting an offshore wind farm in northern Europe. Operating with a highly diversified and robust business model, the port avoids pursuing funds for a narrow purpose, focusing instead on versatile, multi-user infrastructure – additionally attributed on a flexible, current demand basis. To this, Baris Dolek, Northern Lights, added how to establish a working CCS value chain, including liquid CO₂ carriers and permanent undersea storage, for large-scale customers. The day concluded with a session dedicated to explaining why pen-and-paper operations simply do not cut it anymore these days, with speakers and panellists having the chance to share the whys and hows of implementing digital processes. It started with the presentation of another BPC26 partner, Weasel Software, carried out by Hanna Roihuvaara and Mike Karjagin. The duo set the stage for the discussion, leveraging their extensive handson experience in modernizing complex operational environments, including, naturally, ports (with a particular focus on streamlining ferry operations). The topic was then further explored during a panel as other experts joined Hanna and Mike to share some practical examples of both developments and challenges.

New BPO Board Deputy Chair – elected In all the chaos that is the Baltic Ports Conference (deftly controlled by Nikoletta Karpińska who successfully organized her inaugural event, kudos!), all the panels, presentations, evening festivities, and networking, it is easy to lose sight of some key events in the life of the BPO. As such, it’s our pleasure to announce that Ulrika Prytz Rugfelt, Chief Communications & Sustainability Officer, Copenhagen Malmö Port, has been elected as the new BPO Board Deputy Chairperson. “I am very pleased and honored by the confidence placed in me as Deputy Chair, and I look forward to continuing the Board’s work within BPO together with my fellow Board members. An important part of this work is, of course, to listen carefully to the wishes and priorities of our members and incorporate these into the strategy that we will finalize this fall,” Ulrika commented. All good things come to an end… BPC26 is over, but what a ride it was! The agenda was beautifully packed, the audience more than eager to pitch its remarks, and the hosts more than we could have ever asked for. We would like to thank the Port of Turku and its team for the fantastic support at every step of the journey leading to this year’s event. Kiitos! “It has been truly inspiring to see the broader Baltic and European maritime community come together once again with such remarkable energy and engagement. As we look ahead, cooperation and collaboration remain the cornerstones of a strong, resilient Baltic maritime community, and I want to extend my deepest thanks to the City and Port of Turku for being such a wonderful host for this year’s conference,” Alan Aleksandrowicz praised the event. We would also like to thank all the sponsors, honorary partners, and media friends for their support. It was a pleasure to work with you – and we hope to do it again! … but a new journey’s on the horizon! The 2027 edition of BPC will take us to Riga! In his invitation, Ansis Zeltiņš, the Port of Riga’s CEO, mentioned the challenging times lying ahead of the port industry in the Baltic and beyond. He also pointed out that seaports have stopped being the slow-movers they used to be. The sector has proven to be every bit as adaptable as others – if not more! Join us in the capital of Latvia on 8-9 September!

BALTIC PORTS ORGANIZATION • Secretariat Office – Actia Forum Ltd. al. Zwycięstwa 96/98, 81-451 Gdynia, POLAND, ph.: +48 502 559 631, e-mail: bpo.office@actiaforum.pl, bpo.sg@actiaforum.pl, www.bpoports.com 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 47

How to build an evolving digital portal for employee development

Beyond ticking off a course by Alexa Ivy

Not only do the roles people hold today shape the future of an organization, but the capabilities they develop for tomorrow also play a crucial role. As responsibilities evolve and new skills become essential, understanding employees’ strengths, growth areas, and career aspirations gains increasing importance for long-term workforce planning. For Marport, this perspective raised a practical question: how could individual development goals be followed systematically while also providing meaningful input for career and succession planning?

he Horizon Training and Development Portal was created in response to this need. Its name reflects the philosophy behind the platform: the horizon represents both where employees stand today and the direction they aspire to pursue. Horizon bridges these two points by connecting team members’ current roles, capabilities, and advancement needs with their future goals. This approach is particularly relevant in an organization with over 1,000 staff working across different operational, technical, and managerial roles. With a 530,000-square-metre site, five berths, and an annual handling capacity of 2.3 million TEUs, Marport, a container terminal in Türkiye, requires not only operational continuity but also a structured approach to developing the people who will take on future responsibilities.

than administrative. Valuable information about employees’ strengths, growth needs, and career ambitions existed, but transforming this information into a consistent organizational asset required structural change. In 2024, IDFs were integrated into the existing portal, and their completion and approval processes were digitalized and linked directly with learning. Training budget approvals were also moved into the system. Development was no longer treated as a collection of separate forms, course requests, and conversations, but as an interconnected process. Today, Horizon has 360 users and is primarily used by white-collar staff. Personalized accounts are also created for workers in shift-based operational departments where shared user accounts would otherwise hinder individual tracking.

When spreadsheets aren’t enough Marport had already been managing training processes digitally, but personal skill-enhancement planning relied largely on Excel files and email correspondence. As the procedure expanded, its limitations became apparent. Different versions of individual development forms (IDFs) circulated concurrently, revisions were hard to differentiate from final documents, and development data could not easily be standardized or connected with training, promotion, and succession decisions. The issue, therefore, was more

From where to where At the heart of Horizon is a simple principle: people should take ownership of their own development. The IDF starts not with a training catalogue, but with reflection. Employees first consider “Where am I now?” by assessing their current role, responsibilities, strengths, and areas for advancement. They then move to “Where do I want to be?” by defining short- and long-term career aspirations. And finally comes the practical question: “How do I get there?” This last step translates ambition into action. Team members define development

48 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

objectives, specific actions, learning methods, and target completion dates. At least two development objectives are required, with at least one tied to Marport’s eight leadership model competencies. Development methods are based on the 70-20-10 approach: 70% through experience and learning by doing, 20% through coaching or mentoring, and 10% through formal training. This helps move the conversation beyond the assumption that attending a course automatically translates into skill enhancement. A new responsibility, a mentoring relationship, or experience gained through a project can be equally important parts of the journey. Once employees define their goals, the framework becomes collaborative. The worker and manager meet one-on-one to discuss the form. Managers can suggest revisions, add development needs, or recommend different learning actions. Once both sides agree, the form proceeds to the human resources department for final review. Horizon creates a common framework in which employees can share their advancement expectations and needs with their managers, while managers can follow their progress and provide regular feedback throughout the process. A cycle – with continuous added value Team members can access Horizon directly from their computers or through Limon (Liman Online), Marport’s internal employee app, which itself received one

TECHNOLOGY

Photo: Marport

Silver and one Bronze Stevie Award in 2021. Horizon is also integrated with SAP, allowing current staff information to flow automatically into the platform. Individual growth and training processes are connected within the same structure. Development needs identified through IDFs can become inputs for the annual training plan and budget, while training requests, approvals, and records can be followed through the system. The effectiveness of this approach is also evaluated beyond mere attendance. Immediately after a program, employees evaluate the training and the trainer. One month later, they assess how the acquired knowledge and skills have translated into their work; two months after the training, their managers provide their own assessment based on observed changes. Development is therefore not considered complete when a course ends. The same principle applies throughout the year. During the interim evaluation period, workers update the status of their development goals, while managers can review progress and identify areas where additional support may be needed. What was once primarily an annual documentation exercise becomes a continuous cycle of planning, action, feedback, and review. For HR, Horizon has added strategic value. When development information is structured and traceable, it can help answer

broader organizational questions. Which capabilities are emerging within a department? Where are the gaps? Which employees may be ready for greater responsibility? Which critical positions require stronger succession pipelines? IDFs, training histories, and interim evaluations provide a common data foundation for career management, talent pools, and succession planning. This makes development relevant not only to the individual employee but also to organizational continuity. The impact is also visible in the way these processes are managed. Manual documentation has been reduced, training requests and approvals have become more structured, progress is easier to follow, and feedback between workers and managers has a defined place in the annual cycle. This year, Horizon received two Bronze Stevie Awards: Achievement in HR Technology at the Stevie Awards for Great Employers and Achievement in Digital Transformation Excellence at the International Business Awards. For Marport, the recognition reflects the approach behind Horizon and the way

personal growth, training, feedback, and workforce planning have been brought together within a single structure. Developing the system itself Horizon began with a practical need to make development processes more manageable. Over time, it has created a structure that connects employees’ individual capability-building goals with training, manager feedback, and HR procedures. Team members can define where they are, where they want to go, and the steps they need to take. Meanwhile, managers and HR can follow the same development journey and use this information in longer-term planning. The platform continues to evolve. Infrastructure work is underway to manage training budgets through Horizon and to track employees’ professional qualification certificates within the system. The next stage will build on the data and interactions already created, with a focus on strengthening talent pools, identifying succession needs for critical positions, and further integrating employee development into workforce planning.

Marport, whose history dates back to 1996 when Limar began its operations in the Türk Ambarlı Port Complex, is nowadays one of Türkiye’s leading container terminals by being able to take care of 2.3 million TEUs per year. The company has developed Horizon, an internationally acclaimed training and development portal for its employees. Go to marport.com.tr to learn more. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 49

Shipping is not running out of routes – but out of easy choices

Building resilience (before a crisis strikes)

by Irene Rosberg, Programme Director, Executive MBA in Shipping and Logistics (The Blue MBA), Copenhagen Business School Repeated disruptions at the world’s maritime chokepoints are exposing the fragility of supply chains built around a handful of efficient and predictable corridors. The answer is not to replace ocean shipping, but to create viable alternatives.

or decades, international trade rested on a fragile assumption: the shortest, most established shipping route would remain open, secure, and commercially viable. That assumption is now being tested across strategic maritime corridors. Security threats have disrupted traffic through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal; drought has constrained the Panama Canal; war has transformed the Black Sea; and ongoing tensions around Hormuz continue to expose vulnerable energy supply chains. The shipping industry has demonstrated considerable resilience by rerouting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope. Companies have increased inventories, moved critical components by air and through combined sea-rail transport while diversifying suppliers and moving some procurement closer to their principal markets. These measures have kept trade moving, but at a significant cost. Longer voyages consume more fuel, absorb capacity, and increase emissions. Larger inventories tie up capital, while airfreight remains prohibitively expensive for most commodities. In short, emergency workarounds are not a sustainable transport strategy. Overlapping security and supply-chain risks Modern trade became efficient partly because enormous cargo volumes were 50 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

channelled through a few maritime trade lanes. This reduced distances and costs when the system operated normally, but created a dependence that is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain. Recent events have reinforced how disruption at one maritime chokepoint can spread quickly through the global economy. The UN Trade and Development reported in June 2026 that over 100 days of disruption in the Strait of Hormuz had increased freight, energy, and fertiliser costs, with continuing consequences for inflation and food security, particularly in vulnerable economies. Meanwhile, the International Maritime Organization has recorded 61 confirmed incidents affecting international shipping in the Red Sea since January 2024, showing that overlapping security and supply-chain risks can no longer be dismissed as isolated or temporary anomalies. The oceans remain open, and ships can usually avoid dangerous areas, but commercially attractive alternatives are narrowing – a longer route is not necessarily economically sustainable. Shipping companies can calculate the extra fuel and charter costs of a diversion, but the wider consequences are less predictable. Schedules become unreliable, equipment is displaced, ports and terminals receive cargo outside the planned windows, and manufacturers must hold more stock, spreading the cost across the supply chain.

The question is therefore no longer simply how shipping should manage the next crisis, but whether industry and governments will invest in structural redundancy before another major corridor becomes constrained. Modest but encouraging The Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, known as the Middle Corridor, warrants greater attention. Linking China and Central Asia with Europe through Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, with onward connections across the Black Sea or Türkiye, it avoids Russia and offers an alternative to the Northern Corridor and maritime diversions around Africa. Its strategic value does not lie in replacing deep-sea shipping, which remains indispensable. No rail-based corridor can reproduce its scale or cost efficiency for the vast volumes of energy, raw materials, and consumer goods moving between Asia and Europe. The Middle Corridor should instead complement maritime routes for cargo where value, urgency, or supply-chain importance justify a multimodal option. When it works efficiently, it can give shippers greater choice, reduce dependence on a single corridor, and improve landlocked economies’ access to international markets. The Trans-Caspian International Transport Route Association reported that

LOGISTICS

Photo: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik/Baku Research Institute

container traffic reached 76,900 TEUs in 2025, up 36% from the previous year, while container train delivery times reportedly fell to 12-15 days outside winter. Some 4.12 million tonnes moved through the Middle Corridor in 2025 (typically bulk goods – including fertilisers, grains, and construction materials – as well as metals and timber), representing significant growth from 2022’s 1.5 million tonnes and 2023’s 2.75 million tonnes. These figures are encouraging, though modest relative to established maritime services. The World Bank has concluded that, with appropriate policies and investment, Middle Corridor freight volumes could triple by 2030 versus 2021 levels, while transit times could be halved. It also argues that the route’s future extends beyond China-Europe traffic because regional trade may ultimately generate the majority of its economic value. Functioning seamlessly The Middle Corridor still faces serious physical and operational constraints because cargo must cross several borders and transfer between trains, ports, and vessels, creating points where delays and costs accumulate. Different railway gauges, shortages of rolling stock, limited port capacity, difficult Caspian conditions, and inconsistent inland connections all affect reliability. Investment in Aktau, Kuryk, Baku, Poti, and Batumi, alongside stronger connections to Türkiye and Europe, will be essential. The wider

Black Sea network, including Constanța, could also benefit as cargo volumes grow and regional seaports play a larger role in Eurasian trade. Following Azerbaijan’s recent pivot towards the US, the Middle Corridor’s capacity may extend with its very own southern (rail) leg, the Zangezur Corridor, which goes around Armenia to connect with Türkiye. But beyond infrastructure, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has identified additional priorities including digital documentation, improved border crossings, market liberalisation, and more predictable tariffsetting. Specifically, customs procedures must be harmonised, transport documents digitised, and data shared among railways, ports, border agencies, shipping companies, and cargo owners. A corridor cannot function seamlessly if each border introduces new paperwork, incompatible systems, or tariffs subject to discretionary changes. Reliability must become the principal performance metric. A route that delivers quickly on occasion but

frequently encounters unexplained delays will struggle to secure long-term commitments. Shippers need transparent pricing, dependable schedules, and end-to-end tracking. Resilience comes from creating a portfolio of viable transport choices before a crisis begins, not searching for a substitute after disruption strikes. Providing redundancy Shipping will continue to carry most global trade, and established maritime routes will remain essential. Yet governments, infrastructure providers, cargo interests, and transport operators must stop treating alternative corridors as contingency options activated only during main-route disruptions. The industry is not running out of routes but is losing confidence that the lowest-cost option will remain perpetually available. The Middle Corridor cannot solve every geopolitical or supplychain problem, but it can provide crucial redundancy that a less predictable trading system increasingly requires.

An alumna of Rice Business, the Jönköping International Business School, California State University-Sacramento, and the Copenhagen Business School, Irene Rosberg has been with the last for over 25 years, currently as the Director of the Executive MBA in Shipping and Logistics, aka the Blue MBA, which won the prestigious Danish Maritime Prize for 2011. “Always in good humour, kind, and co-operative,” Irene takes MBA students “through the challenging two-year programme with her strong passion and dedication,” read Irene’s pupils recommendations. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 51

XXVII Euromed Convention from Land to Sea, 24-27 September

We’re not waiting for the future by Przemysław Myszka and Przemysław Opłocki The now-biennial event returned to the island of Sardinia for the get-together of the Grimaldi Group, its agents, partners, clients, friends, and the media. The conference part of it traditionally tackled the Naples-based shipping line’s investments, after which three panel debates detailed the many factors shaping seaborne transportation – both globally and locally – with a particular focus on vehicle logistics.

Photos: Grimaldi Group

“

Our world has become more unpredictable,” stressed Emanuele Grimaldi, Managing Director of the Grimaldi Group, in his opening speech. He detailed, “Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. The crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. The continuing war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East. Growing geopolitical tensions and the persistent threat of further barriers to trade. Together, these events have tested our industry and reminded us how much the world depends on keeping maritime routes open.” But, at the same time, Grimaldi noted, “Shipping has continued to connect economies, communities, and people. Our industry has adapted, our people have responded with courage, and our Group has continued to invest. That is why, despite the difficulties our industry has faced, my message today is one of confidence. The challenges are real, but so is our ability to overcome them together.” The story of Grande Torino, one of Grimaldi’s car carriers, was used to illustrate the current geopolitical climate shipping operates in. The vessel was 52 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

stranded for over 100 days in the Persian Gulf, not only generating a considerable loss for the company but foremost exposing her crew to stress and the more than real danger of coming under fire – as so many ships trying to cross the Strait of Hormuz unfortunately did. Thankfully, Grande Torino eventually left the perilous region to deliver cargo and people safely ashore. He then went on to share the Group’s latest developments and listed some of the key investments on the horizon. Being in Sardinia, Grimaldi didn’t fail to notice that his company was awarded in early autumn a new fiveyear public contract to provide sea service to the isle. “Over the years, we have become an important part of the mobility of the island, supporting the journeys of residents, the daily work of local businesses, and the holidays of many visitors. We know that for an island, reliable maritime connections are essential to economic opportunity and to everyday life,” he underscored. Afterwards, Grimaldi went through the Group’s tonnage renewal programme. “We’re

not waiting for the future,” he highlighted, “we’re already designing what comes next.” First, all 14 of the GG5G class (Grimaldi Green 5th Generation) hybrid ro-ros were delivered when Eco Napoli began sailing in March 2025. Second, 14 out of 17 ammonia-ready pure car and truck carriers (PCTCs) are already operating, with the last ones scheduled to enter service in 2027. By 2030, nine methanolready ferries are to be operating across the Mediterranean and the Baltic (four for Grimaldi Lines, a pair for Minoan Lines, and three for Finnlines in our corner of the world). The Knud E. Hansen-designed GG5Gs, depending on the variant, offer 7,800 (Grimaldi) or 5,800 (Finnlines) lane metres of capacity. They are equipped with, among others, 5MWh lithium-ion battery systems for zero in-port emissions, air lubrication, and 350 m² of photovoltaic panels (peak power of 60kWp). The PCTCs also feature 5MWh packs, but their solar arrays span 2,500 m². Each offers 9,800 CEUs of capacity. The new ferries, Hansa Superstars as they’ll be called in the Baltic, will

EVENTS

differ depending on their area of operations. The Med ones will have a higher passenger capacity than those Baltic, 2,500 vs 1,100, but less room for wheeled freight, 3,300 lane metres vs 5,100. That said, every ferry is to see her CO₂ emissions slashed by half (“otherwise we’ll lose our jobs,” noted Dario Bocchetti, Head of Energy Saving, R&D, and Ship Design at the Grimaldi Group, later during a panel). Beyond these, the Group is also working on two other, yet-to-berevealed-in-detail, ship concepts – of a con-ro and a multipurpose vessel. Regulations were another topic raised by Grimaldi. Specifically, he spoke of the Net-Zero Framework (NZF) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), two topics I also raised later during the press conference. “In October 2025, adoption of the IMO NetZero Framework was postponed for one year. I remain confident it can be adopted when the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee meets in extraordinary session on 4 December [2026].” On my part, I inquired

whether he actually believes that NZF can be adopted in an effective way (emphasis on ‘effective’). Grimaldi answered that the shipping business, through the International Chamber of Shipping he lately chaired, did everything to put forward a workable proposal that each and every shipping segment, cargo and passenger alike, agreed to (a universal GHG fee, a feebate-style reward system, and a global IMO-managed fund to accelerate fuel transition and support developing countries). IMO Members then decided not to proceed – either because some states are generally on the opposite page from the green agenda or, conversely, are too green and will never put their signatures under a proposal that is nothing but idealistically pristine. Grimaldi added that as an entrepreneur, he was – and still is – more concerned with having in place a practical mechanism than with politics or activism. Grimaldi was even more vocal about the EU ETS, questioning the very legitimacy of the bloc’s right to tax parts of a sea journey that

fall outside its geographical mandate – say, of an Asia-to-Europe service, most of which takes place outside European waters. He didn’t shy away from calling EU ETS madness, pointing to two things – the EU’s blind stubbornness on taxing the greenest mode of transport as well as to the fact that EU ETS shipping revenues aren’t reinvested into the sector. “The ETS is already adding an estimated €8 billion a year to the cost of maritime transport in Europe, a figure expected to approach €10 billion from 2027,” Grimaldi said. He further stressed, “If their costs make maritime services less competitive than the road alternative, cargo may remain on the road instead of travelling by sea. That would be a reverse modal shift – and a contradiction. We cannot encourage cargo to move from road to sea, invest billions in cleaner ships, and then create conditions that push those journeys back onto Europe’s roads.” In the Baltic, Estonia asserts that the country is putting 100% of the EU ETS shipping stream back into the sector. Asked whether other EU Member States are doing the same,

5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 53

EVENTS

particularly the ones the Group operates in (read: it serves their economies), Grimaldi just shrugged helplessly. The subsequent three panels went through a plethora of themes. As is his custom, Ugo Salerno, Executive Chairman, RINA, talked about the benefits of employing modular nuclear engines for shipping, as well as energy efficiency (“the best fuel is the one you don’t burn”). This time, however, he also brought forth remote inspections, tying the topic to regulations. As things stand today, these are prescriptive, meaning that rules allow only this-and-that to be checked remotely. Salerno retorted that remote inspections and regulations alike should be goal-oriented. For the former, it means that they’re preferable to manual supervision if they increase safety. For the latter, they ensure that, e.g., shipping’s energy transition isn’t narrowed to certain (prescribed) technologies. If the industry is to green itself, the principle of technological openness must be upheld, Salerno underscored. In general, energy efficiency dominated the discussion. Per Håvard Siljan Hjukse, EVP Propulsion & Handling, Kongsberg Maritime, shared that it isn’t as straightforward as it sounds. Different solutions offer different outcomes, which, in addition, do not simply add another fuel reduction atop others. Energyefficiency measures are also connected to how other ship systems function, let alone the way a vessel operates in changing conditions. The human aspect was also raised, though from somewhat contradictory angles. Maximo Q. Mejia, Jr., President, World Maritime University, pointed to the challenge of training people for a transition that is only now taking place in shipping (although the sector continues to struggle with attracting and retaining talent). On the other hand, noted Hjukse, autonomous shipping is an energy-efficiency measure in itself – a vessel without a crew has no need for structures like on-board accommodation, or providing services such as food delivery and 54 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

storage, etc. Eco-designing newbuilds is largely self-explanatory, noticed Ricardo Batista, Head, Climate Action and Clean Air, IMO, but older tonnage also needs compliance options – or at least clarity on the cost of non-compliance with future global GHG-cutting rules. The second panel of the XXVII Euromed Convention had a very regional focus, with representatives of Italian seaports (from the North Tyrrhenian, Ligurian, and Sardinian seas), their Greek colleague (Igoumenitsa), of Spanish shipping, a Maltese minister (for sustainable mobility), and one of Grimaldi’s sons, Eugenio, in charge of the Group’s Short Sea North/South Lines chapter. They mainly went through whether their respective Mediterranean economies/regions had suffered from the multiple crises – and apparently not so much. Particularly Italian container and liquid bulk trades kept going strong. Ana Núñez Velasco, Director General, Spanish Merchant Navy, commented by pointing to the EU ETS driving business out of Algeciras to non-EU seaports like Tanger Med. In the light of this, Chris Bonett from Malta wondered aloud whether EU’s decarbonisation policy isn’t playing into the hands of other regions’ competitiveness – to the extent that European companies are more willing to invest in North African port capacity over strengthening the position of their home economies. The closing discussion went under the ‘think like a plumber’ motto, as recounted anecdotally by Alessandro Furnò, Global Head of After Sales, Purchasing & Supply Chain, Leapmotor International. According to him, the transport and logistics industry now faces a period of supply chain desynchronisation, characterised by goods repeatedly stuck at chokepoints. Modern logistics is no longer only about killing the idle time and getting things running anew – but also thinking how one part of the supply chain can make operations easier for others in line. Frank Schnelle, Executive Director, ECG – The Association of European

Vehicle Logistics, and Luigi Pacella Grimaldi, Automotive Intercontinental Director at the Grimaldi Group, put the spotlight on the car industry as an example of what it means when an entire sector changes virtually overnight. Today, it’s Europe that sees more cars imported than exported, a trend by and large fuelled by the electric vehicle manufacturing boom in China. For seaborne car carrying, it’s a harvest festival – hundreds of thousands of e-cars in need of transportation from Asia. On the land side, this creates its own set of challenges, Schnelle highlighted, including car imports requiring twice the storage space as exports for the same volume. Another, he furthered, is trying to ship cars in containers – a cargo flow not yet effectively integrated with existing transport networks of finished vehicle logistics, not to mention that cars get more easily damaged when containerised vs when shipped aboard a specialised PCTC. Finally, Le Anh Thien Thu, Global Logistics Director, VinFast, was also on the closing panel, showcasing Vietnam’s ambitions of becoming a car manufacturing hot spot. Handout of the Grimaldi Excellence Awards 2026 topped the conference. These were presented to “partners, shipping, and logistics industry players, as well as bodies that have distinguished themselves through strong partnerships with the Grimaldi Group, built on shared values and a common vision for growth and sustainability.” Apart from that, the ceremony highlighted the changing landscape of production and logistics, with many of the awards going to Chinese companies, including what became the Group’s biggest overseas office, Grimaldi China in Shanghai. “The ability to work together as a system is now a strategic asset, also in light of the epochal changes we are experiencing. With the Grimaldi Excellence Awards, we celebrate this valuable network of expertise and professionalism, united by a shared vision for the future of transport,” underlined Emanuele Grimaldi.

ECG Conference 2026, 15-16 October, Copenhagen

The speed of change by Przemysław Myszka This year’s flagship autumn event of ECG – The Association of European Vehicle Logistics drew around 550 participants to Denmark’s capital for two days devoted to the theme Winds of Change. Understanding tomorrow, navigating towards the future. Apart from the usual presentations on the sales-and-production state of the market, one speech stood out in particular: Lars Sudmann’s on leadership in times of uncertainty.

n TED-talk style, he walked the audience through five principles for navigating disruption. First, exploration – the need to ‘stir’ entrenched thinking by asking not only ‘why is this being done?’ but also ‘what else could be done?’ To help with that, Sudmann proposed one should imagine receiving a letter from the International Olympic Committee. In it, one would find an invitation to the next Olympics – but without stating for which competition. Now, Sudmann asked: how one should prepare for something unknown. A HILP session might come in handy – sitting down and scrutinising how one would act in the face of a high-impact, low-probability event. To demonstrate the effectiveness of such training, he brought up a story of a company that actually analysed the case of a global pandemic before COVID-19. Next was the owl eyes principle – having cascading clarity, from vision to goals, focus areas, initiatives, and concrete actions. It was followed by spaghetti – referring to the method of checking whether the pasta is ready by throwing the strands against a wall and seeing if they stick. Similarly, instead of theorising about the optimal course, an organisation would do better to just test things in action. Last, the self-leadership principle – asking whether one’s own code is evolving in the wake of challenges. This rule is meant to steer the person to ask who expressed exceptional leadership when it was truly needed – and whether that person might not be the inquirer themselves. While Sudmann’s presentation had nothing whatsoever to do with automotive logistics 56 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026

Photos: ECG – The Association of European Vehicle Logistics

– or transport in general, for that matter – it was genuinely refreshing in its out-of-the-box energy. It also aligned with the introduction made by ECG’s Executive General, Frank Schnelle, who laid out the conference’s central question: how to react to a volatile market? The Association’s newly elected president, Mark Hindley, spotlighted in the following welcome address the forces of transformation, including geopolitics, new technologies, sustainability issues, and profound importexport rebalancing. “I have been in the car industry for 30 years, but the speed of change has never been greater,” he stressed. Though this year’s event featured no presentations from Chinese speakers, unlike 2025’s, China was on the lips of almost all speakers. In 2026, the country’s domestic market sales are forecast to come in 19% below the level of new-vehicle purchases recorded in 2025. However, that doesn’t mean the market is in crisis; rather, an explosive boom has left it saturated, first and foremost with electric cars made by Chinese companies. One development couldn’t underscore that fact more than Volkswagen’s shrinking fortunes in that market – the Group used to earn billions of euros on it, a torrent that has dwindled to a trickle (some €4.6b in 2018, with just €0.4b predicted by the end of this year). China’s car manufacturers, after heavily investing in production capacity of virtually all segments, from entry-level to luxury vehicles, now have to move those volumes into global markets. Their brands are already pouring into Brazil (currently China’s top export market), followed by Russia

and the UK. Anybody not living under a rock can testify that more and more Chinese cars are appearing on European streets, too. But there’s more in China’s toolbox. The EU is trying to curb Chinese imports (through tariffs or quotas), and that’s why the Chinese want to have their own production plants in Europe, a move already under way. What is more, they’re also eyeing investments in nearby countries, particularly Morocco and Türkiye. None of this bodes well for European carmakers, with domestic production in the EU-15 falling by 43% in the decade leading up to 2025. This rebalancing of trade comes with its own set of challenges. Ports and terminals are increasingly facing congestion – as handling import vehicles requires twice the yard space that exports do, even at identical volumes. This is compounded by the arrival of ever-larger car carriers. That said, overseas transportation capacity remains far from sufficient (China alone exported one million vehicles by end-summer 2026); consequently, a growing number of cars is being transported in containers, a sub-optimal solution. Later, at the press conference, I asked about the specific challenges of this containerised trade. Hindley, as well as ECG’s VP, Marcos Duato Mollera, answered that it’s easier to damage a car when it’s in a container – both in transit and when stripping (here chiefly because container terminal workers are not used to handling this kind of freight). Also, containers are not part of the established finished vehicle logistics network, meaning that final delivery to a car dealer is more cumbersome.

EVENTS

The state of the market was further analysed in other presentations, including by Thomas Gerlach, Partner at PwC, Stefan Bratzel, Executive Director and Founder of the Center of Automotive Management, and Christopher Ludwig, Chief Content Officer of Automotive Logistics (who also moderated a panel comprising carmaker representatives). Gerlach focused on the sales and production figures. Both light and medium- & heavy-duty markets are growing, with China as the main driver (the EU and the US remaining flat over the next couple of years, with the former’s market still below pre-pandemic levels). Electric and hybrid vehicles are steadily advancing – except in the US (Tesla being the exception, of course). In the EU, this new generation of vehicles is predicted to reach a market share of nearly 90% in 2035 – and a similar development is expected to take place in China (whereas the US reaches just 30% by then). Conversely, Magnus Sahlholm, Head of Group Strategy at Volvo Trucks, painted a different picture when it comes to electrifying the trucking sector. While battery vehicles account for 28% of trucks in China, the figure is barely 2% in Europe and effectively null in the US. The strategic rationale differs markedly between these markets. In Europe and the US, it’s a commercial affair – switching a diesel engine for an electric motor must make business sense. In China, it’s about energy independence – getting rid of oil imports in favour of locally generated power. Clean air in their cities, Sahlholm added, is a factor that the Chinese also pay attention to. For Europe to compete in this race, its manufacturers need to have the best product, make sure that at least the operating expenses of an e-truck are lower than a diesel’s, and add value through digitalisation (predictive maintenance, greater visibility, or better customer service, to name a few). Bratzel highlighted that changing the corporate culture is the most important task for European carmakers – and at the same time the hardest. Chinese producers have fully embraced

not only the electric-vehicle concept but also that of the software-defined car. Europeans are trying to catch up now, especially manufacturers from Germany. Bratzel sees future cars akin to smartphones – a multipurpose platform through which different industries connect. Specifically, an electric car can become part of the grid, e.g., acting as battery storage for a prosumer household. Yet, divining which innovation will strike gold is always a bit of tea-leaf reading. Here, Bratzel highlighted the robotaxi market. Waymo, the US market leader and an Alphabet subsidiary, is on average losing $300 per ride, amounting to roughly $1b burnt per quarter. “But we’ll see more autonomous cars,” he concluded. Meanwhile, it’s not entirely clear whether we’ll actually witness more autonomous trucks on the roads. Tobias Schweickhardt, Manager Regulatory Affairs Connected & Automated Vehicles from Daimler Trucks, said the industry is more likely to move towards hub-to-hub solutions, looking more like rail services than a future in which trucks without drivers will zip freely along Europe’s highways and narrow streets. The issue with autonomous trucking is that it just doesn’t add up to a business case today, even though other pieces of the puzzle are in place, including technology and regulations. Another presentation, by Enno Borchers, Industry Partner Automotive from Telekom, and Vesa Kiviranta, CBO, Automotive & Intelligent Vehicles, from Unikie, gave an update on a speech from last year about automated vehicles. Here, the solution is to fit the environment with sensors, not the vehicle, so that it can steer the flows (in partnership with Audi, Unikie has lately shown this works for rail handling of cars). The advantage of this approach also lies in data – the environment-guiding-a-vehicle communication can rely on a 4G network since it requires far less information to be processed than a car that needs to have situational awareness comparable to a human driver. Speaking of tech solutions, no conference these days is complete without AI (next year,

in mid-May, ECG will host its own event in this field: the AI-Day in Paris). Ben Waller, Associate Director at ICDP, presented a long list of applications across automotive sales and delivery chains: demand forecasting, risk sensing (e.g., to better manage workflows around those import surges), process scheduling and handling optimisation (especially in ‘closed’ environments, like ports and terminals, for better asset utilisation), used vehicle condition appraisal, chatbots, fleet management, in-car voice assistants, and solutions for the abovementioned sectoral convergence. Waller, however, emphasised that AI will not magically optimise a business on its own – it’ll still require strategy and oversight in the foreseeable future. Importantly too, in the car industry and the logistics sector serving it, AI will more likely be limited to ‘islands of excellence’ rather than overall enterprise optimisation. Before ECG Conference 2026 moved to its concluding session, the Association traditionally held a press conference, during which I raised a few questions relating to topics covered at previous events, including military mobility and safety. Having hosted a NATO representative’s presentation at the 2025 edition, ECG asserted that this wasn’t a passing fad, and it’s actively involved in raising the sector’s profile among those responsible for Europe’s defence. Consequently, ECG will be heading to Edge, NATO’s partnership and defence innovation event – this year taking place in İzmir. Asked about the Association’s work on safe working conditions and whether the spread of electric vehicles has changed anything in this regard, ECG said that it’s still a matter of workers adhering to safety guidelines more than anything else. Incidents continue to be reported and analysed, with efforts to urge everybody involved in handling vehicles to never put operations ahead of health and safety. And finally, the press briefing revolved around China and its car-making industry. Here, one outstanding insight was that battery health checks on vehicles headed for the secondary market reveal that they’re in very good condition. 5/2026 | Baltic Transport Journal | 57

WHO IS WHO KORNELIJA BUTKUTĖ Commercial Director, Port of Klaipėda Butkutė graduated from Mykolas Romeris University – first with a BSc in law and then with an MSc also in law, with a specialisation in criminal law and criminology. She began her career as a judicial assistant at the Klaipėda City Courthouse, after which she joined the Klaipėda City Municipality as a public procurement and legal specialist. Butkutė has been working at the Lithuanian seaport since 2023, first as a lawyer, then as an advisor to the CEO.

KENNI CALLESEN Managing Director, Nordic & Baltic Area, Maersk Callesen, a graduate of Business Academy Aarhus in sales and marketing, has been with Maersk since 2018, when he joined the Danish shipping company as General Manager, Country Head of Customer Experience, Denmark. He was then Director, Area Head of Customer Experience for the Nordic & Baltic region, before becoming Sales Director, Area Head of Sales, also Nordic & Baltic. Callesen also worked for hummel, Margit Brandt, and Falck.

DANIEL HULTIN Business Development Manager, Port of Ystad

EVA LINDELL CEO, Port of Norrköping

The MBA holder (in technology management from Lund University) has joined the Swedish seaport from SARSYS, where he worked as a sales manager. Earlier, Hultin was with SARSYS-ASFT as a business development director, ASFT Industries as a key account sales manager, and ONOFF Sverige as a sales representative. Hultin is no stranger to the transport industry, having worked for Maersk – as a market analyst and shipbroker.

An alumna of, among others, Linnaeus University (business administration, management and operations), the University of Minnesota Duluth (operations management, business administration finance, international marketing), and Stockholm School of Economics (executive management programme), Lindell joins the Swedish seaport from Rusta, where she was head of logistics. Before that, she worked for many years with Freudenberg, including as a logistics and innovation manager.

MIKAEL MALZOFF Business Development Manager, Port of Norrköping

KRISTIAN RASMUSSEN Head of Sales & Business Development, Port of Hirtshals

Malzoff, who has for his entire professional career (of 29 years and counting) worked at the Swedish seaport, has moved up the ladder – from terminal manager (most recently in charge of Norrköping’s dry bulk operations). He began working as a docker, a position he occupied for over a decade, after which he became a supervisor for another 14 years.

Rasmussen has joined the Danish seaport from the Frederiksberg-based Deaconess Foundation, where he started as a leasing manager, then worked as a rental manager before becoming a board member. Rasmussen is a real estate manager from Copenhagen Business Academy – EK, who also completed his leadership training at CfL. Among others, he worked as a real estate agent for EDC-gruppen and danbolig-kæden. Rasmussen was also the founding director of Boligagenten.

TOMI RAUTIO Managing Director, Euroports Finland

ASBJØRN BYSKOV STRUNK Head of Maritime Operations, Thyborøn Port

An alumnus of the Kymenlaakso University of Applied Sciences in logistics/transport management, Rautio joins the Finnish arm of the Belgium-based multinational stevedore from Saimaa Terminals, where he was CEO. Before that, Rautio worked for over a decade and a half for another stevedoring company, Steveco, as senior vice president, ports and terminals. He also chairs Shipbrokers Finland.

Strunk has been part of the Coastal Rescue Service and its day-to-day management since 2009, playing, among other things, a key role in the rescue service’s transition from the Danish Navy to the Danish Emergency Management Agency. He has also worked on the implementation and development of new IT systems, vessels, and other technologies within the rescue service. Strunk chairs the Danish Association of Rescue Personnel and is a skipper at Føniks.

58 | Baltic Transport Journal | 5/2026