Skip to content


NEVILLE Smith, formerly deputy editor of daily shipping and insurance newspaper Lloyd´s List, is now working freelance, accepting editorial and copywriting commissions and consultancy work.
Neville has 16 years´ experience reporting on the maritime and related industries. Most recently, he has reported on piracy and security, environment and sustainability, freight and commodity markets and their derivatives, finance and IT/communications.

He has written for web and print delivery – most recently conducting video interviews and script-editing for webcasting.
To get in touch with Neville, contact us.
For a "piece of Neville" (or should it be a piece by Neville?), read on…

FORMER Lloyd’s List editor Julian Bray is clearly enjoying his new role at Tradewinds, recently penning 20-plus questions on the subject of CO2 emissions with enough wit even to raise a smile in Oslo. But if I can add one addendum to his analysis, it would be that shipping is going to run into a brick wall between the principles of Kyoto/Copenhagen and the tenets of the IMO.

As Julian points out, the former works on the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’, under which each country does according to its contribution, with some doing more than others. The IMO, on the other hand, works on the principle of ‘no more favourable treatment’, which is designed to neutralise any benefit to ships flying the flag of developing nations (non-Annex I under Kyoto) and discourage a flight to these flags from Annex I countries (mostly developed western nations).

Applying emission reduction targets under these directly contradictory principles will require the ability to suck and blow at the same time and we will see this year whether the IMO can make any progress at all. Copenhagen will make progress regardless, probably setting – under pressure from the EU – global emission reduction targets for shipping that COP15 will simply hand back to the IMO and say “now get on with it”.

The law of unintended consequences cuts both ways here. If the IMO can somehow strike a deal to make non-Annex I flag states pay for CO2 on the basis of tonnage entered, one plank of their cost advantage might be lost. If these same flags win the argument that the IMO lacks authority to impose such penalties, then it could be the end for some high-cost national registers.
Thank you! Your subscription has been confirmed. You'll hear from us soon.