Ship Efficiency & Sustainability
Ship Efficiency & Sustainability
Ship Efficiency & Sustainability
Ship Efficiency & Sustainability
Ship Efficiency & Sustainability
Marine Fouling: The Hidden Drag on Global Shipping
By Michael Stein
June 4, 2025
12 min to read
Summary
This blog post will explain what marine fouling is, the different classes of fouling organisms and their biological origins, how fouling affects ship hydrodynamics, and the consequences for fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It will also introduce global regulations and guidelines aimed at managing this problem. Throughout, we’ll ground the discussion in up-to-date maritime science, referencing technical studies and reports to ensure accuracy. By the end, you should have a clear understanding of why marine fouling is such a big deal for global shipping, and how we contribute to managing such risks.
Introduction
Marine fouling – also known as biofouling – is the accumulation of aquatic organisms on submerged surfaces, such as the hulls and propellers of ships. It is a natural process: within hours of a clean surface being immersed in seawater, microorganisms begin to cling on and form slimy films, followed by the growth of larger organisms such as algae, barnacles, and mussels. For ships, this “coat” of marine life significantly increases drag (resistance) as the vessel moves through water, requiring engines to work harder. The result is higher fuel consumption, increased operating costs, and more greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, even a thin layer of biofilm or “slime” on a ship’s hull can lead to surprisingly large inefficiencies.
One recent International Maritime Organization (IMO) study found that a minor slime film just 0.5 mm thick covering half of a hull’s surface can increase a ship’s greenhouse gas emissions by 20–25% (maritime-executive.com, 2021). If small barnacles or tubeworms manage to attach, the impact is even worse – an “average” ship with light calcareous fouling could see fuel use and emissions jump by as much as 55% (maritime-executive.com, 2021). In global terms, researchers estimate that roughly 10% of the shipping industry’s fuel is wasted overcoming the extra drag from biofouling, equating to about 90 million tons of excess CO₂ emissions every year (IMO, 2020).
Classes of Marine Fouling Organisms
Scientists classify marine fouling organisms into broad categories based on size and the nature of the growth. The two primary divisions are microfouling and macrofouling, with macrofouling further divided into hard and soft fouling. Each class has distinct biological origins and characteristics:
Microfouling (Biofilms or “Slime”) refers to the microscopic life that initially coats a surface including bacteria and single-celled algae. The organisms in a biofilm produce glue-like polymers (extracellular polymeric substances) that help them stick to the hull and to each other. A biofilm can build up to a thickness of around 0.5 millimeters or more, and it provides a base for further colonization. | |
Macrofouling – Soft Fouling Organisms: After the biofilm stage, larger organisms can anchor themselves to the hull – this is called macrofouling. One subset, soft fouling, includes organisms, which includes organisms that are fleshy, flexible, or lack hard shells. These organisms often have a plant-like or gelatinous appearance. | |
Macrofouling – Hard Fouling Organisms: This group includes species that build calcareous or rigid shells and attach firmly. Common hard foulers are barnacles, mussels, clams, and tube worms. These organisms create strong, cement-like bonds to the surface and can be extremely difficult to remove once established. |
It is worth noting that fouling isn't just a problem for ships; it affects any submerged structure—from ocean buoys to offshore wind turbines—requiring constant maintenance to remove growth and keep operations running smoothly. In the context of shipping, however, the stakes are especially high due to the fuel and emissions penalties incurred. This following paragraph reveals how marine fouling degrades a ship’s hydrodynamic performance and how it leads to a significant spike in fuel usage.
How Fouling Affects Ship Hydrodynamics
When a ship moves through water, the majority of the resistance it encounters comes from hull friction—the drag caused by water flowing along the hull’s surface. Time is a key factor: a hull that’s fresh out of drydock (with new antifouling paint) might stay relatively clean for a few weeks or months, but over longer periods, fouling builds up progressively. In cases where biofouling is attached to the hull, the ship’s engines must then generate more power to maintain the same speed through the water. To visualize this, an IMO-sponsored analysis (IMO, 2021) plotted the increase in GHG emissions (as a proxy for fuel consumption) against different biofouling conditions.
 Figure: Relationship between biofouling severity and increase in GHG emissions for ships, based on preliminary IMO study data. The red curve in the figure below shows how emissions rise sharply with even small amounts of fouling, based on data from real ship observations and models. |
Roughness near the forward part of the hull or close to the waterline tends to have a greater impact on drag than the same roughness in sheltered areas such as recesses or near the stern because the forward areas influence how water flow develops along the entire hull. However, even fouling in “niche areas” like sea chests, thruster tunnels, or on the propeller can be detrimental. For instance, a fouled propeller or thruster loses efficiency and can cause vibration. A layer of slime or shells on the propeller blades reduces thrust output and can substantially cut propulsion efficiency, compounding the effects of hull resistance.
Propeller Fouling Examples
Sea chest Fouling Examples
Near Waterline Fouling Examples
Fuel Consumption and Emissions Impact
The global shipping industry is the backbone of international trade, but it also accounts for a significant share of the world’s energy use and emissions. Shipping contributes roughly 3% of global CO₂ emissions (IMO, 2020), with 1.056 million tonnes of CO₂ emitted in 2018. Overall, analyses suggest that approximately 10% of shipping’s emissions can be attributed to the drag caused by biofouling—equating to about 90 million tonnes of CO₂ annually—which likely adds around $6 billion to the annual fuel (bunker) costs of the commercial fleet (IMO, 2020).
A study conducted by I-Tech and Safinah Group (2020) surveyed 249 ships between 2015 and 2019, noting that over 40% had at least 10% of the hull covered in hard fouling. Using published drag data from Schultz (2011), they calculated that this level of barnacle coverage across a large portion of the global fleet would result in roughly 110 million tonnes of excess CO₂ emissions per year (I-Tech and Safinah Group, 2020).
On a global scale, if international shipping were a country, it would rank as the 7th largest CO₂ emitter as of 2023. Despite having emitted more CO₂ than the airline industry in that year, shipping remains the most efficient and environmentally friendly mode of transportation when measured by CO₂ emissions per tonne moved.
Source: ATAG.org (2024), Statista 2024), SEAISI (2024)
 | Furthermore, if a ship’s performance degrades too much, it may fail to meet charter party speed requirements or require prolonged drydocking—resulting in lost revenue and increased maintenance costs. In an era where the shipping industry is under growing pressure to reduce its carbon intensity, the additional emissions from fouling can also lead to regulatory consequences, such as a higher carbon levy or failure to meet EEXI or CII targets. |
Global Regulations and Initiatives
Marine fouling is unique as an issue that straddles both engineering efficiency and environmental protection because of invasive species. Consequently, international bodies like the IMO, as well as national governments, have developed guidelines and regulations to address different aspects of biofouling management. Here we discuss the key regulatory measures and global initiatives:
 | IMO Anti-Fouling Systems (AFS): |
 | IMO Biofouling Guidelines (MEPC.207(62)): |
 | In-Water Cleaning Guidelines: In 2022, BIMCO released guidelines on in-water cleaning with capture technology, reinforcing the principle that proactive maintenance (or “grooming”) is preferred. These guidelines emphasize that any cleaning operation removing macrofouling should also capture the resulting debris to prevent environmental contamination. |
 | EEXI / CII: These regulations indirectly incentivize proper fouling management, as biofouling negatively impacts fuel efficiency. Ships with persistently poor CII ratings may face operational restrictions. As a result, shipowners now have an added incentive to maintain clean hulls to meet regulatory environmental performance targets. |
National Regulations and Initiatives
 | New Zealand was one of the first countries to implement strict biofouling regulations for incoming vessels. Since 2018, ships have been required to arrive with a clean hull. As of October 2023, New Zealand updated its requirements to align with the revised IMO Biofouling Guidelines, mandating that vessels carry a Biofouling Management Plan and provide evidence of appropriate cleaning prior to entering New Zealand waters. |
Australia also has guidelines and some mandatory requirements for managing biofouling on international vessel arrivals. Incoming ships are essentially required to have a Biofouling Management Plan and supporting documentation consistent with the IMO Biofouling Guidelines. Notably, both Australia and New Zealand were key driving forces behind the development of these international guidelines at the IMO. |  |
 | California (USA) has implemented its own biofouling management regulations for vessels arriving at its ports. These include requirements for regular hull inspections, cleaning, and mandatory reporting of such activities. |
Other countries, such as Chile and Brazil, have begun implementing biofouling regulations for ships. Additionally, there is growing momentum within the European Union—primarily driven by Scandinavian nations—to consider adopting more stringent biofouling control measures. |  |
What can be done about marine fouling?
Effectively managing marine fouling on ships begins with a comprehensive understanding of the current state of underwater growth and the condition of the vessel’s antifouling paint. Typically, ships undergo underwater inspections approximately every 2.5 years as part of their class renewal process. This means that for nearly 900 days, shipowners may have little to no visibility into the condition of their hulls. Even when conventional divers are hired for inspections, the video quality is often too poor to support meaningful managerial decisions based on in-water survey (IWS) reports.
In recent years, the rise of micro-ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle) systems -commonly referred to as “underwater drones”- has made ship hull inspections more affordable, efficient, and widely accessible. These ROVs hover along the hull, capturing high-definition images that enable the identification of marine fouling species at various stages of growth. Their high manoeuvrability provides a comprehensive, undisturbed view of the hull surface, in contrast to the limited, narrow focus typical of conventional diver inspections. The high-quality video data captured by ROVs also opens the door to advanced analytics, such as image segmentation using artificial intelligence (AI).
At the forefront of AI-based marine fouling detection is Vesselity Maritime Analytics, a German tech start-up founded in 2023. Vesselity specializes in underwater image recognition of marine fouling, combining ROV-based ship inspections with its content management software, Hull-Sight, to assess fouling risk and estimate the impact on excess fuel consumption.
With accurate, real-time insights into the state of a ship's hull and antifouling coating, shipowners and fleet managers receive optimal decision support for in-water hull cleaning, particularly when economic conditions justify such maintenance.
In a 2025 blog post on MaritimeMagazines.com, Wendy Laursen introduces the context of robotic in-water cleaning, summarizing its development through early applied examples. Her work highlights the role of micro-ROV systems in inspecting marine fouling and improving hull maintenance strategies.
Similarly, Michael Stein (2023) explored the rise of micro-ROV systems and their transformative impact on the maritime industry. His article details how this class of technology is reshaping inspection and maintenance operations, with implications for fuel efficiency, safety, and environmental compliance.
Conclusion
Marine fouling has significant implications for the economics and environmental footprint of global shipping. A fouled hull creates hidden drag that forces vessels to burn more fuel to maintain speed, resulting in increased costs and higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The scale of the problem is substantial: an estimated 79 to 110 million tonnes of CO₂ are emitted annually due to biofouling-related fuel inefficiencies—costing the shipping industry billions of dollars.
At the regulatory level, the IMO and several national authorities are increasingly recognizing the environmental impact of fouling and are moving toward making biofouling management standard practice. Shipowners that invest in proactive hull maintenance benefit from reduced fuel consumption and greater compliance with tightening environmental regulations.
To achieve this, however, accurate knowledge of the hull’s condition is essential—especially in areas inaccessible to the human eye. This is where maritime technology companies are stepping in. Using state-of-the-art underwater drones, innovators like Vesselity Maritime Analytics are pioneering AI-driven solutions that extract meaningful insights from ROV video streams. Their platform provides expert decision support by evaluating marine fouling conditions in real time.
In conclusion, marine fouling is a compelling example of how seemingly small biological processes can have global industrial and environmental consequences. Microscopic organisms attaching to a ship’s hull can, at scale, drive up global fuel use and emissions. By understanding this challenge and applying science-based technologies, the maritime industry has a real opportunity to reduce unnecessary fuel consumption and curb climate-related impacts.
Reference List
ATAG Air Transport Action Group (2024). Aviation and climate change (Fact Sheet No. 2). https://atag.org/media/gw5cgzzh/fact-sheet_2_aviation-and-climate-change.pdf
I-Tech, & Safinah Group (2020). Quantifying the scale of the barnacle fouling problem on the global shipping fleet [White paper]. https://selektope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/ITECH-WHITE-PAPER_June-2020-1.pdf
International Maritime Organization (2020). Fourth IMO greenhouse gas study 2020. https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/Environment/Pages/Fourth-IMO-Greenhouse-Gas-Study-2020.aspx
Laursen (2025). Send in the robots. https://www.maritimemagazines.com/maritime-reporter/202505/send-in-the-robots/
Maritime Executive (2021). IMO study shows higher-than-expected fuel cost from fouling. https://maritime-executive.com/article/imo-study-shows-higher-than-expected-fuel-cost-from-fouling
Schultz, M. P., Bendick, J. A., Holm, E. R., & Hertel, W. M. (2011). Economic impact of biofouling on a naval surface ship. Biofouling, 27(1), 87–98.
SEAISI South East Asia Iron and Steel Institute (2024). Global CO₂ emissions from energy production hit record high of 40 gigatonnes in 2023. Reference to BigMint. https://www.seaisi.org/details/25413?type=news-rooms
Statista (2024). International shipping carbon dioxide emissions worldwide from 2012 to 2023. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291468/international-shipping-emissions-worldwide/
Stein, M. (2023). How the micro ROV class will change the maritime sector: An introductory analysis on ROV, big data and AI. In Autonomous vehicles—Applications and perspectives. IntechOpen.
Introduction
Marine fouling – also known as biofouling – is the accumulation of aquatic organisms on submerged surfaces, such as the hulls and propellers of ships. It is a natural process: within hours of a clean surface being immersed in seawater, microorganisms begin to cling on and form slimy films, followed by the growth of larger organisms such as algae, barnacles, and mussels. For ships, this “coat” of marine life significantly increases drag (resistance) as the vessel moves through water, requiring engines to work harder. The result is higher fuel consumption, increased operating costs, and more greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, even a thin layer of biofilm or “slime” on a ship’s hull can lead to surprisingly large inefficiencies.
One recent International Maritime Organization (IMO) study found that a minor slime film just 0.5 mm thick covering half of a hull’s surface can increase a ship’s greenhouse gas emissions by 20–25% (maritime-executive.com, 2021). If small barnacles or tubeworms manage to attach, the impact is even worse – an “average” ship with light calcareous fouling could see fuel use and emissions jump by as much as 55% (maritime-executive.com, 2021). In global terms, researchers estimate that roughly 10% of the shipping industry’s fuel is wasted overcoming the extra drag from biofouling, equating to about 90 million tons of excess CO₂ emissions every year (IMO, 2020).
Classes of Marine Fouling Organisms
Scientists classify marine fouling organisms into broad categories based on size and the nature of the growth. The two primary divisions are microfouling and macrofouling, with macrofouling further divided into hard and soft fouling. Each class has distinct biological origins and characteristics:
Microfouling (Biofilms or “Slime”) refers to the microscopic life that initially coats a surface including bacteria and single-celled algae. The organisms in a biofilm produce glue-like polymers (extracellular polymeric substances) that help them stick to the hull and to each other. A biofilm can build up to a thickness of around 0.5 millimeters or more, and it provides a base for further colonization. |
Macrofouling – Soft Fouling Organisms: After the biofilm stage, larger organisms can anchor themselves to the hull – this is called macrofouling. One subset, soft fouling, includes organisms, which includes organisms that are fleshy, flexible, or lack hard shells. These organisms often have a plant-like or gelatinous appearance. |
Macrofouling – Hard Fouling Organisms: This group includes species that build calcareous or rigid shells and attach firmly. Common hard foulers are barnacles, mussels, clams, and tube worms. These organisms create strong, cement-like bonds to the surface and can be extremely difficult to remove once established. |
It is worth noting that fouling isn't just a problem for ships; it affects any submerged structure—from ocean buoys to offshore wind turbines—requiring constant maintenance to remove growth and keep operations running smoothly. In the context of shipping, however, the stakes are especially high due to the fuel and emissions penalties incurred. This following paragraph reveals how marine fouling degrades a ship’s hydrodynamic performance and how it leads to a significant spike in fuel usage.
How Fouling Affects Ship Hydrodynamics
When a ship moves through water, the majority of the resistance it encounters comes from hull friction—the drag caused by water flowing along the hull’s surface. Time is a key factor: a hull that’s fresh out of drydock (with new antifouling paint) might stay relatively clean for a few weeks or months, but over longer periods, fouling builds up progressively. In cases where biofouling is attached to the hull, the ship’s engines must then generate more power to maintain the same speed through the water. To visualize this, an IMO-sponsored analysis (IMO, 2021) plotted the increase in GHG emissions (as a proxy for fuel consumption) against different biofouling conditions.
Figure: Relationship between biofouling severity and increase in GHG emissions for ships, based on preliminary IMO study data. The red curve in the figure below shows how emissions rise sharply with even small amounts of fouling, based on data from real ship observations and models. |
Roughness near the forward part of the hull or close to the waterline tends to have a greater impact on drag than the same roughness in sheltered areas such as recesses or near the stern because the forward areas influence how water flow develops along the entire hull. However, even fouling in “niche areas” like sea chests, thruster tunnels, or on the propeller can be detrimental. For instance, a fouled propeller or thruster loses efficiency and can cause vibration. A layer of slime or shells on the propeller blades reduces thrust output and can substantially cut propulsion efficiency, compounding the effects of hull resistance.
Propeller Fouling Examples
Sea chest Fouling Examples
Near Waterline Fouling Examples
Fuel Consumption and Emissions Impact
The global shipping industry is the backbone of international trade, but it also accounts for a significant share of the world’s energy use and emissions. Shipping contributes roughly 3% of global CO₂ emissions (IMO, 2020), with 1.056 million tonnes of CO₂ emitted in 2018. Overall, analyses suggest that approximately 10% of shipping’s emissions can be attributed to the drag caused by biofouling—equating to about 90 million tonnes of CO₂ annually—which likely adds around $6 billion to the annual fuel (bunker) costs of the commercial fleet (IMO, 2020).
A study conducted by I-Tech and Safinah Group (2020) surveyed 249 ships between 2015 and 2019, noting that over 40% had at least 10% of the hull covered in hard fouling. Using published drag data from Schultz (2011), they calculated that this level of barnacle coverage across a large portion of the global fleet would result in roughly 110 million tonnes of excess CO₂ emissions per year (I-Tech and Safinah Group, 2020).
On a global scale, if international shipping were a country, it would rank as the 7th largest CO₂ emitter as of 2023. Despite having emitted more CO₂ than the airline industry in that year, shipping remains the most efficient and environmentally friendly mode of transportation when measured by CO₂ emissions per tonne moved.
Source: ATAG.org (2024), Statista 2024), SEAISI (2024)
Furthermore, if a ship’s performance degrades too much, it may fail to meet charter party speed requirements or require prolonged drydocking—resulting in lost revenue and increased maintenance costs. In an era where the shipping industry is under growing pressure to reduce its carbon intensity, the additional emissions from fouling can also lead to regulatory consequences, such as a higher carbon levy or failure to meet EEXI or CII targets. |
Global Regulations and Initiatives
Marine fouling is unique as an issue that straddles both engineering efficiency and environmental protection because of invasive species. Consequently, international bodies like the IMO, as well as national governments, have developed guidelines and regulations to address different aspects of biofouling management. Here we discuss the key regulatory measures and global initiatives:
IMO Anti-Fouling Systems (AFS): |
IMO Biofouling Guidelines (MEPC.207(62)): |
In-Water Cleaning Guidelines: In 2022, BIMCO released guidelines on in-water cleaning with capture technology, reinforcing the principle that proactive maintenance (or “grooming”) is preferred. These guidelines emphasize that any cleaning operation removing macrofouling should also capture the resulting debris to prevent environmental contamination. |
EEXI / CII: These regulations indirectly incentivize proper fouling management, as biofouling negatively impacts fuel efficiency. Ships with persistently poor CII ratings may face operational restrictions. As a result, shipowners now have an added incentive to maintain clean hulls to meet regulatory environmental performance targets. |
National Regulations and Initiatives
New Zealand was one of the first countries to implement strict biofouling regulations for incoming vessels. Since 2018, ships have been required to arrive with a clean hull. As of October 2023, New Zealand updated its requirements to align with the revised IMO Biofouling Guidelines, mandating that vessels carry a Biofouling Management Plan and provide evidence of appropriate cleaning prior to entering New Zealand waters. |
Australia also has guidelines and some mandatory requirements for managing biofouling on international vessel arrivals. Incoming ships are essentially required to have a Biofouling Management Plan and supporting documentation consistent with the IMO Biofouling Guidelines. Notably, both Australia and New Zealand were key driving forces behind the development of these international guidelines at the IMO. |
California (USA) has implemented its own biofouling management regulations for vessels arriving at its ports. These include requirements for regular hull inspections, cleaning, and mandatory reporting of such activities. |
Other countries, such as Chile and Brazil, have begun implementing biofouling regulations for ships. Additionally, there is growing momentum within the European Union—primarily driven by Scandinavian nations—to consider adopting more stringent biofouling control measures. |
What can be done about marine fouling?
Effectively managing marine fouling on ships begins with a comprehensive understanding of the current state of underwater growth and the condition of the vessel’s antifouling paint. Typically, ships undergo underwater inspections approximately every 2.5 years as part of their class renewal process. This means that for nearly 900 days, shipowners may have little to no visibility into the condition of their hulls. Even when conventional divers are hired for inspections, the video quality is often too poor to support meaningful managerial decisions based on in-water survey (IWS) reports.
In recent years, the rise of micro-ROV (Remotely Operated Vehicle) systems -commonly referred to as “underwater drones”- has made ship hull inspections more affordable, efficient, and widely accessible. These ROVs hover along the hull, capturing high-definition images that enable the identification of marine fouling species at various stages of growth. Their high manoeuvrability provides a comprehensive, undisturbed view of the hull surface, in contrast to the limited, narrow focus typical of conventional diver inspections. The high-quality video data captured by ROVs also opens the door to advanced analytics, such as image segmentation using artificial intelligence (AI).
At the forefront of AI-based marine fouling detection is Vesselity Maritime Analytics, a German tech start-up founded in 2023. Vesselity specializes in underwater image recognition of marine fouling, combining ROV-based ship inspections with its content management software, Hull-Sight, to assess fouling risk and estimate the impact on excess fuel consumption.
With accurate, real-time insights into the state of a ship's hull and antifouling coating, shipowners and fleet managers receive optimal decision support for in-water hull cleaning, particularly when economic conditions justify such maintenance.
In a 2025 blog post on MaritimeMagazines.com, Wendy Laursen introduces the context of robotic in-water cleaning, summarizing its development through early applied examples. Her work highlights the role of micro-ROV systems in inspecting marine fouling and improving hull maintenance strategies.
Similarly, Michael Stein (2023) explored the rise of micro-ROV systems and their transformative impact on the maritime industry. His article details how this class of technology is reshaping inspection and maintenance operations, with implications for fuel efficiency, safety, and environmental compliance.
Conclusion
Marine fouling has significant implications for the economics and environmental footprint of global shipping. A fouled hull creates hidden drag that forces vessels to burn more fuel to maintain speed, resulting in increased costs and higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The scale of the problem is substantial: an estimated 79 to 110 million tonnes of CO₂ are emitted annually due to biofouling-related fuel inefficiencies—costing the shipping industry billions of dollars.
At the regulatory level, the IMO and several national authorities are increasingly recognizing the environmental impact of fouling and are moving toward making biofouling management standard practice. Shipowners that invest in proactive hull maintenance benefit from reduced fuel consumption and greater compliance with tightening environmental regulations.
To achieve this, however, accurate knowledge of the hull’s condition is essential—especially in areas inaccessible to the human eye. This is where maritime technology companies are stepping in. Using state-of-the-art underwater drones, innovators like Vesselity Maritime Analytics are pioneering AI-driven solutions that extract meaningful insights from ROV video streams. Their platform provides expert decision support by evaluating marine fouling conditions in real time.
In conclusion, marine fouling is a compelling example of how seemingly small biological processes can have global industrial and environmental consequences. Microscopic organisms attaching to a ship’s hull can, at scale, drive up global fuel use and emissions. By understanding this challenge and applying science-based technologies, the maritime industry has a real opportunity to reduce unnecessary fuel consumption and curb climate-related impacts.
Reference List
ATAG Air Transport Action Group (2024). Aviation and climate change (Fact Sheet No. 2). https://atag.org/media/gw5cgzzh/fact-sheet_2_aviation-and-climate-change.pdf
I-Tech, & Safinah Group (2020). Quantifying the scale of the barnacle fouling problem on the global shipping fleet [White paper]. https://selektope.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/ITECH-WHITE-PAPER_June-2020-1.pdf
International Maritime Organization (2020). Fourth IMO greenhouse gas study 2020. https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/Environment/Pages/Fourth-IMO-Greenhouse-Gas-Study-2020.aspx
Laursen (2025). Send in the robots. https://www.maritimemagazines.com/maritime-reporter/202505/send-in-the-robots/
Maritime Executive (2021). IMO study shows higher-than-expected fuel cost from fouling. https://maritime-executive.com/article/imo-study-shows-higher-than-expected-fuel-cost-from-fouling
Schultz, M. P., Bendick, J. A., Holm, E. R., & Hertel, W. M. (2011). Economic impact of biofouling on a naval surface ship. Biofouling, 27(1), 87–98.
SEAISI South East Asia Iron and Steel Institute (2024). Global CO₂ emissions from energy production hit record high of 40 gigatonnes in 2023. Reference to BigMint. https://www.seaisi.org/details/25413?type=news-rooms
Statista (2024). International shipping carbon dioxide emissions worldwide from 2012 to 2023. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291468/international-shipping-emissions-worldwide/
Stein, M. (2023). How the micro ROV class will change the maritime sector: An introductory analysis on ROV, big data and AI. In Autonomous vehicles—Applications and perspectives. IntechOpen.
Share article
Get in touch with us today
Get in touch with us today
Get in touch with us today
Get in touch with us today