Charting a Sustainable Course Part I: Decoding the Operating Ecosystem of EEXI, SEEMP, CII & EEOI
- Paul Nijhof
- Oct 30
- 9 min read
Updated: 22 hours ago
Shipping is the backbone of global trade, yet it operates under the most comprehensive energy-efficiency framework imposed on any industrial sector. The IMO’s EEXI, CII, SEEMP and EEOI are often described as four separate instruments — but in truth they form one operating ecosystem. When understood together, they reveal the physics of compliance, the psychology of crew execution and the economics of carbon performance.
In today’s paused-NZF environment, these existing instruments remain the centre of gravity for compliance and commercial performance. With the extraordinary MEPC session adjourned and earliest potential changes not entering into force before 2028, industry attention is reverting to tight execution of the current toolkit—refining EEXI controls onboard, managing CII as an operating carbon budget, running a living SEEMP Part III with verifiable corrective actions, and using EEOI as the voyage-level diagnostic that underpins trust.
As policy discussions continue, pressure may grow to tighten or broaden the instruments already in force (including exploration of well-to-wake elements within CII). In parallel, regional regimes (notably EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and the emerging UK ETS scope) act as near-term price and intensity signals, raising the premium on evidence integrity, ship–shore alignment and audit-ready data. For owners and crews alike, mastery now lies in orchestrating design limits, operational behaviour and verifiable records as one feedback loop - so that every tonne saved is measured, defensible and bankable.
LET’S DECODE
1. EEXI — The Design Floor
The Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index defines a ship’s design baseline. It expresses how efficiently the vessel is built to perform at a fixed engine power and configuration; hull form, propeller and machinery settings set the technical ceiling. EEXI is a mandatory certification that applies to existing ships of 400 GT or more on international voyages, and a new or revised attained EEXI must be calculated when the ship is technically altered or newly built such that design or propulsion parameters change materially. A vessel without an EEXI certification may not sail.
In practice, compliance pathways remain unchanged and are predominantly achieved via Engine Power Limitation (EPL) or Shaft Power Limitation (ShaPoLi). These measures must be governed by an approved Onboard Management Manual (OMM) that sets out the authorisation, release and re-engagement steps for any temporary override, together with mandatory override logging and supporting records. The regime applies as is to ships ≥400 GT and is actively enforced by flags and recognised organisations.
EEXI Applied
A vessel that meets EEXI on paper (its design and documented limits look compliant), may operate very differently in reality if its day-to-day controls and evidence don’t match that design. That misalignment erodes audit confidence and charter value, and it raises the likelihood of CII slippage later in the year. It is imperative to pair EEXI changes with SEEMP controls and transparent EEOI evidence so performance and documentation move together.
Audits are placing heightened emphasis on practice versus documents - especially the fidelity of override procedures, the completeness of evidence trails (OMM entries, shaft-power data, noon reports, VDR extracts) and the ship-shore follow-up on any deviations. To stabilise CII outcomes while staying within the EEXI envelope, owners are increasingly deploying targeted hydrodynamic retrofits: eg. propeller re-optimisation, energy-saving ducts, pre-swirl/boss-cap fins, and bulb/bow adjustments. Properly matched to the vessel’s trade and hull form, retrofits have achieved segment-dependent main-engine fuel reductions in the order of 0.5–6%+.
All such measures should be codified in SEEMP, with EEOI-based validation to evidence realised savings and ensure operational behaviour and documentation remain aligned.
2. SEEMP — The Playbook
The Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP), a mandatory regulation, is the procedural heart of compliance - plan, do, record, improve. Put together, the three parts form one closed-loop system - plan how you will run (Part I), prove what actually happened (Part II), and use that verified data to manage, correct, and improve your CII “over time” (Part III).
Part I: energy-efficiency management for ships 400 GT or more.
Part II: the plan for IMO DCS fuel oil consumption data (including how fuel is measured/verified and required parameters such as distance travelled and hours underway) for ships 5,000 GT or more.
Part III: CII implementation for ships 5,000 GT or more, requiring the attained annual CII, required CIIs for the next three years, an implementation plan, self-evaluation/ continuous improvement, and a plan of corrective actions where applicable.
With the NZF adjourned, SEEMP Part III serves as the real-time operating system for carbon performance—managing monthly targets, rolling forecasts, and pre-set corrective triggers (e.g. deviations from the CII glidepath or biofouling flags)—instead of being a static document. Verification standards call for rigorous version control (complete change logs and approvals), defined roles and accountabilities, and auditable links connecting procedures, data, and decisions.
Operationally, SEEMP should set out how EEXI limits are honoured, covering EPL/ShaPoLi override authority, logging and review and how CII is run as an in-year budget. With EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and UK ETS acting as immediate price/intensity signals, companies are building allowance and penalty exposure—as well as regional reporting specifics—into SEEMP planning and periodic reviews to align commercial and compliance drivers.
SEEMP Applied
A robust Part III turns regulatory burden into predictable operations and better commercial terms. An executable, up-to-date SEEMP Part III (clear roles, data trails, corrective-action triggers) stabilises your CII, strengthens claim defensibility, and speeds class/flag audits while lowering PSC disruption risk. The knock-on effect is fewer off-hire events, higher charterer confidence, and reduced compliance overhead.
To build that level of robustness, use Resolution MEPC.282(70), Chapter 5 (“Guidance on Best Practices for Fuel-Efficient Operation of Ships”) and the IMO GreenVoyage2050 Appraisal Tool (Appraisal Tool: GreenVoyage2050 (imo.org)) to select, combine and document the right measures for each vessel.
Successful execution hinges on robust evidence and coordinated ship–shore processes. Standardise validation and reconciliation for noon reports, sensors, BDNs, MRV/DCS filings, VDR tracks, CMMS records, and class approvals, and record exception handling and root-cause analysis inside SEEMP procedures.
Set initial, additional, and periodical verification checkpoints in your annual cycle. Use rank-specific prompts and avoid duplicate data entry to manage crew workload efficiently.
When you apply retrofits or operational measures (for example, cleaning cadence, trim targets, routing rules), define measurement and verification steps—often using EEOI-based voyage analyses—and record lessons learned so SEEMP Part III is updated continuously.
Finally, keep the charterparty interface in scope: SEEMP artefacts now underpin performance clauses, emissions cost pass-through, and claim defensibility—which shortens negotiations and reduces off-hire risk.
3. CII — The Operating Budget
The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) is an annual operational measure that expresses a ship’s CO₂ emissions per unit of capacity-based transport work for ships 5,000 GT or more. It is a mandatory regulation and assigns an A–E rating to the vessel each calendar year.
Improvement is expected “over time” via SEEMP actions; not a regulatory requirement to improve every year, but to remain within the defined rating bands; a plan of corrective actions is required if a ship is rated D for three consecutive years or E in any one year.
Given the current pause in the NZF process, CII remains the primary global, in-service carbon performance signal for owners and counterparties. As reference lines continue to tighten, a substantial share of tanker, bulk, and container tonnage is vulnerable to mid-year rating slippage without proactive interventions.
As policy attention shifts to the existing instruments, stakeholders are watching for a potential broadening of CII’s scope (for example, exploring well-to-wake elements), although no formal decision has been taken by the IMO/MEPC.
In parallel, regional schemes (EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and a widening UK ETS) are driving near-term costs and carbon intensity, making CII ratings more commercially consequential on impacted routes.
CII Applied
CII turns everyday operations into an A–E rating that directly affects what your ship is worth to counterparties.
A weak or slipping rating cascades into commercial and contractual pressure (shortlisting, lower rates, stricter time-charter clauses, potential early redelivery) and bleeds into finance (higher margins, tougher refinancing, softer resale). Maintaining an in-band rating is therefore a balance-sheet imperative, run like a budget with forecasting and corrective measures rather than a year-end formality.
Practically, this means running CII as a live budget through SEEMP Part III, with month-by-month targets, in-year forecasts, and triggered corrective actions evidenced by data. The dominant levers remain speed management, weather routing, trim/draft optimisation and hull/propeller condition (cleaning cadence aligned to biofouling risk).
Owners are strengthening evidence integrity to defend ratings: reconciling noon and sensor data, matching BDNs with MRV/DCS filings, and preserving VDR, CMMS, and class records for claims and audits.
On EU/UK trades where CII increases exposure, operators are pricing allowances and penalties into charterparties and voyage plans. A unified ship–shore loop ensures operational behaviour, records, and year-end verification stay aligned.
4. EEOI — The Voyage Truth Meter
The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) is an operational metric, not regulatory, recognised by IMO as a voluntary monitoring and diagnostic tool supporting SEEMP and CII. It measures what actually happened on each voyage or period: CO₂ per unit of actual transport work using real cargo carried and distance.
Operationally, EEOI should follow MEPC.1/Circ.684, with fuel-specific emission factors, a consistent transport-work definition (such as cargo mass × distance), a stated distance basis (through-water versus over-ground) used consistently, and clearly defined voyage boundaries (laden, ballast, port legs, exclusions).
Owners are adopting a single calculation specification fleet-wide so vessel comparisons and year-on-year trends are defensible.
EEOI is voluntary; its usefulness rests on rigorous methods and clean data: keep traceable links to BDNs, noon reports, shaft or flow meters, engine logs, VDR tracks, and reconciled MRV/DCS data. Operators increasingly tag each EEOI entry with condition states (hull/propeller fouling, weather/sea state, draught/trim) to distinguish operational factors from condition losses and to plan cleaning and maintenance.
EEOI Applied
If your EEOI evidence is not trusted, you cannot credibly prove what saved fuel or why performance changed, so SEEMP updates lack justification and CII forecasts drift.
That uncertainty undermines cooperation with charterers (harder to agree on speed, routing, or benefit-sharing) and slows claim resolution. The result is higher operating cost and weaker negotiating power; you spend more time arguing the numbers and less time earning on-hire.
The current best practice is to make EEOI the measurement and verification (M&V) backbone for SEEMP Part III and CII management: define pre-approved baselines, run A/B or pre/post analyses for measures (cleanings, propeller upgrades, routing rules, speed programmes) and record confidence intervals and assumptions in a standard template.
On data quality, operators are tightening noon-versus-sensor reconciliation with defined tolerance bands and exception workflows; when discrepancies exceed thresholds, ships attach a root-cause analysis (e.g. meter calibration issues or current/leeway estimation errors) before closing the record.
From a commercial standpoint, robust EEOI documentation are now used to support benefit-sharing arrangements, performance warranties, and emissions-cost pass-throughs on EU/UK trades; reducing dispute time and strengthening claim defensibility.
Finally, synchronise EEOI tags with EEXI practices (including explicit EPL/ShaPoLi override notes) to make any temporary power release visible in the voyage record, maintaining alignment between behaviour on board, documentation, and CII projections for audit.
CLOSING SYNTHESIS - OPERATING AS ONE SYSTEM
EEXI, SEEMP, CII and EEOI are not four tasks; they are one control loop.
EEXI sets the lawful design envelope—typically enforced on existing tonnage via EPL/ShaPoLi under an approved OMM with clear override authority and logging.
CII then converts operations within that envelope into an annual A–E budget that tightens over time and, with the NZF adjourned (earliest change unlikely before 2028), remains the dominant global in-service signal alongside regional price/intensity regimes (EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, UK ETS).
SEEMP is the operating system that keeps it coherent: Part I sets the footing, Part II safeguards DCS data integrity, and Part III runs CII in year with targets, forecasts and triggers—while codifying how EEXI limits are respected (including override authorisation, logging and review) and how allowance/penalty exposure on affected trades is handled.
EEOI (voluntary) provides the voyage-level M&V per MEPC.1/Circ.684, explaining CII movements with method-true choices for emission factors, transport work and distance basis.
When any variable drifts—biofouling, missed propeller maintenance, routing or loading shifts, or an unplanned speed-up—the effects propagate through CII, SEEMP and EEOI and can surface as audit findings if practice and documents diverge (for example, an override not logged per OMM).
The dominant levers are well known: hull/propeller condition, speed management, routing/weather windows, trim/draft and loading. Mastery now lies in managing the interrelationship, not the acronyms: run CII as a live budget through SEEMP Part III; keep EEXI discipline with clean override logs; and make EEOI the M&V backbone.
Above all, double-down on evidence integrity - standardised reconciliation across noon reports, sensors, BDNs, MRV/DCS, VDR and CMMS, with firm ship–shore version control - so every tonne saved is measured, defensible and bankable, and the fleet is ready whether existing instruments tighten/broaden (including potential well-to-wake considerations for CII) or a global framework resumes.
In Part II, we will map the strategic pain points for each instrument and show how an offline-capable, retrieval-augmented generative AI - working across OEM documents, class approvals, SEEMP artefacts, and enterprise systems - binds the system together to deliver operational certainty, audit readiness, and commercial resilience.
Comments