News in English

The Emerging Regulatory Pathway for Nuclear Merchant Ships and Floating Nuclear Power Stations Webinar

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) hosted a webinar on ‘The Emerging Regulatory Pathway for Nuclear Merchant Ships and Floating Nuclear Power Stations’ on the 26 February at 12pm-1pm UK time. This webinar was the first to kick-off a new ICS series for 2026 on alternative technologies.

The webinar explored the complex legislative landscape involved in revising international regulations governing nuclear merchant ships and floating nuclear power stations. There needs to be clarity in the sector to understand the technology’s potential. ICS’ Principle Marine Director, John Stawpert, moderated the discussion. Our panel consisted of international experts, including: Partner at Stephenson Harwood LLP, Kirsti Massie, Secretary at Nuclear Energy Maritime Organization Ltd (NEMO), Tobi Menzies, Technical Lead on Safety Assessment at International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Shahen Poghosyan, Global Power to X Director, Marine and Offshore at Lloyd’s Register, Mark Tipping, and Technical Director at the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), Chris Waddington.

The discussion began with our speakers sharing unique perspectives from their organisations. Chris Waddington (ICS) kicked off the discussion by explaining that nuclear power stations could be a major contributor to the supply of clean electricity, and thereby future marine fuels. Tobi Menzies (NEMO) shared that a regulatory framework is present but isn’t readily optimised for new reactor designs. In order to proceed with this, International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) needs revising, in addition to a legal and liability reform, and governance co-ordination. Shahen Poghosyan demonstrated IAEA’s focus on regulation, citing the importance of applying their safety standards to move forward with nuclear merchant ships.

Mark Tipping (Lloyd’s Register) explained how nuclear technology fits into decarbonisation strategies, as nuclear energy is zero carbon, but this goes further. The prevailing challenges with alternative fuels is the access to them and energy security. Since nuclear fuel already exists in the maritime industry, this provides a sense of security when transitioning the conversation to merchant ships. It therefore has a greater advantage to other alternative fuels as a path to the decarbonisation of shipping. He noted that although some sectors in maritime have a high level of awareness of nuclear power, the adoption in a civil context will take time. Mark estimated that we are likely to see this pick up nearing 2035. This is because the maritime industry are not the ones developing nuclear energy, and the application to ships is just one aspect of the wider nuclear sector.

Kirsti Massie (Stephenson Harwood LLP) spoke about nuclear energy in maritime from a liability perspective. She highlighted that current nuclear regulation is rather dated and needs to be reassessed to fit newer technology. It also does not apply to nuclear propulsion. Kirsti noted that there is a policy and regulatory gap which needs to be filled. However, this gap establishes some important liability principles, for example strict liability for operators, which is much more complicated in a maritime context compared to onshore. She concluded that these are all starting points which just need “teasing out” to ensure they work in a maritime context. The pressing issues are the need for co-operation between regulators, clear governmental support, and how nuclear maritime insurance can be established based off our current nuclear insurance and P&I Club insurance.

The second half of the webinar addressed questions sent in from participants. The first considered potential timelines for when civil merchant ships may adopt nuclear energy. Chris Waddington (ICS) predicted that we may see progress in the IMO workplan during the early 2030’s. He noted that the workplan was already discussed in January at IMO during SDC 12, and according to this workplan, the adoption of SOLAS and the nuclear code is targeted for discussion at MSC 118 in 2030. Mark Tipping (Lloyd’s register) referenced when we may see a significant uptake in the use of nuclear power on merchant ships, predicting a wide-scale adoption to occur around 2035.

Shahen Poghosyan (IAEA) answered if the division of responsibility between the IAEA and IMO is clearly defined. He stated that whilst they have a clearly defined mandate from collaborating for such a long time, it is crucial to intensify this collaboration to accelerate the issue. He cited the Atomic Technologies Licensed for Applications at Sea (ATLAS), a framework that needs this strong collaboration to launch, particularly with civil nuclear ships in mind.

A question came through asking if the panel felt the processes for achieving the framework are adequately resourced. Kirsti Massie (Stephenson Harwood LLP) began by stating that the demand for resources is always an issue, alongside time and getting people’s attention. However, she also noted that this shouldn’t discourage the industry, and it is crucial to push forward, otherwise another entity will fill the gap that nuclear energy currently has potential for. Tobi Menzies (NEMO) agreed, stating that nuclear commercial ships is a novel concept and will require more sustained resources than what is already provided.

The next question for our panel asked if Port State Control will differ from its traditional role to check with IMO and IAEA compliance. Whilst it is difficult to provide a definitive answer at the current stage, Mark Tipping (Lloyd’s Register) noted that nuclear merchant ships will be different from what has been seen before and will therefore require new nuclear regulation from a port perspective. Tobi Menzies (NEMO) made the point that most ports won’t have nuclear level inspectors on hand. However, a solution could be to have a pre-approved port access package from IAEA and flag state compliance verification, so that Port State Control can check certifications rather than conducting individual inspections. Both Shahen (IAEA) and Kirsti (Stephenson Harwood LLP) agreed with this, with Kirsti highlighting that the onshore regulations in place can assist maritime applications with the metaphor that “we don’t want to keep reinventing the wheel.”

The final question that the panel had time for revolved around how the framework will govern the use of nuclear fuel and how the disposal of spent nuclear fuel will be implemented and regulated, expanding into a conversation surrounding fuel compatibility with future recycling. Mark (Lloyd’s Register) pointed out that whenever an energy system is introduced, it must always be viewed as a full cycle process and designed to have a minimal amount of material at the end of this life cycle. Kirsti (Stephenson Harwood LLP) concurred this view, stating that what is happening onshore in nuclear will inform maritime of this life cycle and the different types of waste disposal and storage. Chris (ICS) was particularly interested in the focus on recycling, however, drew attention to the financial considerations. He noted that merchant ships go through many owners, typically decreasing in economic value, therefore we need to make sure the recycling of nuclear merchant ships is adequately funded.

As the webinar concluded, the panel each shared a sentiment that they want the participants to remember going forward. These closing remarks drew attention to the need for clear governmental support, co-ordination of regulatory bodies, and the huge opportunity to accelerate decarbonisation. Mark Tipping summed up the topic with the quote “evolution, not revolution,” demonstrating that nuclear power in maritime is not a new concept, it just needs to evolve to fit a civil context.