The UK government is placing stricter regulations on the emissions cruise ships produce while in port, but with limited shore power infrastructure in place, is the policy accelerating decarbonisation or undermining cruise’s competitiveness?

From July 2026, the UK government will expand its carbon pricing system – the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS) – to include the maritime sector. All ships over 5,000 gross tonnes will now fall under the programme, which puts charges on CO2, methane and nitrous oxide emissions produced during “in-port” activity and on voyages between UK ports.

At face value, this comes across as a positive move for the industry’s environmental footprint and the UK’s mission to reduce its contribution to global warming. But without proper infrastructure for alternative fuels and plug-in options in the UK, is the expansion pushing the maritime industry further away from its net zero goals, rather than towards them?

In the UK, ships can currently only plug into onshore power supply (OPS) in Southampton, where although there are five terminals, only two have OPS capabilities, and only one can be utilised at any one time.

Portsmouth will also have connectivity for cruise ships in the coming months, but no other ports in the UK – including major hubs such as Liverpool, Dover, Dublin, the Port of Tyne and Tilbury – offer OPS for cruise, nor do they have the funding or grid capacity that would enable them to do so. A shore power point can cost anywhere between £300,000 and £1 million per berth, with multi-berth projects possibly reaching more than £20 million depending on the size of the project.

According to a CLIA spokesperson, there are many more ports in Northern Europe which offer OPS connections than their counterparts in the UK. “Given that these ports directly compete against each other in terms of attracting cruise calls, this puts UK ports at a disadvantage in terms of attracting cruise tourism,” they say. This disparity between UK and European ports is likely to become more pronounced in the coming years, given that the EU’s Fit for 55 decarbonisation regulations will require major ports in Europe to have shoreside power by 2030.

A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero tells Cruise Trade News that the expansion of the ETS comes alongside its work with Ofgem and network companies to reform the “outdated grid connections process” and speed up delivery of new infrastructure.

“Pricing emissions is a cost-effective way to cut carbon emissions and encourage greener travel. We are working closely with industry on implementation and consumers shouldn’t see any significant costs,” they add. It’s clear that the solutions required to decarbonise will continue to require significant investment from the cruise sector.

The ETS, the CLIA spokesperson says, risks diverting these funds, rather than encouraging investment, delivering little real emissions reduction, while slowing industry-led progress. According to the Scottish government’s final assessment of the ETS expansion, the move is estimated to add thousands of pounds per ship onto cruise line’s yearly costs, with sector totals predicted to reach the high millions.

“Without the government reinvesting revenues into maritime decarbonisation, capital will be driven away from the journey to pursue net-zero operations by 2050, and harming UK competitiveness before essential infrastructure is in place,” they continue.

The government has already announced £448 million of funding for the UK Shipping Office for Reducing Emissions (UK SHORE) between 2026 and 2030, representing the largest ever government investment in the country’s commercial maritime industry – yet this tranche is mainly earmarked for research and development and scaling over the next four years, not direct installation of alternative fuel supply in line with the ETS expansion.

From a financial perspective, the cost of installing the systems necessary to connect a cruise ship, combined with the very high cost of electricity in the UK, makes it a challenging investment for any port

Megan Turner, environment and sustainability manager at the Port of Dover, admits that securing the necessary power supply from the limited spare capacity within the Grid is a challenge for the port, along with many others in the UK.

“However, we are working hard to resolve this and have some important projects in the pipeline,” she says. “From a financial perspective, the cost of installing the systems necessary to connect a cruise ship, combined with the very high cost of electricity in the UK, makes it a challenging investment for any port. No major power installation in Europe has been completed without some level of public funding.”

Turner echoes CLIA and highlights that the Fit for 55 regulations that the EU has implemented have fuelled an increased pace of roll out of OPS systems across major cruise ports in mainland Europe. “OPS is necessary for the transition to alternative fuels, and we are in regular discussion with our cruise lines to support them with the facilities and infrastructure that they may need to offer this. Every cruise line has different requirements, and with a dedicated in-house environment and sustainability team, we are well placed to offer expert advice,” Turner continues.

The port recently unveiled its 2050 masterplan, with the ambitious goal of becoming the UK’s most “seamless, sustainable and tech-enabled” port in the next 25 years. This plan, Carter says, recognises the importance of OPS to cruise vessels and is planned to be delivered by 2035 at the latest.

It’s clear that OPS is a vital part of the industry’s mission to decarbonise, but in the few UK ports where it is being utilised, connections are in high demand. Thea George, ABP Southampton’s project manager for cruise operations, says the port received more than 100 requests for connections last year.

“That leadership is driven by our commitment to meeting the needs of our cruise partners who told us – and continue to tell us – that shore power is such an important part of their operations,” she adds. However, George notes that constraints on achieving its ambitions to grow its OPS connections have been, to date, centred on issues regarding the availability of electricity network capacity outside of the port and costs of operation.

“That’s a situation we’ve been talking about a lot with network operators, government (at multiple levels) and other stakeholders,” she continues. “As we make progress on finding technical solutions – some pretty innovative – for the physical infrastructure we’ll be stepping up even further our dialogue with cruise partners about implementation and delivery.”

Portsmouth port director Mike Sellers says the south coast hub has been “ahead of the curve” despite working in line with the UK government’s Maritime Decarbonisation Strategy. The port has lofty ambitions to become the first zero-emissions UK port, despite not yet having any operational plug-in options. “We were in an excellent position to apply for grant money from the government’s Zero Emissions Vessels and Infrastructure fund when applications went live, so that we could install the shore power system,” he explains.

However, the port’s Sea Change scheme – which included the installation of a £24 million plug-in power system – has not yet been rolled out and, according to Sellers, “could become a redundant asset”. The initiative was due to be available from this spring, but the National Grid connection has been delayed until April and Brittany Ferries said it will not use the charging point while electricity prices remain high, a sentiment which could be shared by cruise lines in the future.

Linden Coppell, vice president of sustainability and ESG for MSC Cruises, praises the OPS options in Southampton for being “generally perceived well by local communities”, but admits the majority of its near-250 calls it was able to plug into last year came in Northern Europe and not the UK.

“We are aware that the UK is planning to proceed with the expansion of its UK ETS for the maritime sector. We continue to support an international approach to the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships rather than regional or national initiatives,” Coppell says.

“Southampton is our main port in the UK and the fact that it is already provided with shore power is very important at this stage as it will allow us to mitigate the impact of future regulations. Cruise lines must factor in the costs associated with utilising shore power and we are currently witnessing higher costs of 20-50 per cent in Europe for local electricity grids, even accounting for European Union ETS savings.”

When approached by Cruise Trade News, the Port of Liverpool, Princess Cruises, P&O Cruises and Cunard declined to comment.

Whether the expansion of the UK ETS proves to be a catalyst for decarbonisation or a drag on competitiveness will ultimately depend on delivery. Pricing carbon can influence behaviour, but only if the infrastructure exists to support change. Without widespread shore power, upgraded grid capacity and access to alternative fuels, there is a real danger that operators are penalised before they are practically able to adapt.

Considering the cruise industry contributes roughly £5.8 billion per year to the UK economy and supports around 60,000 jobs, the stakes extend far beyond environmental policy alone. Cruise lines are global businesses with flexible deployment models.

If plugging in is simpler, cheaper and more widely available in Northern Europe – particularly as the EU accelerates its OPS rollout under Fit for 55 – future capacity decisions could increasingly favour continental homeports and turnaround hubs over UK gateways, further reducing the country’s global economic competitiveness.

The UK has signalled ambition through its Maritime Decarbonisation Strategy and the £448 million commitment to UK SHORE, but this ambition must translate into visible, usable infrastructure at pace.

Ports are willing, operators are investing and demand for shore power is clear. Infrastructure is the bridge between ambition and action – without it, the UK risks asking the cruise sector to sail towards net zero without providing the power to get there.