Bridging policy, institutions, and operations in shipping decarbonization.

Embedded operator helping organizations navigate risk, complexity, and first-of-a-kind challenges.

Why decarbonization stalls

Most shipping decarbonization efforts don’t fail because the ambition is wrong. They stall because the system is hard to move—especially when something genuinely new is being attempted.

Progress breaks down at the interfaces:

  • Between policy intent and operational reality

  • Between safety, class, insurance, and commercial decision-making

  • Between organizations that all act rationally, but don’t move together

  • Between what looks feasible on paper and what institutions are willing to support

These challenges are most visible early on, when there is no established playbook and uncertainty is unavoidable.

My perspective comes from working inside these situations—seeing first-hand where momentum is lost, where assumptions break, and where coordination fails—both in maritime decarbonization and in building new ventures from the ground up.

Where I Focus — Operating Across the System

Shipping decarbonization doesn’t move forward because of a single breakthrough. It moves when decisions, institutions, and operations line up well enough to allow action.

That alignment rarely happens on its own. I focus on the space between:

  • Strategy and execution

  • Policy and implementation

  • Technical feasibility and institutional acceptance

This is not a permanent role inside an organization, and it’s not arm’s-length advisory work. It’s an embedded role, shaped by the phase and ambition of the effort, focused on helping complex initiatives get unstuck and move forward.

I step in where teams need help navigating uncertainty, coordinating across boundaries, and making progress before the path is fully clear.

How I typically engage

While every situation is different, my work tends to fall into a small number of recurring patterns—each shaped by where organizations most often get stuck.

First-of-a-kind project support — Helping early decarbonization efforts survive their most fragile phase

Institutional de-risking — Making novel pathways acceptable to class, insurers, and regulators

Systems integration — Aligning institutions whose requirements don’t naturally line up

Policy-to-implementation translation — Translating IMO frameworks into operational and economic reality

Experience that shapes how I work

This perspective isn’t theoretical. It comes from working inside real efforts to move shipping decarbonization forward—often under uncertainty, scrutiny, and incomplete information.

My experience includes:

  • Developing and advancing a first-of-a-kind ammonia bunkering concept through safety review and DNV Approval in Principle, navigating class, regulatory, and operational constraints along the way

  • Working with shipowners, ports, insurers, energy companies, and technology providers on early decarbonization decisions where precedent is limited and risk tolerance varies

  • Building techno-economic and operational models to support project- and asset-level decisions under uncertainty, including fuel choice, operating assumptions, and investment trade-offs

  • Conducting independent modeling and analysis of IMO decarbonization frameworks, quantifying how policy design choices, fuel-price uncertainty, and adoption pathways translate into system-level economic and operational impacts

  • Founding and building multiple ventures from blank sheets of paper into operating businesses, gaining first-hand experience with ambiguity, coordination challenges, and early-stage risk

These experiences have shaped a practical understanding of where momentum is lost, where assumptions break, and where coordination matters most.

What I bring to complex decarbonization efforts

When organizations are navigating early, high-uncertainty decarbonization efforts, the challenges are rarely confined to a single discipline. My work draws on a combination of technical, operational, regulatory, and institutional experience to help teams move forward.

First-of-a-kind project navigation

  • Translating novel concepts into execution paths that can survive early scrutiny

  • Identifying and closing gaps between design intent, safety logic, and operational reality

Safety, risk, and institutional acceptance

  • Framing risk in ways that institutions can evaluate and accept, rather than avoid

  • Integrating HSEQ and sustainability considerations into early design and decision-making

Techno-economic and systems analysis

  • Building and interrogating models that connect emissions, cost, and operational constraints

  • Stress-testing assumptions under different fuel, regulatory, and adoption scenarios

Policy and regulatory translation

  • Interpreting IMO and EU decarbonization frameworks in operational terms

  • Connecting policy design to likely shipowner, port, and charterer behavior

When this is a good fit

This work is most valuable when organizations are serious about moving from intent to action, and willing to engage directly with uncertainty, trade-offs, and institutional constraints.

I may be a good fit if:

  • You’re attempting something new and the path forward isn’t fully defined

  • You need help aligning institutions, stakeholders, and operations

  • You want someone embedded with the team, helping drive real decisions and outcomes

This is less likely to be a good fit if:

  • You’re looking only for high-level validation or external endorsement

  • The role is intentionally kept at arm’s length from decision-making

  • There’s no appetite to move beyond analysis

Available for collaboration

If you’re engaging with shipping decarbonization at the project, institutional, or policy level and looking for an embedded, execution-oriented perspective, I welcome an initial conversation.

Reach out