The 80th session of the International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 80) agreed to the adoption of a revised greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy. The objective – to significantly reduce GHG emissions from international shipping – now goes much further than before.
Change In Measurement Criteria
MEPC 80 also changed the focus of the marine fuel emissions directive from combustion (tank-to-wake) to lifecycle emissions (well-to-wake). As a result, vessel operators can no longer just look to reduce emissions solely from fuel combustion. Now they will have to take into consideration emissions generated during refinery processes and transportation of the fuel to a bunkering port. This could change the investment decisions of operators who were considering installing sulphur oxide (SOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2) capturing scrubbers on their vessels, aiming to continue to run on high-sulphur fuels and then paying for the disposal of the captured material.
One of the biggest challenges right now is the availability of low or zero-carbon fuels and related infrastructure at scale. Stakeholders responsible for investing in resources, production, bunkering, and port infrastructure require key information on the demand profiles for alternative formulations and the infrastructure required to unlock the investment case for producing and supplying these fuels. One of the biggest challenges right now is the availability of low or zero-carbon fuels and related infrastructure at scale. Stakeholders responsible for investing in resources, production, bunkering, and port infrastructure require key information on the demand profiles for alternative formulations and the infrastructure required to unlock the investment case for producing and supplying these fuels.
Future Fuels
“Developments are still ongoing, but what is clear is that some of the fuel options will need cryogenic storage,” notes Kenneth Kar, product solutions technology engineering associate at ExxonMobil Technology and Engineering. “These may require the development of new supply chains and bunkering technologies, along with revised approaches to onboard handling, storage and combustion.” LNG is one of the most advanced options in terms of infrastructure, “due to its existence in the market for over a decade, making it easily sourced and available,” says Hrishikesh Chatterjee, promotion manager at MAN Energy Solutions, who goes on to note a sharp rise in interest in methanol-fuelled engines, as the company’s had over 160 orders for these this year.
This links to the rise in green methanol production, with approximately 80 projects in progress that are anticipated to generate almost nine million tonnes annually by 2027, according to the Methanol Institute. In terms of biofuels, bunkering infrastructure is already in place in Rotterdam and Singapore and with demand increasing, more ports are making biofuel blends available, notes Ilyas.
ExxonMobil points to biodiesel as also being a good candidate, due to being a “drop-in alternative”, and it’s already successfully bunkered its marine biofuel oil – a blend of conventional marine fuel and a bio-based component derived from fatty acid methyl esters (FAME).
Energy Transition Underway
With more than 57% (over 1,250 units) of MAN’s newbuild orders being for dual-fuel technology, the engine manufacturer believes that the energy transition has come into full momentum and it’s just a matter of time before this will be the default choice for all newbuilding.
“From a technology provider’s perspective, we’re proud to say we’ve pioneered the development of dual fuel technology, using the same base concept as our electronically controlled ME engines. Hence all our ME engine designs are retrofittable to any other dual fuel technology. We’ve proved it doing retrofits for LNG, LPG and ethane, and have upcoming large projects for methanol retrofits,” Chatterjee says.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe
Source: ShipTechnology
