A new report from Lloyd’s Register (LR) has found that the total cost of ownership (TCO) for passenger ships retrofitted with methanol dual-fuel engines to be more than double the cost of blended fuel (Blend B30), heavy fuel oil (HFO) and HFO with Onboard Carbon Capture and Storage technologies (oCCS), says an article published on lr website.
Summary
- Lloyd’s Register Report Findings: Report titled ‘Fuel for thought: Methanol for Passenger Ships’ highlights challenges in adopting methanol propulsion for passenger ships, outlining key barriers and considerations for ship operators.
- Total Cost Of Ownership Comparison: Methanol retrofitting entails more than double the total cost of ownership (TCO) compared to blended fuel (Blend B30), heavy fuel oil (HFO), and HFO with onboard carbon capture and storage technologies (oCCS) over a 15-year period.
- Main Commercial Barriers: Bunkering price of methanol identified as the primary commercial barrier, with fossil-based (grey) methanol appearing more financially appealing for shipowners than a blend of grey, bio-, and e-methanol, even considering EU emissions taxes.
- Technical Viability And Retrofit Paths: Despite cost challenges, methanol deemed technically viable for reducing carbon emissions in passenger ship newbuilds, with successful retrofit paths demonstrated in projects like the LR project for the Stena Germanica in 2015.
- Need For Investment In Production And Infrastructure: Greater investment in green and bio-methanol production and improved bunkering infrastructure necessary for enhanced availability and reduced costs to make methanol commercially viable for passenger ships.
Lloyd’s Register Report Findings
A recent report from Lloyd’s Register (LR) sheds light on the challenges surrounding the adoption of methanol propulsion in passenger ships. Titled ‘Fuel for thought: Methanol for Passenger Ships,’ the report outlines key barriers and considerations for ship operators.
Total Cost Of Ownership Comparison
The report compares the total cost of ownership (TCO) over a 15-year period for passenger ships retrofitted with methanol dual-fuel engines against other fuel options. It reveals that methanol retrofitting entails more than double the TCO compared to blended fuel (Blend B30), heavy fuel oil (HFO), and HFO with onboard carbon capture and storage technologies (oCCS).
Main Commercial Barriers
The bunkering price of methanol emerges as the primary commercial barrier to its adoption. The use of fossil-based (grey) methanol is found to be more financially appealing for shipowners than a blend of grey, bio-, and e-methanol, even considering EU emissions taxes.
Technical Viability And Retrofit Paths
Despite the cost challenges, the report highlights methanol as a technically viable fuel option for reducing carbon emissions in passenger ship newbuilds. Successful retrofit paths, such as the LR project for the Stena Germanica in 2015, demonstrate the feasibility of adopting methanol in the sector.
Need For Investment In Production And Infrastructure
The report underscores the necessity for greater investment in green and bio-methanol production, along with improved bunkering infrastructure. Enhanced availability and reduced costs are deemed essential for methanol to become commercially viable for passenger ships.
Call For Renewable And Low-Carbon Methanol Production
Natasha Pritchard, VP Strategic Key Accounts (Cruise) at Lloyd’s Register, emphasizes the importance of prioritizing renewable and low-carbon methanol production to drive down costs and facilitate widespread adoption in the passenger ship segment.
Conclusion
The Lloyd’s Register report offers crucial insights for passenger ship owners considering methanol as part of their energy transition pathway. While methanol holds promise as a low-carbon solution for propulsion, addressing cost barriers through sustainable production and infrastructure development is imperative for its broader uptake in the industry.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe
Source: lr.org
