Shipping is the backbone of the global economy, carrying more than 80% of traded goods. But it also accounts for about 3% of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, with the overwhelming majority of the world’s fleet running on fossil fuel. If the sector is to decarbonize in line with the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, it needs to move beyond oil.
Available Alternatives
The ship fuels that may eventually replace today’s oil-derived products must produce lower (or zero) emissions, have enough power to propel gigantic vessels around the globe, and be affordable. Here are the main candidates:
- Methanol
Pros:
Can dramatically reduce emissions
Has already attracted significant investment from shipping companies including A.P. Moller-Maersk
Is liquid at ambient temperature, helping make it relatively easy to store and handle
Clean versions can be made, including using agricultural and food waste (bio methanol) or green hydrogen and CO2 (e-methanol)
Cons:
Limited supply of clean versions
Less energy-dense than oil-derived fuel
- Ammonia
Pros:
Doesn’t emit carbon dioxide – it contains no carbon
Can be made using green hydrogen and nitrogen from the air (e-ammonia)
Can also be made using natural gas (blue ammonia)
Cons:
Ammonia ship engines are less developed than those for methanol
Potential nitrous oxide emissions, a potent greenhouse gas
Toxic for people and marine life
- Biofuels
Pros:
Can significantly lower carbon emissions
Already produced and used in shipping
Can be made from various forms of biomass
Relatively easy to store and transport
Can be used with existing oil-based fuel
Cons:
Feedstock availability is a potential barrier, particularly because of competition from other sectors, like aviation
- Liquefied Natural Gas
Pros:
Well-known, generally available, lower carbon-emitting alternative to oil-based fuel
Some ships already run on LNG
There’s also the potential for lower CO2 emissions from so-called bio-LNG and e-LNG
Cons:
Still a fossil fuel and only cuts CO2 emissions by about 20% versus oil-based marine fuel
Causes emissions of methane, a super-pollutant.
Why The Urgency?
The International Maritime Organization, a U.N. agency that regulates global shipping, is currently pushing to cut greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping by at least 50% by 2050. That’s not enough of a reduction to align the industry with the Paris agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. For that, the IMO must target eliminating all GHG emissions, reaching net zero by 2050, according to the Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping. The IMO’s current targets aren’t enforceable in themselves, unless a country puts something in its national legislation.
Latest Developments
The IMO is meeting in early July and is expected to adopt a new greenhouse-gas emissions strategy, potentially including more aggressive targets such as zero by 2050. However, no firm decisions are expected on a global carbon levy or similar hard-hitting regulation that would immediately and directly impact shippers’ activities. The IMO has also recently set rules on ships’ efficiency. Other regulators have also taken action: The European Union is including shipping in its emissions trading scheme starting next year, and the FuelEU Maritime agreement – requiring emissions reductions relative to energy use – has also been reached. In the U.S., the Inflation Reduction Act includes $3 billion of maritime-related funding, including for zero-emission port equipment, and progress is being made on Green Shipping Corridors – zero emission maritime routes between two or more ports.
Did you subscribe to our newsletter?
It’s free! Click here to subscribe!
Source: Pressherald
