Shipping’s ambition to bunker green methanol in the EU faces a setback in the near term as one Swedish e-methanol project dedicated to bunkering shuts down, reports Engine.
Green methanol
The orders for methanol-capable ships are piling up. There are currently 51 methanol-capable ships in operation and another 284 on order for delivery towards 2028, according to classification society DNV.
But now there is a risk that these methanol-capable vessels may not be able to bunker green methanol at EU ports in the near term due to a looming supply shortage.
Environmental non-profit T&E warned in June that around 66% of the total e-fuel projects proposed in the EU may not become operational this decade. The study also noted that more than half of the 61 projects are “at risk” of scaling down planned capacity or facing delays beyond their committed timelines. The primary reason for this may be that fuel suppliers are reluctant to invest without assurances of future demand, according to T&E.
Almost prophetically, last week Danish wind energy company Ørsted shelved one of the most anticipated e-methanol bunkering projects in the EU. It cited the inability to secure financially viable long-term offtake agreements and high project development costs as the main reasons for terminating its 50,000 mt/year e-methanol project. The plant was scheduled to begin operations next year in Sweden.
Producers must secure offtake agreements before investing in production, Faïg Abbasov, shipping program director at T&E said in a social media post. “In mature markets, market signals might be enough. But green hydrogen, e-methanol, and e-ammonia markets are far from being mature. Unfortunately, a similar fate might be waiting for other e-fuel projects, too, unless the European Commission and member states step in to enable early deployments through policy support,” he added.
Meanwhile, methanol producer Proman is ramping up its methanol bunkering operations on the other side of the Atlantic. Proman is set to achieve a total of 12,500 mt of methanol bunkered at the Port of Point Lisas in Trinidad by the end of this month. However, it currently supplies grey methanol for bunkering in Trinidad and Tobago, which is not effective in reducing a vessel’s carbon emissions. Grey methanol emits 1.14 mt of CO2 per mt (mtCO2/mt) of fuel, while VLSFO emits 1 mtCO2/mt of fuel. This means grey methanol emits 14% more CO2 than VLSFO, according to data from the Methanol Institute.
In other news, A.P. Moller-Maersk has joined a study on nuclear marine propulsion. The study will evaluate the regulatory requirements and safety standards necessary to operate a nuclear-powered feeder ship in a European port, according to the classification society Lloyd’s Register (LR). LR has partnered with UK-based maritime tech firm CORE Power, Danish shipping major A.P. Moller-Maersk, and an unspecified “leading” port authority for this study.
Japanese classification society ClassNK is set to approve the machine room safety design for a 40,000-cbm ammonia-fueled ammonia gas carrier. The safety notation will be granted once the shipyard demonstrates that the machinery room meets the requirements to minimize exposure to ammonia leaks. A machinery room typically houses engines, generators, pumps, and other essential equipment for a ship’s operation.
South Korea has proposed removing water content from bunker delivery notes (BDNs) used to determine a vessel’s Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) rating at the 82nd meeting of the IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC 82). It argues that while water content does not affect a vessel’s CO2 emissions, its inclusion in BDNs affects the calculation of the ship’s overall fuel oil consumption, which can negatively impact the CII rating and result in a lower score.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe
Source: Engine
