Author: Peter Bos, Leading Professional Maritime solutions for renewable energies

If the global fleet was a country, it would be the sixth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, contributing about 3% of global CO2 emissions. Despite well-intentioned goals set by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and more recently by the EU, the shipping industry is still undecided when it comes to making the substantial investments needed to decarbonise shipping. It finds itself constrained by a complex Catch-22 situation. How did this arise? More importantly, how can it be resolved?

Earlier this year, the EU set a goal for the maritime industry to reduce its CO2 emissions by 2% by 2025 and 80% by 2050. Furthermore, from 2024, vessels will be taxed on their carbon emissions. Earlier, the IMO set a strategic target to reduce CO2 emissions across international shipping by at least 40% by 2030 and to 70% by 2050, compared to 2008.

These are noble goals which are much needed. But still absent is a firm roadmap to achieve them.

Shortage of renewable energy

There exist many alternative fuels competing to replace diesel. Each have their pros and cons. Today shipping companies and port operators have the unenviable task of determining which fuels and facilities they will need to invest in for the future.

Complicating matters is the fact there’s not enough renewable energy available to make the clean fuels of tomorrow. The world is not generating enough. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency, less than 0.2 Mt of renewable methanol is produced annually, mostly as bio-methanol. The figures fall woefully short.

Also, renewable energy tends not to be located where maritime customers need it most, at major ports like Singapore, Rotterdam, Shanghai, and Los Angeles.

When it comes to identifying the maritime fuel of tomorrow there is no one cap that fits all. Methanol and LNG are touted as transitional fuels because their emissions are lower compared to diesel. But given the climate crisis, shouldn’t we set the bar higher and aim for zero emissions? I think we must.

Fuels for Net Zero Shipping

It’s true that there’s no single silver bullet to meet the needs of all maritime vessels. Hydrogen, for example, made from renewable electricity through electrolysis, emits no CO2. Yet it takes six to ten times the storage space of diesel and when liquefied must be stored at very low temperatures. The extra storage cost means that in the short- and medium-term, hydrogen is an uneconomic fuel for long-distance vessels. Where it is viable, is for coastal vessels that can secure a local fuel supply. The same also applies to short-journey battery-powered vessels.

Ammonia looks promising. On the one hand, it can be made from green electricity, is cheaper than using batteries, and easier to store than hydrogen. In the other hand, its corrosive nature and toxicity raises environmental and safety concerns – not least in ports with bunkering operations close to residential areas.

Bringing clarity

Given all the uncertainty, ports and shipping companies inevitably ask me how should they best proceed?
Understandably, they fear of making the wrong choice, which in the future could cost them dearly. The industry wants to proceed but is held by lack of regulation, shortage of renewable energy, and competing technologies that are still not fully proven and require substantial investment – both in vessels and infrastructure.

The business case appears uncertain: the classic chicken and egg situation. They fear losing out if they jump in and make the wrong decision. On the other hand, failure to act now may cost millions in the future.

I often advocate for them to take baby steps toward their end goal, asking what does success look like? Then to keep that in mind and take guidance on the best technology to meet their current and future business needs. Consider undertaking a pilot project. It must be a measured initiative from which they can learn and, where possible, work with others.

The key is not to be afraid. Accept that risk is an inevitable component of the energy transition. Nothing ventured nothing gained. But be sensible. Don’t ‘bet the farm’ at this early stage as so much needs to be done and despite ambition levels, increasing the amount of renewables won’t happen overnight.

Finally, international and national policymakers ought to engage more with the shipping industry and energy providers. This needs to perform on a truly systematic level. Targets are good but not enough. Policymakers must be part of the solution given that substantial investment is needed from the private and public sectors. Decarbonising shipping is a global issue. One that calls for planning and regulation on an international scale. The good news is that it can be done. Meanwhile, the clock keeps ticking towards midnight.

The highlights from this article were originally published in Bunkerspot magazine in October 2023.

Peter Bos is a leading maritime solutions expert for renewable energy at Haskoning. With 25 years of experience, he has an impressive track record in maritime projects at all stages of design and execution. Peter’s extensive knowledge makes him a trusted advisor to several standards committees, including NEN and ISO. He has an MSc. in Civil Engineering from Delft University of Technology.

Peter  Bos - Leading professional Maritime solutions for renewable energy

Peter Bos

Leading professional Maritime solutions for renewable energy