Maritime Energy Transition
When it comes to understanding the energy transition for the maritime sector, it is hard to get a clear picture. Most reports focus on where the bulk of the current green house gas (GHG) emissions come from, which is international shipping, but little is said (or done) about helping other parts of the maritime world understand how to decarbonise.
As our CEO co-authored the Climate Resilient Wild Catch Commercial Fisheries report (FRDC Project 2021-089) for the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) we thought it might be useful to bring together the reports we have come across and summarise their findings.
Note: Reports are reviewed in order of publish date.
EDIT (7 Dec 2023): Added in the earliest report so far, this one is from the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
EDIT (12 Dec 2023): Added details about the FRDC report on Climate Resilient Wild Catch Commercial Fisheries now that it is published.
EDIT (7 Feb 2024): Added a new report from ZESTAs on Commercial Readiness of Absolute Zero GHG Technologies that they submitted to the IMO’s marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC).
A pathway to decarbonise the shipping sector by 2050
From: International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)
Published: October 2021
Source: https://www.irena.org/publications/2021/Oct/A-Pathway-to-Decarbonise-the-Shipping-Sector-by-2050
Key Takeaways: This report obviously focuses on international shipping and concludes that “Large and very large ships are responsible for about 85% of net GHG emissions associated with the international shipping sector“. This is only 20% of the global shipping fleet, but is also the part that is growing the fastest (most likely due to technological support for more economic sized vessels). They also do a good job of identifying the ways that ports and infrastructure spending could aid or harm the energy transition.
This is a great report if you want to know where the bulk of international maritime emissions are and the current set of alternate fuels. It does not have the detail that a vessel owner/operator might want to see, but it does suggest some relevant regulatory actions for people in government or NGOs.
The diagram below (Figure 19) is the sort of brilliantly simple, yet informative graphics that IRENA have filled this report with, and which make it worth checking out even if you don’t think you will learn anything new.
Summary: Like many of the reports this one concludes that energy efficiency improvements are the right place to start decarbonising, due mostly to minimal capex requirements and applicability to the existing fleet of vessels. They cover the gamut of alternate fuels, they group some together and separate out others in ways different to other reports, but broadly it is consistent with what other reports look at. They briefly touch on battery-electric vessels, more for ports to decarbonise their vessel fleets than large ships
The annexes are worth reviewing on their own. They cover decarbonisation measures at ports, energy efficiency solutions in more depth, and provide an overview of energy technology that is simple enough to help people new to this sector.
Decarbonizing maritime transport: A study on the electrification of the European Ferry Fleet
From: Siemens Energy AG and Bellona
Published: September 2022
Source: https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/home/stories/green-marine.html
Key Takeaways: This short report looks at the GHG emissions effect of electrifying the European ferry fleet and produces some compelling numbers in terms of the impact this would have. The report recommends all ferry routes up to one hour in length be electrified, and that shore power be prioritised for even existing diesel ferries in order to drop the significant GHG impact of running engines while berthed. Longer routes should consider using hybrid electric powertrains to minimise fuel consumption. This gives a good overview for European policy makers, but is light on detail for commercial vessel or port owners/operators.
Summary: Ferries are a great starting point for electrification of commercial vessels as their significant operating expenses due to fuel consumption can be attractively addressed by the operating cost savings of battery-electric or hybrid electric powertrains.
The report also considers the political landscape for electrification of ferries and strategies for electrifying ferries in Italy, Greece, Germany and the UK. Early adopter Norway rates a special mention for already electrifying their ferry industry.
Energy Efficiency and Decarbonization Technical Guide
From: US Maritime Administration (MARAD) and Glosten
Published: November 2022
Key Takeaways: This in-depth and very technical analysis by Glosten looks at a wide range of efficiency options such as “reducing energy wasted on the vessel propulsion system, improving the flow of electricity to various onboard demands, or switching to a fuel and consumers with an reduced lifecycle carbon emissions.“ They go to the extra effort of analysing how different measures can stack with each other for different types of vessels, as well as case studies for six types of commercial vessels.
One of the excellent pieces of information is the below SANKEY diagram for the energy output of a typical diesel generator driving an electric drivetrain. An important point to note is that the energy that needs to be replaced by a battery-electric system is the “Electrical power“ component, and not energy lost by the diesel engine and generator.
SANKEY Diagram of energy use by a diesel engine. Source: ABB (via Glosten report)
Summary: There is no better report to give you an overview of the technology landscape and the potential ways that commercial vessel owners and operators can reduce their GHG emissions and decarbonise their operations. It is particularly useful if you are interested in commercial vessels that fall into one of the classes considered in depth:
Oceangoing Tanker
Oceangoing Containership
Ferry
Towboat-Tugboat
Offshore Supply Vessel
Ore Bulk Carrier
The report includes an analysis of a variety of alternative fuels, and with regards to ammonia they are careful to point out the extreme toxicity of this fuel.
Toxicity effects of gaseous ammonia by exposure concentration/time. Source: Oeko Institut e.V. (via Glosten report)
The future of maritime fuels - what you need to know
From: Lloyd’s Register Maritime Decarbonisation Hub
Published: September 2023
Source: https://www.lr.org/en/knowledge/research-reports/the-future-of-maritime-fuels/
Key Takeaways: This relatively short report takes two future scenarios, 1) where hydrogen-based maritime fuels predominate, and 2) where biofuels-based maritime fuels predominate, in order to see what might be learned from each. In the first scenario green ammonia is seen as the clear winner, but the maritime transportation industry is urged they must lead the development of supplies of it, and in the second scenario biomethane is seen as the clear winner. In both scenarios methanol (either green methanol, or bio-methanol) is seen as a runner up.
Summary: This report is very much taking a high-level market analysis view that is not particularly driven by technical/safety concerns (see the ammonia toxicity table above), nor by the scale of effects on GHG emissions (fugitive methane emissions is a big potential issue). The report does say they used statistical analysis on a number of other predictions/reports, but the high-level advice given is in my opinion not particularly useful and likely to give a false sense of security.
Maritime Forecast to 2050
From: DNV
Published: September 2023
Source: https://www.dnv.com/maritime/publications/maritime-forecast-2023/index.html
Key Takeaways: DNV focuses on international shipping in this report, and works out that operational efficiencies are a key starting point for decarbonisation which is a good idea. They also like carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear, via small modular reactors (SMRs), these are pretty bad ideas. I like CCS, but only if we do something truly useful with the captured CO2, and SMRs are still very much in the realm of pipedream with very low TRLs and uncertain (but likely huge) costs associated with them - not to mention potential political, regulatory and policy hurdles. The recent failure of NuScale Power’s SMR project for the US Department of Energy is a cautionary tale in this area.
Summary: This report looks at a number of regulatory drivers for maritime decarbonisation and then gives “an outlook on six selected technologies that are receiving increased attention in the industry: solid oxide fuel cells, liquefied hydrogen, wind-assisted propulsion, air lubrication systems, onboard carbon capture, and nuclear propulsion.“ Finally, a review of green shipping corridors rounds the report out.
It is a cherry-picked list of technologies and many good efficiency changes are ignored. They do make the case that drop-in biofuels will be a critical interim measure, and that supply of these fuels will be a critical challenge to address.
Voyaging toward a greener future: Insights from the GCMD-BCG Global Maritime Decarbonization Survey
From: Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) and BCG
Published: September 2023
Source: https://www.gcformd.org/gcmdpapers
Key Takeaways: This report is the analysis of the results of a survey of shipowners and operators in the international shipping industry. It usefully identified three broad archetypes of stakeholders, Frontrunners, Followers and Conservatives, and how they view maritime decarbonisation. One of the key findings was that Conservatives were not even aware of many of the efficiency changes they could make today that would have a positive financial and environmental impact on their operations.
Summary: This sort of report is very useful for giving a reality check to decarbonisation ambitions as we tend to associate with like minded individuals and organisations, meaning the reality of where the industry is at in their thinking and implementation is not visible. The stakeholders that GCMD engage with are also very broad, which leads to interesting suggestions such as “Create innovative financing mechanisms to de-risk adoption of less-mature levers“, which is the sort of financial innovation most technology-centric reports are not suggesting.
Pathway to Net-Zero Emissions 2023
From: DNV
Published: October 2023
Source: https://www.dnv.com/publications/pathway-to-net-zero-emissions-report-2023-249543
Key Takeaways: Maritime transport is relatively close to the target pathway, at least compared to road and aviation transport sectors. Demand for low and zero carbon fuels is likely to outstrip supply. This is partly because the IMO’s targets and actions in wealthy regions are likely to have a flow on effect to other regions.
Summary: This report looks across transportation sectors and across regions, with a backcast that looks for “a pathway that is technically and politically feasible“ to achieve 1.5°C global warming. They also have a forecast report that predicts a likely 2.2°C global warming given current actions. They rightly point to a need for alternate fuels, and (in my opinion) wrongly point to green ammonia, other e-fuels (like green methanol) and bioenergy (which I think is biofuels).
Like the Maritime Forecast to 2050 this report could be criticised for being a little naïve in its views on advocating for carbon capture and storage (CCS) and direct air capture (DAC) as real climate mitigation strategies. CCS has some value, especially if you find a use for the carbon rather than simply storing it (or extracting more oil!), but DAC has been reasonably described as a “nonsensical Rube Goldberg contraption“.
Pathways to Propulsion Decarbonisation for the Recreational Marine Industry - Synopsis Report
From: International Council of Marine Industry Associations (ICOMIA) and Ricardo plc
Published: November 2023
Key Takeaways: The obvious solution to decarbonise the majority of the existing vessels is to look at low carbon drop-in fuels like renewable diesel (biomass derived, like HVO), renewable gasoline (biomass derived again), e-gasoline and e-diesel. From their they see some use cases where battery-electric, hybrid electric, or alternate fuels like hydrogen may apply. Unfortunately, while they are completely right about the easiest approach for everyone in the industry, the lack of supply for the drop-in fuels is an issue they acknowledge “there is considerable uncertainty over the availability of these fuels through to 2035“ but do not address.
Renewable diesel is the drop-in fuel most likely to be affordable, and is already in use in California. Unfortunately, California’s mandates have ensued that most of the world’s supply ends up in their state - and the rest of it is is in heavy demand by international shipping. Our own investigations have shown there is no pathway to affordable e-gasoline or e-diesel because the hard work of creating complex hydrocarbon chains isn’t given the boost that biomass gives to the renewable diesel/petrol fuels. That means lots more renewable energy will be needed, as well as a plentiful supply of CO2, both of which will drive up the costs. The current planned production of e-fuels will likely target sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mandated volumes, where cost is less of an issue.
Summary: This is the only report to focus on the recreational maritime industry, and as such is looking at a very wide range of use cases, from dinghies to superyachts, and with a sprinkling of everything else in between. It does a great job of looking at how a wide range of existing vessels (9 craft categories) could be decarbonised using known technologies. They point out that recreational craft engines “are operated on average between 35 and 48 hours per year” (less for sailing craft, more for motorcraft) which means that expensive retrofitting projects might actually cost more than leaving the engines alone. I think this is a great point, there is not a lot of value in decarbonising the parts of the sector that are so little used, because they produce very little GHG emissions as well. Most likely, this sector will find the cost of fossil fuels significantly increasing as supply dries up and carbon taxes affect costs. However, that is not necessarily going to do much more than slightly change the ways these vessels are used - with owners looking to add batteries and solar panels to help minimise how often they put the engines on.
I think ICOMIA have missed something important, which is that new vessels should be considering the use of battery-electric or hybrid electric powertrains (I am not so certain that hydrogen is a good fit for the recreational market). In the case of new vessels there is a lot to be gained from buying a design that is focused on energy economy and minimising GHG emissions. Credit One Group have published statistics on boat ownership in Australia in 2023 and they make the point that boat ownership is on the rise, with personal watercraft ownership rising by 29.2% over 2 years, and new boat sales are increasing by 50% per year, whilst used boat sales are increasing by 20% per year. With electric vessels they see plenty of growth ahead and they state that “learnings from recent studies strongly indicate that we will see a significant increase in the number of electric boats produced and purchased across Australia in the next few years“
Climate Resilient Wild Catch Fisheries
From: Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) and Seafood Industry Australia (SIA)
(Disclaimer: Maritime Impulse was involved in authoring this report)
Published: December 2023
Source: https://www.frdc.com.au/project/2021-089
Key Takeaways: Wild catch commercial fishing is one of the hardest maritime operations to decarbonise, especially deep water fishing where journeys can last weeks at a time and catch is frozen at -60°C. One of the key takeaways of this report is to place the decarbonisation concerns of the fishing industry in context with the many other industries affected (see figure below). This was important because the fishing industry can often feel that they are not listened to, but they have allies in many adjacent industries they can work with to solve these energy transition problems.
Industries involved in Fishing’s energy transition journey. Source: Blue-X (via FRDC’s report)
Summary: This report is specifically addressing the requirements of the fishing industry, however to do so it necessarily covers issues that apply to the broader maritime industry as well. This is one of the larger reports, exceeded in size only by Glosten’s excellent technical one for MARAD.
The report covers a wide range of issues:
Exploring different energy carriers and powertrains,
Reviewing what can be achieved at different levels of intervention to existing vessels,
Industry-wide scenario analysis,
Decarbonisation roadmaps for existing vessels and newbuilds,
A review of the broader maritime industry’s progress towards decarbonising and technology development (the one part of the report that shows a degree of age, given the pace of change), and
A set of 19 recommendations, both fishing-specific, and cross-industry recommendations.
The breadth of issues covered means that there is a lot of detail, but it also (unintentionally) repeats information that earlier reports have also covered - so an informed reader might skip those sections. The scenario analysis yields many unexpected learnings, but as these are specific to the Australian fishing industry they are less relevant to the broader maritime industry. Some of them might well apply more broadly, but it would be best to confirm that with a properly detailed analysis, the ones we would think most apply more broadly are:
None of the current set of technically mature solutions will lead to a complete reduction of green house gas emissions - thus more investment in new technologies will be needed for decades to come.
It is not economically rational for companies to transition without outside intervention - this may come from financial, insurance, or regulatory requirements, but something must apply pressure across the industry so that competitors are jointly affected.
Energy intelligence is lacking - most companies have very little idea how their specific parts of their operations generate, consume or waste energy. The report highlights a previous FRDC report’s findings in this area which one can apply to many vessel owners/operators:
“most fishing companies are not properly prepared for undertaking energy audits, simply because the 24 months of historical data required to complete the simplest energy audit (i.e. level 1) is either not being kept, or is kept in an inappropriate form that compromises its analytical worth.”
Commercial Readiness of Absolute Zero GHG Technologies (MEPC 81/INF.5)
From: Zero Emissions Ship Technology Association (ZESTAs)
Published: December 2023 (but publicised January 2024)
Source: https://zestas.org/policy-regulation/
Key Takeaways: Currently electric systems, particularly hybrid-electric ones, are the most mature - but are limited by the maturity of fixed charging infrastructure. For many use cases swappable battery packs are available and in commercial use.
Technology for hydrogen fuel-cells, wind propulsion and supplementary energy efficiency technologies are ready to help larger vessels.
Because ZESTAs is deliberately looking at the commercial readiness of solutions they end up referring to Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Commercial Readiness Level (CRL), below is the handy table they include to help align these two ideas.
Table combining TRLs and CRLs as used by report.
Summary: This is a technology report that limits itself to considering absolute zero emission technologies, so many popular alternate fuels such as LNG, ammonia, and methanol are largely ignored. Each solution is considered from a technology and regulatory viewpoint, with some consideration given to announcements about application of the technologies.
There are basically three main solutions considered:
Electrification
Green hydrogen
Wind propulsion
We agree with numbers 1 and 3, they are definitely vital considerations in reducing maritime emissions, but the emphasis on green hydrogen seems … misplaced. Increasingly, recent developments have shown that green hydrogen projects are simply not economically feasible - something opponents of hydrogen as fuel have pointed out for years. In their Renewables 2023 report the International Energy Agency (IEA) pointed out that only 7% of the hydrogen projects announced to go live before 2030 have actually been funded:
“The main reason is the slow pace of bringing planned projects to final investment decisions due to a lack of off-takers and the impact of higher prices on production costs.“
Without confirmed customers (”off-takers”) and with too high production costs, there is no business opportunity to fund. The real picture is that electrification and biofuels are eating green hydrogen’s lunch in the maritime space. Calling for renewed investment is just sinking good money after bad - far better to focus on what is working, which is electrifying everything we can and ensuring biofuels supply continues to grow to meet demand.
The list of supplementary technologies given by the report is limited, and minimal details reported, the Glostens report for MARAD is far more detailed and useful in this regard. There are also two pages given to crew training which point out obvious deficiencies in current regimes but do not do much more.
Overall it was a good report, but I do hope the IMO does not get distracted with green hydrogen in the way they did with LNG. We don’t need to derail the maritime energy transition with dead end technologies that won’t really make a climate change impact.
