Clean AFA soot emission, yes, but still a major GHG emitter:
Which fuel to choose is not only difficulty facing shipping:
Looks like Methanol is winning the race to become the main marine fuel for now:
One of the reasons MAY be that Methanol is more easily available at present.
It also have the advantage of not requiring special storage, or major changes to the main engine(s)allowing dual fuel operation.
Yet another aspect to consider for the future marine fuel scenario:
One more reason why LNG is NOT a long term solution, or a good candidate as the Future Marine Fuel:
But Hydrogen and Ammonia are among the front runners:
Trailing somewhat behind Methanol at the moment:
The pacific is going to be a challenge for any of these alternative fuels. Where steaming distances between ports are 7,000 miles or longer ammonia or methanol is going take a fair chunk of the cargo space.
More chicken sh*t wanted.
It is needed to produce enough Bio-LNG to cross the Pacific.
Bio-LNG (Bio-Liquified Natural Gas) sounds like a contradiction in terms.
(But I suppose LBG could be misunderstood)
More Biogas (Bio-LNG) news:
Havila Castor naming ceremony in Ålesund 14.Nov:
On Tuesday 06. Nov. the coastal liner Havila Capella was christened by godmother Hege Sævik Rabben outside Havila Kystruten’s head office at Mjølstadneset in Fosnavåg:
Havila Capella was baptized with clean clear water from a waterfall in Geiranger:
Havila Capella and Castor together:
Photos: Havila Kystruten
Opportunities galore for those who dare to take them:
What you need to produce green fuel? Sun, wind, hydro or nuclear power in abundance. (+Money and guts, of course)
The big issue at he moment is everyone has power shortages along with the most expensive power they have ever paid for.
Doesnt bode well for evironmentally cleaner fuels that use huge amounts of power to produce.
You mean like;“making solar cells takes lots of power”?
Yes it does, but if that power come from renewable sources it is good for the environment.
Just because things aren’t perfect immediately doesn’t mean you should stop trying, or innovating.
The world is looking at several different routes towards “net zero emission”. Maybe one of those rotes will prove to be the eureka, or maybe several will end up leading to that goal.
But if you stop trying you’ll be stuck in the present, or going back to the stone age.
Agreed we should be constantly pushing the envelope and be reducing emissions and trying to get to net zero, buts thats a long way off.
Billions have been spent yet most of the world is short of power and its gotten very expensive.
How is that possible if the power input is free, sun and wind?
Something wrong with the model?
Plenty of green technologies will work once power is almost free but just look around power is expensive.
McDonald’s should be able to supply enough used coking oil to power a big fleet of ships.
Maybe even enough to offset the burps and farts of the cows that supply their meat:
The marine fuel trend in 2022:
Ships will run on oil for the remainder of our lifetime. The carbon BS will gone and in 10 years we all will look back and laugh at it.
In MY lifetime, very likely so, but most likely there will be some younger forum members still alive when “oil” is phased out as marine fuel, at least in the form and the way it is used today (i.e. HLSFO/MDO)
LNG will also likely to be a short lived love affair in shipping, unless a reliable method of carbon capture and storage is found soon.
You can hope that climate change will show up to be harmless and we all live happily ever after, but I would not bet my savings on it, if I were younger.
Methonol has about half the energy density of current heavy fuel oils and hydrogen about 20% so doesn’t that mean you have to burn siglnificanly more of either to get the same power output?
That and the additional cost, but most of all availability in main ports around the word is holding back development for now. As 2050 loom larger things are likely to change, both technically and availability, though.
Smart Shipowners are preparing themselves for the inevitable changes, but it is yet not clear which one of the many fuels and alternative technologies will become “the winner” in the race to be the “Fuel of the Future”.
There MAY be several alternative fuels, or technologies existing together, incl. wind power in some form. Or fossile fuel in some form MAY still be dominant, only used differently.
Those who live and is still coherent in 2050 will have a clearer picture of what the future will bring.
Let’s just hope that the Shipping Industry manage to agree on one or more universal method(s) and not make the same mistake as has been done with so many developing technologies in the past.
It is also my understanding that there is less than a 10% reduction in total CO2 emissions per unit of energy produced when using methonal vs heavy fuel oil when you consider the totality of processing and burning is considered. If this is true, it doesn’t make sense to require the switch.