yes when used in a fuel cell but not it run though an engine, so if you are doing a conversion because you have lots of electricity why add steps?
Conservation of energy rules.
Perhaps a giant cyro tank full in a ship would beat anything else, certainly have zero emissions as you say if used to run electric motors. I could see that being a reality.
Just imagine a 100,000hp electric motor??
How many ships require 100000 Hp?
all the current 20k teu box ships but thats the limit of a prop so they will become twin shaft
I see that the HMM Algeciras is equipped with a single MAN B&W G95ME-C10.5 engine, capable of delivering 6,870 kW per cylinder for a total engine power of 60380 kW (81K Hp):
All the articles I have read with regards to the MAN B&W K108ME-C engine say IF that version were ever built it would be the most powerful engine (6,950 kW/cylinder). So far I have not found any reference that it ever was.
The MAN B&W 11G95ME-C found on the HMM Algeciras is capable of delivering 6,870 kW per cylinder. This is a higher per cylinder rating than Emma Maerskâs Wärtsilä RT-flex96C at 5,720 kW per cylinder.
A emission free fuel that can be used by both Aviation and Shipping?:
wow that would ground breaking, liquid fuel that is emission free?
This is the path any new build could do today. Anyone got details on the vessel?
https://www.uecc.com/news/2019/january/uecc-invest-in-new-generation-pure-car-and-truck-carriers/
Getting more domestic cargo onto ships with zero emission is but a dream.
But in Norway it is possible to dream:
I know, I know; It is impossible.
To think otherwise is stupid.
The greedy Shipowners, Shipbuilders and Cargo owners are just doing this to bluff gullible Norwegians into thinking that they are taking care of the environment, whiler all they actually look for is more PROFIT.
OK, even if it work in Norway it could NEVER work in the US because;
We got roads and rail. that is cheaper.
We got strong environmental regulations.
Ships has to be built in US, has to meet strict rules and be manned by Americans., which is much safer and more expensive.
In US we have XXXXXXXX (Fill in the blanks according to your choice)
More news from Norway on the subject of zero emission.
This time testing ammonia a fuel for 4-stroke engines:
And Norway is not alone in developing zero emission ships:
I just wish they would just call them low emission shipsâŚ
How about we just say the operating emissions from the engine are very low?
That removes the issue of the question of the emissions in making the fuel
Good news!!
GHG emission in the world has peaked, with 2019 being the peak year.
This according to a report by DNV-GL and doesnât :involve only shipping:
Singapore wants to be in the forefront on the decarbonisation in shipping:
While Rotterdam is gearing up for the hydrogen powered future ofb shipping:
Howâs that work? Are they going to stop importing natural gas or stop importing and refining crude or just stop exporting refined products and setting up as the regionâs LNG fueling station?
Are they going to refuse to accept inbound cargoes of crude and natural gas unless they are carried on sailing ships or tankers powered by solar or Norwegian hydrogen?
see next
and made of wood
mini nuclear powered chainsaws?