The recent behavior of shipowners on the liquefied natural gas issue has reignited the conflict between opponents of this fuel and the shipping industry as a whole.
UCL Professor Tristan Smith is sceptical about the new dynamics in the LNG sector, saying container lines are copying each other, “perhaps because none of them have the courage to read through the IMO’s revised strategy or really find out what it means for the speed of technological change.”
This is “bizarre,” he said, given that “…the IMO made it clear last year that it would set its medium-term measures to achieve a 50 to 60 percent reduction in greenhouse gas intensity by 2030 and a 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gas intensity by 2040.” Even the most optimistic models assume that greenhouse gas intensity could be reduced by 23 percent by liquefied natural gas (LNG) with state-of-the-art engine technologies tailored to this fuel.
“I don’t see how it will be possible to operate a dual-fuel LNG plant competitively into the 2030s at realistic biofuel prices,” he said.
Under CEO Soren Skou, Maersk said The Loadstar In 2023, LNG will “not be a fuel of the future for our fleet” and the shipping company will “invest in technologies and innovations that can develop new environmentally friendly alternatives to fossil fuels”.
However, under the new leadership of Vincent Clerc, the shipping giant made a controversial U-turn in this regard this year.
A Maersk spokesman said The Loadstar This month, the company said it expected biomethane to be available in larger quantities than expected, adding: “…we are seeing promising developments in the availability of liquefied biomethane, although its full scaling capacity has not yet been reached.”
Biomethane is the carbon-neutral version of LNG and its proponents believe there will be a “clear path” from fossil LNG to bio-LNG in the near future.
However, current evidence suggests that the supply of biomethane will also be subject to similar constraints.
“Future large-scale biomethanol will be produced predominantly from dry feedstocks,” the Maersk spokesperson explained. “These feedstocks are of course limited in quantity and scope, but we still see significant scaling potential for both routes.”
OceanScore Late last week, it was suggested that it was possible to avoid the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fine of €2,400 per tonne of fuel burnt – rising to €3,360 by 2029 – by combining a fleet of high-emission vessels, including one low-emission vessel.
“A significant number of the shipping companies we have spoken to, especially smaller ones, are not considering pooling but simply intend to pay the penalty,” said OceanScore CEO Albrecht Grell. “But this, as well as the postponement of compliance deficits into subsequent years through loans that generate interest, will prove increasingly costly in the long term.”
