Zero-carbon fuels and marine shipping: Both a will and a way? | Greenbiz – GreenBiz

The marine shipping sector consumes around 10 quadrillion British thermal units (Btus) of fuel and emits 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide each year. Thats more than all of Germanys emissions, more than all of Saudi Arabias emissions and roughly equal to the emissions from all passenger vehicles in the United States. By any reasonable measure the shipping industry is a major global emitter, one of the economic sectors that must be fully decarbonized by midcentury to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Eliminating GHG emissions from marine shipping is an enormous undertaking, but the technological path forward has been reasonably clear for a few years. What has been missing is the requisite will among the shipping industry and regional and international regulators to require and implement the steps that need to be taken.

Greenhouse gas emissions can be eliminated from the marine sector largely by shifting from heavy fuel oil and marine diesel to zero-carbon fuels (ZCF) such as hydrogen and ammonia, as detailed by the Clean Air Task Force (see here and here), other nongovernmental organizations (here and here), academic and government experts (here and here) and financial institutions (here and here).

Ammonia, made by combining hydrogen with nitrogen captured from ambient air, looks like a particularly promising marine fuel, especially for transoceanic voyages provided the hydrogen and the nitrogen are sourced from processes that emit little to no greenhouse gas. It can be used in fuel cells or more conveniently, at least in the near term in retrofitted or purpose-built versions of the massive two- and four-stroke internal combustion engines that propel container ships, tankers and bulk carriers around the world.

Ammonia contains no carbon atoms, so no carbon dioxide is produced when it is converted into energy, regardless whether that conversion happens in a fuel cell or in a reciprocating engine. And, as explained more fully here, production technologies that use carbon capture and storage systems or renewable- or nuclear-derived electricity can make ammonia with little to no associated greenhouse gas emissions. To be clear, ammonia fuel presents real challenges its a toxic substance that requires careful handling, and harmful nitrogen oxide gases can form when ammonia is combusted but the challenges look to be manageable through a combination of time-tested safety protocols and modern emission control systems.

Because most transoceanic shipping occurs outside the claimed jurisdiction of national governments, regulatory authority over the shipping sector is thin and spotty.

The opportunity that ammonia produced with little-to-no lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions affords for shipping decarbonization is apparent to a growing set of innovative companies and institutions, many of which are taking steps toward full-scale commercialization of ammonia-fueled shipping technology. Some recent examples include:

These companies are at the vanguard of what is likely to be a challenging journey. Container ships and bulk carriers consumed 118 million metric tons of heavy fuel oil-equivalent fuel in 2018, per data from the U.N. International Maritime Organization (IMO), accounting for half the sectors total fuel consumption. If those same ships ran on ammonia instead (assuming 1.89 metric tons of ammonia are needed to replace a metric ton of marine fuel, as indicated in this 2020 analysis by Kim et al.), they would have consumed 224 million metric tons of ammonia. Total global ammonia production is about 180 million metric tons per year, and almost all that ammonia is made using technologies that emit significant amounts of carbon dioxide.

Is there a way to make 224 million metric tons of ammonia with technologies that emit little to no CO2? More immediately, is there a way to supply a 5000 TEU container ship with the 33,000 metric tons of zero-carbon ammonia fuel it would consume during a years worth of voyages between, say, the ports of Los Angeles and Shanghai? (The second question is particularly relevant to coZEV, a joint effort by leading retail companies, CATF, the Aspen High Seas Initiative and other organizations to build demand for first-of-a-kind zero-emission container ship routes between major international seaports. The first such route is likely to be served by a 5000 TEU ammonia-fueled container ship.)

It will take about 400 new world-scale clean ammonia production plants to make the 224 million metric tons of zero-carbon ammonia required to decarbonize the global fleet of container ships and bulk carriers. (By world-scale, we mean a facility or complex that makes about 560,000 metric tons of ammonia per year from about 100,000 metric tons of hydrogen.)

That is an undeniably massive undertaking. We have the know-how to do it, though, and we can start making progress one clean ammonia plant and one zero-emissions vessel at a time. If one of the first world-scale clean ammonia plants was near a major port, just 6 percent of its annual output could fuel a 5,000 TEU emissions-free container ship for a year.

Whats needed is the will to push forward the will to develop and implement new policies and new business models aimed at driving down the price of zero-carbon ammonia and pulling it into the marine fuel market.

Because most transoceanic shipping occurs outside the claimed jurisdiction of national governments, regulatory authority over the shipping sector is thin and spotty. The authority that does exist is mostly reposed in the IMO, a conservative and consensus-driven institution headquartered in London.

The IMO has developed important environmental regulatory requirements, such as a 2020 regulation that sharply constrains vessels sulfur dioxide emissions, but its track record is full of environmental initiatives that were delayed, blocked or ineffectual.

Notably, the IMOs 2018 greenhouse gas reduction requirement is literally a half-measure it only requires the sector to reduce GHG emissions by "at least 50 percent by 2050" and the body has failed so far to establish meaningful mid-term milestones that could generate useful momentum. Efforts to strengthen GHG regulations have been frustrated by delegates from economically powerful countries and the shipping industry, which has a large consultative role in IMO proceedings.

It will take about 400 new world-scale clean ammonia production plants to make the 224 million metric tons of zero-carbon ammonia required to decarbonize the global fleet of container ships and bulk carriers.

Over the past year, however, as the global imperative to responsibly tackle climate change has solidified, other stakeholders in the marine space have begun charting a different course for the sector, oneconsistent with a 1.5 degree C limit on warming. A string of recent developments signal to the IMO and industry laggards that change is coming:

The emerging evidence of a will to decarbonize the marine sector among pioneering retail and commodity companies willing to invest in strategies to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from the marine portion of their supply chains, among innovative shipbuilders and engine technology developers and, most recently, among key policymakers is just a start. But its a start we can build on.

Original post:

Zero-carbon fuels and marine shipping: Both a will and a way? | Greenbiz - GreenBiz