In South Korea, Science Direct reports researchers at the Korea Research Institute of Ships and Ocean Engineering compared marine fuel retrofits through 2050 by looking beyond ship exhaust to the full fuel pathway, vessel design constraints and lifetime costs. The study, published August 2 in the Journal of Cleaner Production, evaluates methanol, ammonia, biomethane, bio LNG, batteries, hydrogen fuel cells and conventional marine diesel using well to wake emissions and different feedstock sources.
That broader accounting changes the picture. Fuel prices and carbon regulation dominate lifetime costs, and the same fuel can produce sharply different results depending on how it is made. Under stricter carbon scenarios, renewable ammonia emerges as a potentially cost effective alternative as carbon rewards and falling fuel costs narrow its gap with marine diesel. Fossil methanol fares poorly because of high fuel costs and carbon penalties.
Battery and fuel cell systems reduce emissions but remain expensive because of higher equipment costs and replacement requirements over a vessel’s lifetime.
More on the story
Category: Sustainable Marine Fuels
