Liquid Wind study: eMethanol has carbon footprint 15 times lower than sustainable biofuel bunkers

Liquid Wind on Thursday (27 April) said less than half the amount of eMethanol is required compared to biofuel bunkers when it is sourced for compliance under the FuelEU Maritime regulation according to a case study in its whitepaper. 

It also said eMethanol can have a carbon footprint 15 times lower than sustainable biofuel. 

These results are contained in a White Paper produced by Liquid Wind on the economic implications of e-fuel Well-to-Wake emissions compared to alternative marine fuels as the development is moving rapidly in the eMethanol and e-fuel space. In the white paper, the firm dug into these increased efforts and showed why eMethanol is the best alternative bunker fuel to fossil fuels.  

Liquid Wind said the shipping industry is stepping up its efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. More and more companies are setting targets and offering green shipping solutions to their customers. 

“At the same time, new regulations and policies are being introduced to support the transition to low-carbon shipping. The primary motivation for switching to low-carbon fuels is to reduce emissions and support sustainability, rather than to transport goods at the lowest possible cost. As a result, the value of the fuel lies not only in its ability to transport goods, but also in the carbon footprint and its contribution to sustainability,” it said. 

“With the introduction of alternative fuels, a broad range of products with varying production pathways and respective emission intensities enter the market. The emission reduction contribution of a fuel directly correlates with their Well-to-Wake (WTW) emission value. Therefore, fuel prices will reflect the WTW values of a specific fuel. eMethanol and its very low intensity offers a great reduction potential for shipping companies and their customers” Felix Jung, Sustainability Manager at Liquid Wind and author of the white paper, said. 

The firm said when shipping companies switch to fossil-free fuel alternatives, they are not only buying an energy carrier, but also a product that supports sustainability and compliance with regulations. In conclusion, sourcing alternative bunker fuels means primarily sourcing sustainability. 

In the white paper we encourage shipping companies, policy makers and users of shipping and transportation services to use a Well-to-Wake approach when evaluating emissions from the shipping industry.  

This means that shipping companies should determine the amount of alternative fuel needed to achieve a reduction target. In time and with more regulations getting in place regarding lowered emissions, this will become increasingly relevant and will greatly affect the value of a fuel. 

This approach considers all emissions along the life cycle of a fuel: from the cultivation of biomass or primary energy production to the combustion of fuel onboard the vessel – which enables accurate emission accounting and upstream transparency.  

Conclusions from the white paper include:

• Sourcing alternative fuels means primarily sourcing sustainability and not just an energy carrier. 
• The Well-to-Wake emission determines the amount of alternative fuel needed to achieve a reduction target and therefore impacts a fuels value. 
• Further sustainability and ESG criteria, especially for upstream production, need to be considered and will influence the value of an alternative fuel. 
• A Well-to-Wake approach enables accurate emission accounting and upstream transparency. 

Note: Download the white paper ‘Exploring the Economic Implication of Well-to-Wake Emission Intensities’ here.

Photo credit: Liquid Wind
Published: 2 May, 2023