Connect with us

Alternative Fuels

Report: Ship design and timeline planning key to green fuels conversion of box ships

Finds ‘Preparing Container Vessels for Conversion to Green Fuels’ report published by Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping.
Admin

Published

3 years ago

on

post 56361

Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping on Friday (28 September) published a report ‘Preparing Container Vessels for Conversion to Green Fuels’ provides a technical, environmental, and techno-economic analysis of the impacts of preparing container ships for conversion to green fuels (i.e. methanol, ammonia).

The study found that although preparing for the transition to alternative fuels requires additional upfront investment, preparation can pay off in the long term with intelligent ship design and careful planning of conversion timelines. The conclusion of the study is as follows:

Building dual fuel and conversion-ready new builds typically increases newbuild CapEx by 1-16% of the cost for a standard fuel oil newbuild, depending on the planned alternative fuel, desired range, and preparation level. Total CapEx for newbuilding and conversions range from 1033% of the cost of a standard fuel oil newbuild (see Table 15).

post 54506 Table 15

The increased tank volumes required for methanol and ammonia mean that costs associated with lost cargo have a big impact on the total lifetime costs. In the twin island vessel design used here, lost cargo space can be reduced by placing tanks under the accommodation, but this must be done during the newbuild phase, which increases newbuild costs and the risks associated with committing to a particular future fuel.  When tank preparation is not possible and additional alternative fuel tanks must be added in cargo areas later, this has a large impact on costs from cargo losses.

We have analyzed the total costs of newbuilding, conversion and cargo losses for vessels with different preparation levels for each fuel and provided recommendations for newbuild readiness levels, depending on the desired future fuel, conversion timelines, and range (see Figure 15,16). The costs of conversion mean that for short conversion timelines (3-8 years), dual fuel vessels make economic sense.  In most cases where conversion is expected in a timeline of 8-10 years, and full range for the alternative fuel is required, some degree of preparation reduces the total costs.

post 54506 Figure 15
post 54506 Figure 16

Converting unprepared vessels only makes economic sense on longer timelines or where reduced range options reduce cargo loses.  However, the different preparation levels (1-3) we analyzed only had a small impact on newbuild and total costs and very little impact on the total lifetime cost. However, in general the earlier you expect to convert, the more you should prepare. The desired range after conversion, on the other hand, has a much larger influence on conversion CapEx, and therefore the total lifetime cost. Reduced range vessels may offer cost effective options for conversion, where feasible.

When converting from LNG to ammonia, some of the required installations for ammonia are already installed, and as a result the conversion costs are lower than converting from fuel oil. When compared with an ammonia-fuel oil dual fuel newbuild, the total CapEx add-on including LNG option and the conversion cost, is around 30% of a fuel oil newbuild price. Our study shows that the additional cost for the LNG option is recovered over the period before conversion to ammonia because of the assumed lower cost of LNG as fuel, however the fuel price of LNG compared with fuel oil has a big impact on this calculation. If an LNG vessel’s fuel tank is not prepared at newbuild phase, then conversion to ammonia is not feasible for this type of vessel.

Our emissions analyses showed that CO2 emissions from the conversion is minimal, at around 0.3 of the lifetime emissions of a fuel oil vessel.  If the vessel is replaced with a newbuild, instead of converted, the emissions related to building a new vessel, is equal to around 1.5 years emissions from operating on fuel oil or 1.7 years of operation on LNG. This shows that conversion is also a valid option from an emission reduction perspective.

Note: The complete report ‘Preparing Container Vessels for Conversion to Green Fuels’ can be obtained from the Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping through the link here.

Photo credit: Venti Views on Unsplash
Published: 3 October, 2022

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Biofuel

NYK to launch Japan’s first antioxidant for biodiesel bunker fuel in August

When added to biofuel, BioxiGuard slows progression of oxidative degradation and helps deter issues such as metal corrosion, strainer blockage, and cleaning-system fouling often triggered by oxidised fuel.
Admin

Published

16 hours ago

on

May 22, 2025

By

Japan’s first antioxidant by NYK for biodiesel bunker fuel set to release in August

Nippon Yuka Kogyo (Nippon Yuka), an NYK Group company specialising in chemical R&D as well as the manufacture and sale of chemical products, on Wednesday (21 May) announced the upcoming release of BioxiGuard, the Japan’s first antioxidant specially developed for marine biodiesel, from 10 August.

NYK said compared with conventional petroleum-based fuels, biofuel contains a higher proportion of unsaturated fatty acids, making it more susceptible to oxidative degradation. Once oxidised, the biofuel can produce acidic substances and sludge, adversely affecting vessel fuel efficiency by reducing the fuel’s calorific value.

Developed by Nippon Yuka based on property analyses of the biofuel used in NYK-operated vessels, BioxiGuard is specifically formulated to enhance the oxidation stability of biodiesel. When added to biofuel, BioxiGuard slows the progression of oxidative degradation and helps deter issues such as metal corrosion, strainer blockage, and cleaning-system fouling often triggered by oxidised fuel.

According to laboratory tests conducted by Nippon Yuka researchers, the addition of BioxiGuard at a concentration of 1 part per 500 resulted in an approximate 50% reduction in the rate of biofuel degradation compared to untreated biofuel. 

This significant improvement underscores the potential for vessel operators to not only extend the useful life of biofuel on board but also maintain more stable and cost-effective vessel operations.

 

Photo credit: NYK
Published: 22 May, 2025

Continue Reading

Newbuilding

Höegh Autoliners latest LNG dual-fuel PCTC en route to Shanghai for bunkering

The 9,100 CEU “Höegh Sunrise”, currently sailing the seas, is on its way to Shanghai for bunkering before sailing to Japan and then towards Europe.

Admin

Published

16 hours ago

on

May 22, 2025

By

Höegh Autoliners latest LNG dual-fuel PCTC en route to Shanghai for bunkering

Höegh Autoliners on Tuesday (20 May) said its latest liquefied natural gas (LNG) dual-fuel pure car and truck carrier has departed China Merchants Heavy Industry’s yard, ready to commence its commercial operations.

The 9,100 CEU Höegh Sunrise, currently sailing the seas, is on its way to Shanghai for bunkering before sailing to Japan and then towards Europe. 

The PCTC is the fifth in a series of 12 Aurora Class vessels built by the shipyard in China. The first eight Auroras are or will be equipped with engines primed to run on LNG and low-sulphur oil. 

These vessels can be converted to run on ammonia later. By 2027, Höegh Autoliners said the four last vessels of the series will be able to run net zero on ammonia directly from the yard when delivered.

Manifold Times previously reported the naming ceremony of Höegh Autoliner’s fourth Aurora Class newbuild, Höegh Sunlight, at Taicang Haitong Auto Terminal.

Related: Höegh Autoliners names LNG-powered RoRo ship “Höegh Sunlight” in China|
Related: Gasum completes SIMOPS LNG bunkering operation of PCTC “Höegh Sunlight”

 

Photo credit: Höegh Autoliners
Published: 22 May, 2025

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

UECC: Liquefied biomethane bunker fuel to enable compliance surplus under FuelEU

Company says bunkering liquefied biomethane will give it a significant compliance surplus under FuelEU that can be monetised through the regulation’s pooling mechanism.
Admin

Published

16 hours ago

on

May 22, 2025

By

UECC: Liquefied biomethane bunker fuel to enable compliance surplus under FuelEU

United European Car Carriers (UECC) on Monday (19 May) said bunkering liquefied biomethane (LBM), also known as bio-LNG, will give it a significant compliance surplus under FuelEU that can be monetised through the regulation’s pooling mechanism.

UECC’s Senior Manager of Business Planning & Sustainability, Masanori Nagashima, said bio-LNG is now seen by the company as the key fuel to achieve its target of a 45% reduction in carbon intensity by 2030 versus a 2014 baseline and net zero by 2040 – ahead of the 2050 deadline set by both the IMO and EU.

The marine fuel is being bunkered on UECC’s dual and multi-fuel LNG PCTCs – three of which have battery hybrid capability – under Sail for Change that was launched by UECC last year and currently has participation by automotive giants including Toyota, Ford and JLR. 

The company also has on order two multi-fuel LNG battery hybrid newbuild PCTCs due for delivery in 2028 that could be enlisted into the programme. 

The overall carbon intensity of the UECC fleet, using the same gCO2e/MJ (grams of CO2 equivalent per megajoule) metric as FuelEU, is calculated at 68 gCO2e/MJ to achieve an interim target of a 25% carbon intensity reduction in 2025, though the company is expected to achieve 57 gCO2e/MJ this year based on its supply plan, according to Nagashima.

This is significantly below the current FuelEU threshold of 89.3 gCO2e/MJ – a 2% reduction from the baseline of 91.16 gCO2e/MJ – and still lower than the threshold of 77.9 gCO2e/MJ from 2035 that is a 14.5% reduction versus the baseline figure.

“The low carbon intensity of our fleet means all of our vessels are expected to gain a C rating or above with the IMO’s Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII)” Nagashima explained.

“It also gives us a significant compliance surplus under FuelEU that can be monetised through the regulation’s pooling mechanism, allowing a great commercial opportunity to offset regulatory costs for customers and eliminate FuelEU surcharges.”

“UECC will continue to accelerate its progress in improving decarbonisation of its fleet by further optimising our fuel mix strategy going forward to incorporate more high-impact fuels as these become viable.”

 

Photo credit: Titan Clean Fuels
Published: 22 May, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending