SEA\LNG and SGMF, associations promoting the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a marine fuel, on Tuesday (28 January) issued a response to an earlier report from ICCT claiming LNG bunkers to offer no climate benefit:
SEA\LNG and SGMF note the draft report “The climate implications of using LNG as a marine fuel” produced by the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT). We were not contacted prior to the release – and need some time to review the report in depth – but our immediate comments are related to the assumptions and methodologies used and the lack of direct input from the engine manufacturers.
We stand by the results of the Thinkstep study (https://www.thinkstep.com/content/life-cycle-ghg-emission-study-use-lng-marine-fuel-1) published in April 2019. The study has been widely recognised as the most comprehensive analysis undertaken to date on the lifecycle GHG emissions of LNG as a marine fuel compared with current and post-2020 conventional marine fuels. The analysis was based on the latest primary data available from the main marine engine manufacturers, namely; Caterpillar MaK, Caterpillar Solar Turbines, GE Aviation, MAN Energy Solutions, MTU Friedrichshafen, Winterthur Gas & Diesel (WinGD) and Wärtsilä. On the fuel supply chains, data from internationally recognised lifecycle databases was supplemented with information from ExxonMobil, Shell and Total. The study assessed the supply and use of LNG as a marine fuel according to ISO standards. Finally, to ensure objectivity, it was peer-reviewed by leading academics from key institutions in France, Germany, Japan and the USA. Previous critical comments towards the Thinkstep study (https://www.thinkstep.com/content/addendum-life-cycle-ghg-emission-study-use-lng-marine-fuel ) were comprehensively addressed last autumn and these points remain valid, post the publication of the ICCT report.
With regard to assumptions – the ICCT findings are based on analysis of the 20-year global warming potential (GWP20) data, rather than the more commonly used 100-year (GWP100) metric. Whilst there are many metrics available to quantify climate change that are discussed by scientists GWP100 is considered the best practice and default metric, in part because it is compulsory for UNFCC national GHG inventory reporting.
We note that the balance of LNG shipping numbers quoted in the study are heavily biased towards coastal vessels. Aside from existing LNG carriers, they do not include many deep-sea ocean vessels powered by large slow-speed two-stroke engines, and it is these vessels that make up most of the global fleet tonnage and offer the greatest potential for reductions in GHG emissions through the use of LNG as a marine fuel.
Right now in January 2020 there are three compliant fuel solutions available, LNG is one of them and is both available and scalable. Use of LNG will reduce GHG emissions from marine transportation. It will further provide a strong foundation towards a zero-emissions shipping industry through the use of liquefied biomethane (LBM) and liquefied synthetic methane (LSM), as well as initiating the development of much longer-term alternative fuel solutions that are not yet available or feasible.
Source: SGMF
Photo credit: Photo by Helloquence on Unsplash
Published: 30 January, 2020
Desgagnes had to develop a LNG bunkering network from scratch before launch of the M/T Mia Desgagnes.
Eagle Brasilia and Eagle Bintulu will be chartered by Shell for Atlantic Basin operations from Q4 2018.
The CEPSA-chartered Bunker Breeze was delivered to Suardiaz Energy Shipping on 25 October, 2018.
Cryopeak is developing a LNG bunkering barge to be used in an articulated tug and barge configuration, while Sumimoto will provide end-to-end LNG fueling solutions.
Coralius’s first bunkering was in September 2017; she reached the 100th bunkering mark in February last year; her 200th delivery was achieved this week, says the company.
Other participants in the project include POSCO, EK Heavy Industries, MyTek, Valmax Technology, and Seoul Line; vessel delivery expected by 2021, it said.
The top three positive movers in the 2020 bunker supplier list are Hong Lam Fuels Pte Ltd (+13); Chevron Singapore Pte Ltd (+12); and SK Energy International (+8), according to MPA list.
‘We will operate in the Singapore bunkering market from the Tokyo, with support from local staff at Sumitomo Corporation Singapore,’ source tells Manifold Times.
Changes include abolishing advance declaration of bunkers as dangerous cargo, reducing pilotage fees on vessels receiving bunkers, and a ‘whitelist’ system for bunker tankers.
Claim relates to deliveries of MGO to the vessels Pacific Diligence, Pacific Valkyrie, Pacific Defiance, Crest Alpha 1, and Pacific Warlock between March 2020 to April 2020.
3,490 mt of LSFO from Itochu Enex was lifted at Universal Terminal; the same bunker stem was bought by Global Marine Logistics and delivered by bunker tanker Juma to receiving vessel Kirana Nawa.
Representatives of Veritas Petroleum Services, Maersk, INTERTANKO, ElbOil Singapore, and SDE International provide insight from their respective fields of expertise on what lies ahead.
