Industry coalition SEA-LNG on Wednesday (14 May) said it has completed its initial analysis of the IMO Net-Zero Framework following MEPC 83 by using the independent Z-Joule cost of compliance calculator to assess the commercial implications of the new regulations.

The calculations show that under the Net-Zero Framework investments in LNG dual fuel vessels offer shipowners a significantly shorter payback period than methanol, ammonia or VLSFO. LNG ships also give shipowners a commercial advantage through fuel optionality and access to widespread established infrastructure.

The complex IMO Net-Zero Framework now requires further detailed analysis and feedback from the industry, as well as coordination with EU initiatives and the specific concerns of other member states, prior to formal ratification later this year. There are also critical details surrounding the IMO Net Zero Fund and the zero and near-zero-emission fuels (ZNZ) Reward Mechanism that will not be addressed before 2027.

SEA-LNG’s research examines the investment case for a 14,000 TEU container vessel operating a trans-Pacific route from Japan to the US West Coast. It compares LNG, ammonia and methanol dual fuel vessels against a vessel fuelled by VLSFO over a 15-year investment period.

The total cost of the different fuel pathways is driven by CapEx, the carbon intensity of the fuels, and the fuel price. For both fuel price forecasts and carbon intensity values, SEA-LNG used assumptions from DNV’s analysis (MEPC 82/INF.8/Add.1) of the candidate mid-term measures discussed at MEPC 82.

Both high-pressure and low-pressure LNG dual fuel engines offer a relative payback period of between 4.5 and 5 years compared with VLSFO because of lower compliance costs due to LNG’s lower greenhouse gas fuel intensity (GFI). Methanol and ammonia fuelled vessels do not pay back over the 15-year investment horizon.

SEA-LNG also modelled the investment case for a 14,000 TEU containership operating on the Rotterdam-Singapore trade route using the same fuel price forecasts. In this case, the vessel is subject to both IMO and EU decarbonisation regulations – the latter for 50% of the voyage. Here the payback for LNG fuelled vessels was reduced to about 3.5 years mainly due to the effect of FuelEU Maritime in the early years of the analysis period.

Steve Esau, Chief Operating Officer of SEA-LNG, said: “While many details need to be decided, the IMO Net-zero Framework provides a clear basis for maritime decarbonisation and should, in principle, enable all fuel pathways – be they LNG, methanol or ammonia – to compete on a level playing field. For this to continue, it is imperative that the ZNZ Reward Mechanism is designed in a fuel agnostic and technology neutral way.”

Peter Keller, Chairman of SEA-LNG, concluded: “The industry continues to make major investments in the LNG pathway. These ships can use LNG, bio-methane and e-methane, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut local pollution today. The IMO position, as well as the EU regulations, both affirm the pathway is heading in the right direction and offers a practical and realistic route to compliance, starting right now.”

This research is the first in a series of costs of compliance analyses SEA-LNG is developing using the Z-Joule calculator. 

The IMO Net-Zero Framework is the first in the world to combine mandatory emissions limits and GHG pricing across an entire industry sector.   

Approved by the Marine Environment Protection Committee during its 83rd session (MEPC 83) from 7 to 11 April 2025, the measures include a new fuel standard for ships and a global pricing mechanism for emissions.  

These measures, set to be formally adopted in October 2025 before entry into force in 2027, will become mandatory for large ocean-going ships over 5,000 gross tonnage, which emit 85% of the total CO2 emissions from international shipping.  

Note: The full SEA-LNG analysis can be read here.

Related: IMO MPEC 83 approves net-zero regulations for global shipping
Related: IMO: Outcomes of Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 83)

Photo credit: Venti Views on Unsplash
Published: 15 May, 2025

Maritime and energy research provider Maritime Strategies International (MSI) on Wednesday (7 May) said analysis performed by MSI using data from its new platform has given an early indication of the impact that the IMO’s recently agreed Net Zero Framework will have on the bunker market.

By extending the annual fuel consumption estimates calculated in SEASCAPE platform for 2024 through to 2035, and applying MSI’s forecasts for bunker prices, MSI projected the future fuel costs for all conventionally-fuelled ships included in the platform, which is just over 30,000 ships, alongside the projected IMO penalties.

“This provides some indication of the scale: by this approach, the IMO’s penalties would be equivalent to an 82% premium on top of the fleet bunker costs by 2035 – almost USD 100 billion for the ships included,” it said. 

From another perspective, this also highlighted the opportunity for the shipping bunker market – an annual pot directed towards drop-in biofuels and low carbon alternatives that could rise to USD 100 billion per year within the next decade.

MSI SEASCAPE is designed to complement MSI products which offer a forward view of the market by providing a complete retrospective, 12-month view on the global fleet. Hourly data on vessel activity provides vessel speed, direction, emissions, fuel consumption, port time and anchorage durations.

MSI uses machine learning to identify changes in voyage patterns and ship clusters, developing an algorithm to measure vessel tracks, speed and port stays to generate emissions data where AIS satellite tracks were not available. Each month, MSI’s algorithm generates data for over two million ‘dark periods’ where AIS signals are absent.

Users can extract data by ship, by fleet or sections of the global fleet, filtering by vessel type, characteristics or IMO number. The product is being made available at flexible subscription levels allowing users to start with the data they require most and add additional sectors as their needs evolve.

“MSI has invested two years in SEASCAPE’s development, driven by demand from customers for improved modelling of fleet behaviour at a time when fleet inefficiencies and diversions are impacting earnings and values far in excess of historical norms,” said Will Fray, Director, MSI. 

“The platform can also be used for due diligence prior to vessel acquisition/lending or charter, to track fleet or vessel behaviour and compare against cohorts and competitors.”

Photo credit: Maritime Strategies International
Published: 8 May, 2025

The Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) on Tuesday (6 May) released its latest report on a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) quantifying Carbon Capture and Storage’s (OCCS) potential to provide GHG emissions savings.

The study, named COLOSSUS (Carbon capture, offloading, onshore storage, utilisation and permanent storage), provides an in-depth analysis of GHG emissions and costs associated with OCCS across the entire carbon value chain, accounting for emissions from fuel production, transport and use, to CO2 capture onboard the vessel and its final disposition.

GCMD said LCAs facilitate an equivalent comparison of different decarbonisation measures; this comparison can help shipowners make informed decisions on solutions adoption based on their net abatement impact across the entire carbon value chain. This holistic quantification of emissions ensures that OCCS adoption does not lead to inadvertent increases in emissions in adjacent sectors because of decisions made downstream.

“While LCAs are available for onshore carbon capture technologies in themselves, assessments of the overall GHG emissions from deploying these solutions onboard vessels across the associated value chains are limited,” it added.

A full assessment would require the inclusion of the well-to- tank (WtT) emissions of the fuel, onboard tank-to-wake (TtW) emissions, including those associated with OCCS operations, the subsequent emissions from transporting captured CO2, and those associated with permanent storage or its utilisation.

What this study considers

The study used a WtW GHG emissions of 93.3 gCO2eq/MJ for Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) as a baseline for comparison against other scenarios. This study explored five OCCS technologies, with six marine fuel options, and three post-capture scenarios. Among OCCS technologies, the study examined different post-capture scenarios with conventional monoethanolamine (MEA)- based OCCS, with it being the most mature of the OCCS technologies in the industry. Based on the practical limitations of storing large quantities of liquid CO2 onboard vessels, the study further assumed a 40% gross carbon capture for all scenarios explored, consistent with industry recommendations.

Key findings

Notably, the deployment of conventional MEA-based OCCS can result in a WtW GHG emissions savings of 29% for an HFO-fuelled ship.

Replacing HFO with biofuels presents a promising strategy for maximising GHG emissions savings. The WtW emissions savings for a vessel deploying MEA-based OCCS range from 69% to 121% when using bio-LNG and biodiesel from used cooking oil, respectively.

Among the post-capture scenarios evaluated, fixing the captured CO2 in concrete is most effective. This approach can increase GHG emissions savings from 29% to 60% across the carbon value chain by partially displacing the need for carbon-intensive cement in applications Ashore.

Post-capture transport and permanent storage of CO2 add minimal emissions, approximately 1% to the WtW emissions of a vessel deploying MEA-based OCCS when the captured CO2 is transported 1,000 km.

Captured CO2 can also be used to produce e-methanol with renewable electricity, allowing the vessel that consumes this e-methanol to claim a 17% GHG emissions savings.

The cost of avoided carbon for OCCS with permanent storage is between USD 269-405/tCO2 for a 40% gross capture on an MR tanker, considering a full-scale, Nth-of-a-kind installation of an OCCS system with full heat recovery.

Note: The full statement by GCMD can be found here while the full study findings can be found here.

Photo credit: Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation
Published: 6 May, 2025