Alternative Fuels Online Slides

ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND
ENERGY CARRIERS FOR

SHIPPING
Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts
March 2021
Disclaimer
Whilst efforts are made to keep the content updated periodically, its accuracy cannot be guaranteed at all
times. Content from the workshop package may be reproduced for strictly non-commercial purposes only
providing that full acknowledgement is given of the source.
The opinions expressed in the well-to-wake emission reduction potentials provided in this presentation are
solely those of the presenter(s). They do not imply in any way or form IMO’s support for, or endorsement or
validation of, the technologies, services or practices offered by a commercial entity, and shall not be seen as
prejudging any future policy development at IMO on lifecycle GHG/carbon intensity of fuels.
The content of this workshop package was developed in March 2021 by E4tech and Houlder in collaboration
with the IMO-Norway GreenVoyage2050 Project.
Please cite this source as: IMO-Norway GreenVoyage2050 Project, E4tech and Houlder, 2021: Alternative fuels and
energy carriers for shipping Workshop.
Disclaimer 2
Training course prepared by…
E4tech is an energy and sustainability strategy consultancy. It

works internationally with wide range of companies and
organisations to maximise opportunities in the clean energy
transition. E4tech brings a deep expertise in low-carbon fuels and
technologies to the maritime sector, helping governments and
companies in the sector understand the options and transition
pathways to deep emission reductions.
Houlder is a marine design and engineering consultancy. It has
a track record of over 3,000 projects spanning vessel newbuild
design, retrofit, and conversions as well as offshore equipment
design, installation and mobilisation. Houlder delivers
innovative, creative, and often specialised solutions that allow
clients to optimise asset efficiency and tackle the challenge of
the energy transition.
Please contact:
Chester Lewis – Managing Consultant (Maritime lead), E4tech – chester.lewis@e4tech.com
Chris Bell – Senior Consultant, Houlder – chris.bell@houlderltd.com
Training delivered by…
Astrid Dispert Minglee Hoe Jamie Jones Adam Chase Chester Lewis Chris Sim
IMO IMO IMO E4tech E4tech E4tech
David Pugh Chris Bell Jonathan Strachan Mike Davis Charlotte Kirk
Houlder Houlder Houlder E4tech E4tech
Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 4

AGENDA AND OBJECTIVES

Objectives of this training course
• This training course is about an important and fundamental transition in the global maritime sector.
• The aim is to equip participants with the knowledge to help understand and shape this transition, by
looking at the role of alternative fuels.
• The objective is for all participants to be able answer the following key questions by the end of the course:
Where we are now? How do we get there?

How does the maritime sector need to change and
Why do we need to transition to alternative fuels? adapt to use these fuels?
What are the key barriers to adoption? What are the key opportunities presented by the
transition?
Which options look feasible today? Which options look feasible for the medium and
long term?

AGENDA
1. Introduction to alternative fuels
2. Key concepts related to alternative fuels
3. Summary of day
INTRODUCTION TO ALTERNATIVE FUELS:
CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

Different types of shipping
There are many different ways to examine shipping:

• Passenger vs. freight
• Type of vessel e.g oil tanker, bulk carrier, container
• Geography and type of operation…
Inland waterways Domestic/coastal shipping International shipping

International shipping industry is currently dominated by fossil fuels
Estimated global fuel consumption break down across ship types, for each year 2012-2018
The most used fuels are:
1. Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO)
2. Marine Diesel Oil (MDO)
3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
Source: UMAS, IMO Fourth GHG study

International shipping industry is currently dominated by fossil fuels
• Mapping of ongoing zero-emission pilot and demonstration projects has been undertaken by the Getting to
Zero Coalition (results shown below for 2020).
Ongoing pilot or demonstration projects by fuel type and vessel size.
Source: Getting to Zero Coalition, https://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/news/mapping-of-zero-emission-pilots-and-demonstration-projects/

Addressing climate change requires a reduction in the use of
fossil fuels
2.02% 50%
Percentage of global CO2 emissions IMO initial GHG strategy target for
from international shipping[1] greenhouse gas emissions reduction by
2050 compared with 2008 levels[2]
[1] Fourth IMO GHG Study, July 2020. Anthropogenic emissions only. Figure for 2018.
[2] Strategy adopted in 2018 (resolution MEPC.304(72)).

The story so far…
• While technological development in maritime propulsion has been an ongoing process, it’s progress up until
now can be defined by three main ‘revolutions’.
• We are now entering the ‘fourth revolution’ of maritime propulsion.
Wind Coal Oil
?
Pre-industrial 1800s – Late 1800s – 2000s – ?
revolution early 1900s 2000s

Greenhouse gas emissions are not the only reason for change
Ozone depleting
Greenhouse gases Air pollution
substances
NOx Etc.
CO2 CH4 N2O SOx PM CFC HCFC
All these gases/substances are currently emitted from shipping

This workshop focuses on greenhouse gases (GHGs) but it is important to consider all of these when thinking
about alternative energy/fuel options

HFO has advantages and disadvantages
• Cheap • Greenhouse gas emissions

• Undesirable product of crude oil • Air pollutant emissions
• Well understood • Viscous
• Reliable • Hazardous spills
• Energy dense

Decarbonization: IMO Strategy on reduction of GHG from ships
Vision
IMO is committed to reducing

GHG emissions from
international shipping and, as a
matter of urgency, aims to phase
them out as soon as possible in
this century

Levels of ambitions set out in the Initial IMO GHG Strategy

Candidate measures
• Initial GHG Strategy contains a list of “candidate GHG measures” with

the following timelines for finalization and agreement:
• Short-term measures - between 2018 and 2023
• Mid-term measures - between 2023 and 2030
• Long-term measures - beyond 2030
• Proposals for candidate measures need to be accompanied by
an assessment of impacts on States
• Current negotiations focus on a mandatory goal-based short-term GHG
reduction measure for existing ships aimed at achieving 40% carbon
intensity reduction by 2030

In practice, 50% means deep decarbonisation per vessel
Source: DNV GL
• 50% reduction is the target for the international shipping sector

• The demand for shipping is expected to continue to grow as our economies grow
• How much the demand for shipping will grow is heavily debated…
• … however scenarios suggest 70%+ reduction per vessel will be needed by 2050 to reach
this target

>70% reduction per vessel needs to average across the fleet
Today’s global fleet composition (merchant ships)
• Merchant fleet currently comprises of
approximately 50,000-60,000 vessels.
• Most vessels have a lifetime of approximately
30 years.
• This means the vessels ordered and built
today will be operating in 2030.
• And the supply of alternative fuels and/or
technologies and their associated
infrastructure needs to be built
• A massive challenge for the sector, but
definitely not impossible
Source: Statista https://www.statista.com/statistics/264024/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-type/

Why do we need alternative fuels and energy carriers?
Are there other ways we can reduce GHG emissions? What can each contribute?
Efficiency
Fuel
Message: IMO GHG target cannot be met without alternative fuels and energy sources that offer
deep GHG emission savings compared to current fossil fuels

Why does change need to happen now?
Proving technology and equipment
Developing regulation and policy
Preparing supply chain (production, distribution and refuelling)
Ships are capital-intensive assets, with lifetimes of 20 – 30 years

Which alternative fuels and energy sources are we considering?
• In these sessions we will cover: • Other fuels or energy options that could have
• LNG been considered:
• LPG • Ethanol -> Feedstock currently more highly valued
• Methanol for road transport, and restrictions due to fuel
properties (covered later)
• Biofuels
• E-diesel -> High cost
• Batteries
• Nuclear -> Concerns over safety, cost and political
• Hydrogen challenges limit applicability
• Ammonia
• All these fuels or energy sources have a case for

being an alternative option for shipping
• More detail will be given on these fuels in following
sessions

Safety and environmental regulation
• Environmental regulation is primarily provided by the International Convention

for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).
• Adopted on 2 November 1973 at IMO and updated over the years since then.
• Includes regulations to prevent and minimise pollution from ships via six annexes.
Of particular interest for this course is Annex VI - Prevention of Air Pollution
from Ships, which includes the following key chapters:
• Chapter 3: Requirements for control of emissions
• Includes regulations covering NOx, SOx and particulate matter;
• Also regulates fuel oil availability and quality.
• Chapter 4: Energy efficiency regulations
• Includes measures to reduce GHG emissions through energy efficiency

improvements;
• Key aspect is the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), which sets minimum
energy efficiency levels per capacity mile.

NOx - what is the impact and how is it produced?
• Refers to oxides of nitrogen including NO2 and NO.

• NOx is a reactive gas, in the presence of sunlight:
• Causes health problem; in particular on respiratory system.

• NOx together with Volatile Organic Compounds and other reactive gases in the atmosphere can lead to smog.
• Additionally, NOx contributes to global warming and acid rain.
• NOx: Formed in the process of fuel combustion where O2 and N2 meet at high temperature.
• The higher the temperature (and longer the exposure time at high temp.), the more NOx is formed.
• In engines, the higher the temperature, the more efficient the engine is; thus more NOx produced.

Chapter 3: IMO regulation on NOx
NOx emission limits of

MARPOL Annex VI
apply to each marine
diesel engine with a
power output of more
than 130 kW installed
on a ship.
Source: DNV GL (2019)

How is SOx and PM produced and what is the impact?
• SOx : normally Sulphur dioxide (SO2) and to some extent Sulphur trioxide (SO3).
• SOx is produced from combustion (oxidation) of sulphur contained in most fuel-oil.
• SOx causes:
• acid rain
• sea and soil acidification
• human health issues
• PM (Particulate Matter) is produced due to incomplete combustion of fuel.

• Level of PM is dependent on fuel sulphur level.
=> Reduction of fuel sulphur will reduce both: SOx and PM.

Chapter 3: IMO regulation on SOx
“IMO 2020”
Limits the sulphur in the

fuel oil used on board
ships operating outside
designated emission
control areas to 0.5% by
mass

IMO 2020: global 0.50% sulphur limit in marine fuels
• On 1 January 2020, the 0.50% global sulphur cap -

“IMO2020” took effect.
• Reduction of max. 3.50% to 0.50% sulphur content in
bunker fuels resulted in a 77% drop of
overall SOx emissions from international shipping.
• March 2020: IMO’s ‘Carriage Ban’ (global prohibition to
carry non-compliant fuel for propulsion) entered into
force, further reinforcing IMO2020.

Chapter 4: Energy efficiency regulations for ships
SHIP DESIGN SHIP OPERATION
Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP)
For new ships For all ships
• Requires new ships to be built to a minimum level • On-board management tool.

of energy efficiency. • Framework, against which, a shipowner can develop
• Ship designers/builders free to choose technologies best practice and energy efficient operations.
to satisfy EEDI requirements. • Aims to catalyze uptake of operational
• EEDI level is tightened over time. Shipbuilders deliver Energy Efficiency Measures.
on this: More technologically advanced/
complex ships.
• Promotes innovation at design stage of ships.

Chapter 4: Energy efficiency regulations for ships
• Energy efficiency improvements through
the current framework (EEDI and SEEMP)
are important, but will not be enough to
reach the 2050 ambition.
• MEPC 75 (Nov 2020) approved

amendments to MARPOL Annex
VI introducing new regulations to reduce
GHG emissions from existing
ships (pending final adoption).

Safety and environmental regulation
• Regulation of maritime safety is primarily provided by the International

Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS).
• The version in force today was adopted in 1974, with multiple updates and
amendments made since then.
• It includes important codes such as:
• IGF Code – referring to safety of using gases or other low-flashpoint fuels
• Codes referring to the safe transport of dangerous goods e.g IBC code and IGC code

KEY CONCEPTS

Fuel value chains
• As part of this training course, we will examine alternative fuel options by looking at their value chains.
• A value chain describes all the various activities that make up the process of producing and using the fuel.
• A simplified summary of a generic fuel value chain is shown below.
Feedstock/ Feedstock/ Product

energy source energy source storage, End
Processing
capture distribution and distribution and use
transportation transportation

Key concepts we will cover
• In this section we will look at key concepts related to different parts of the value chain:
1. Concepts related to fuel production, distribution

and processing
1. Concepts related to bunkering and use of the fuel
2. Concepts related to the whole value chain

KEY CONCEPTS
1. FUEL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION AND PROCESSING

Key concept: what can we make fuels with?
• Fuels are fundamentally made from: and/or

Example fuel oil
Carbon Hydrogen
molecule
• To produce fuels, firstly a source of carbon and/or hydrogen must be found. Here are some examples:
Biomass/ Electricity
waste/oils (Source of ) and water ( Source of )
Point source/
Fossil
sources (Source of ) atmospheric (Source of )
CO2
• Input materials used in fuel production are generally referred to as feedstocks.

• Feedstocks and energy sources can be used to produce different fuel types
Conventional
Source of
( ) Fossil
sources
fossil fuels
or Fossil-based
alternative fuels
Production
processes
Source of
( ) Biomass/
waste/oils
Biofuels

• Feedstocks and energy sources can be used to produce different fuel types
( Source of
) Electricity
and water
E-fuels
(with carbon)
( Source of
) Carbon source
(e.g. point source,
atmospheric, biomass)
Production
processes
( Source of
) Electricity
and water
E-fuels
(without carbon)
Air

Key concept: production processes
• A variety of different processes and techniques are used to produce traditional and alternative fuels
• While many factors can influence the choice of process, such as the type of feedstock, cost of processing and
desired properties of the products from the process
• Here we will look at the following:
• Refining
• Reforming
• Electrolysis
• Gasification

Refining
• Refining is a process that turns a substance into a more useful form,
either by extracting useful products or removing impurities. One of the
most common refining processes is the refining of crude oil, in which
vapour is condensed into various oil products in a distilling column.
• Several techniques can be used in a refining process, but one of the
most important ones used in fuel production is distillation, which
separates components of a liquid mixture that have different boiling
points.
• Another important set of processes in refining are conversion
processes, where higher boiling point (but less valuable) molecules are
converted into lower boiling point, more valuable molecules. Examples
of such processes include fluidised catalytic cracking and
hydrocracking.

Steam reforming
• One of the most common reformation reactions is steam
reforming of natural gas to produce hydrogen.
CH4 + H2O (+ heat) → CO + 3H2

Electrolysis
• Electrolysis is a process that uses electricity to break down
a substance into separate components. O2
• While many substances could be electrolysed, the most
relevant to this training course is the electrolysis of water to
produce hydrogen and oxygen.
2H2O → 2H2 + O2
• Electricity passed through a pair of electrodes, providing
one with a positive charge and the other with a negative
charge.
• Ions (charged particles) are attracted to each of the
electrodes, where they form the separate molecules.

Gasification
• Gasification is a common form of processing used in the
production of bio-based fuels.
• It converts biomass or other carbon-containing feedstocks
into gases using high temperatures and controlled
amounts of steam and oxygen.
• In fuel production, gasification is used to produce syngas,
a gas composed of CO, H2 and other gases.

Pyrolysis
• Pyrolysis uses heat to decompose biomass or other carbon-
containing substances in the absence of oxygen. This produces a
mixture of oil, gas and solid char.
• The heating rate is important for pyrolysis, which can be adjusted to
produce different ratios of these products.
• For example, ‘slow’ pyrolysis produces a greater yield of solid char
product, whereas ‘fast’ pyrolysis produces a greater yield of oil
product.
Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL)
• HTL is similar to pyrolysis, although it uses a large amount of water
in the heating process (in addition to high pressures) to produce a
crude-like bio-oil as a product.

Synthesis processes
• Synthesis describes a process in which two or more
substances are reacted to form a new compound
substance.
• There are many examples of synthesis reactions, but in this
training course we will cover these common examples:
• Methanol synthesis
CO + 2H2 → CH3OH
• The Haber-Bosch process (ammonia synthesis)
3 H2 + N2 → 2 NH3
• The Fischer-Tropsch process (synthesis of paraffinic
hydrocarbons)
(2n+1) H2 + n CO → Cn H(2n+2) + n H2O

Conventional fossil fuels

• Crude oil is extracted and refined to produce conventional hydrocarbon marine fuels, such as HFO and MGO.
• When used, these fuels emit carbon that was stored millions of years ago, and is therefore not sustainable.
Marine gas oil

(distillate)
Heavy fuel oil

(residual)
LNG
Oil and gas extraction Refining/processing LPG

Fossil-based alternative fuels

• Raw fossil sources, such as natural gas or coal, can also be used to make a variety of alternative fuels.
Distillate
fuel
Synthesis
Methanol
Reformation
‘Grey’
or ‘blue’
Fossil source Ammonia
hydrogen*
extraction
* Grey = production carbon emissions not captured
Blue = production carbon emissions captured using CCS
Biofuels
• Biofuels can be made out of a variety of feedstocks, which we will explore in detail during the biofuels
session.
• Given that they release carbon that has only been stored relatively recently, the use of biofuels does not
increase atmospheric carbon dioxide when burned*. However, the ultimate sustainability of biofuels
depends on the nature and type of their feedstocks.
Distillate
Biofuel/
biodiesel
Residual
Biofuel
Feedstock
Processing
harvesting/extraction

A brief side note…
• So far we’ve seen three ways in which sources of carbon can be used in fuels.
• Some of these options can be sustainable, while others cannot.
• This depends on the original source of the carbon that is ultimately emitted into the atmosphere.
By extracting and burning fossil This causes an

Carbon is being exchanged carbon sources…
between sources and sinks overall increase
all the time… in carbon in the
…we introduce carbon that has atmosphere.
accumulated over millions of years
…and prior to the use of into the atmosphere in a short
fossil fuels, these period of time, therefore upsetting
exchanges were in balance. this balance.

E-fuels (without carbon)

• Hydrogen, produced by the electrolysis of water, can also be used directly as a fuel, or used in an onward
process to produce other fuels.
• In this training, we will refer to fuels made in this way as ‘e-fuels (without carbon)’.
Green Ammonia
hydrogen
Electrolysis Synthesis

E-fuels (with carbon)

• Hydrogen, produced by the electrolysis of water, can be combined with carbon from a carbon source to
create a synthetic fuel or an alcohol such as methanol.
• Fuels made in this way are called ‘e-fuels’, given the electricity required in the electrolysis process.
Distillate
e-fuel
Methanol
Electrolysis Carbon source capture Synthesis

Key concept: Resource availability
• Each of the fuel types we have seen so far are made using different feedstocks and energy sources.
• Availability of these feedstocks and energy sources for use in fuel production is affected by the following:
• How much of it exists – the amount of resource will likely vary (e.g. by geography or over time), and could be widely available in
one place but scarce in another.
• How much of it can be viably harvested – while enough of the resource may exist, extracting the required amount for use in fuel
production may be too expensive, unsustainable or not practically feasible.
• How much competition there is for its use – when demand for a certain feedstock is high, different fuel producers, industries and
end-user sectors may compete for its use, restricting availability for some parties.
• How easily it can be transported to production sites – required resources are conveyed to production sites via supply chains.
Some energy sources, such as green electricity, are difficult to transport over very long distances.
• Whether use of that resource is permitted – policies may be put in place to limit some uses of certain feedstocks (e.g. stipulating
limits on extraction or specifying prioritised end-use sectors).
• The most viable locations for fuel production will be those for which these factors are most favourable.

Key concept: centralised vs decentralised production
Centralised Decentralised
• Fuel is produced at larger production facilities • Fuel is produced at smaller production

• Fuel is transported to the end-users as a facilities located closer to end-users (e.g. at
finished product filling stations)
• Generally better when demand for fuel is high • Generally better when overall demand for
(utilising economies of scale) fuel is low
Fuel production facility Fuel production facility

End-user End-user

Key concepts: biofuels
Crop-based biofuels Advanced biofuels

• Made from crop feedstocks that are often also used for • Made from lignocellulosic biomass (e.g. agricultural
food (such as corn, soybeans or virgin vegetable oil). /forestry residues), energy crops, waste or algae.
• Concerns about indirect land use change and negative • Avoids direct competition with food crops and the effects
impact on food supply (‘food vs fuel’ debate). of indirect land use change.
• Often called ‘first-generation’ biofuels. • Often called ‘second-generation’ biofuels.
Indirect land use change (ILUC) Energy crops

• Conversion of agricultural land to be used for biofuel • Woody or grassy crops grown specifically for energy
production could result in conversion of land elsewhere production that can have lower competition with land for
for agriculture in a way that causes net CO2 emissions to food and low indirect land use change impacts.
rise (e.g. through deforestation).
Session 2 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 1 55

Key concepts: biofuels
Waste oil biofuels Novel oil crops

• Biofuels made from waste vegetable oils and animal fats • Oil yielding crops grown that have lower competition
such as used cooking oil and tallow with land for food and low indirect land use change
impacts.

KEY CONCEPTS
2. FUEL USE

Key concept: ‘drop-in’ fuels
• ‘Drop-in’ refers to a fuel that can be directly used in place of an existing fuel with minimal alterations to
the equipment using the fuel.
• In some cases, an alternative fuel may not be useable in its 100% pure form and may require ‘blending’
to produce a drop-in solution.
Drop-in fuel
Conventional Conventional
fuel (e.g. HFO) fuel (e.g. HFO)

Key concept: blending of drop -in fuels
• ‘Blending’ refers to mixing an amount of one type of fuel with another type, expressed as a percentage
(%) of the total mixture*.
• Usually describes the amount of an alternative fuel added to a traditional fuel.
• Maximum limits on how much alternative fuel can be added are often dictated by quality standards,
technical requirements and the properties of the alternative fuel.
• This maximum limit is sometimes referred to as the blend wall.
• Fuel blending is undertaken prior to delivery of the fuel and is not usually carried out by end-users.
Q: How does this affect

Example: 20% blend
emissions?
20% fuel type A
A: For GHGs, weighted
average of emissions per
80% fuel type B energy of fuel
*in this course, we will consider this percentage (and blending rate) by volume, although it can also be considered by mass.

Key concept: flashpoint
• When exposed to the open atmosphere, liquid fuels can release vapour. How readily this happens depends
on the volatility of the fuel and the atmospheric conditions.
• When exposed to a source of ignition, such as an open flame, the vapour can ignite.
• The lowest temperature at which this happens is known as the fuel’s ‘flashpoint’.
• Fuels with a low flashpoint can present an increased handling risk, which we will explore further as part of
the detailed fuel sessions.
• Flashpoint requirements are outlined in the SOLAS regulations and The International Code of Safety for
Ships using Gases or other Low-flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code).

Key concept: energy density
• There are two key measures of energy density that we will examine as part of this course:
• Volumetric energy density

• Gravimetric energy density

• Gravimetric energy density Energy content (e.g. MJ)
Volumetric
energy density
Volume (e.g. l)
Fuel A…
Fuel A has a… lower volumetric energy density
(16 MJ/l) which means it contains… less energy for the same volume of fuel
so it takes up… more space for the same amount of energy
Fuel B…
Fuel B has a… higher volumetric energy density
(35 MJ/l) which means it contains… more energy for the same volume of fuel
so it takes up… less space for the same amount of energy

• Gravimetric energy density Energy content (e.g. MJ)
Gravimetric
energy density
Mass (e.g. kg)
Fuel A Fuel B Fuel A…

(20 MJ/kg) (42 MJ/kg) has a… lower gravimetric energy density
which means it contains… less energy for the same mass of fuel
so it weighs… more for the same amount of energy
1 MJ
1 MJ
Fuel B…
has a… higher gravimetric energy density
which means it contains… more energy for the same mass of fuel
so it weighs… less for the same amount of energy

• The energy density affects amount of energy that can be stored on board for a given volume or mass, which
therefore can affect:
• Available engine hours (and therefore voyage length)
• Space available for cargo or passengers
• The deadweight cargo capacity
Increased
tank size for
same total
propulsion
energy

Key concept: cold ironing
• This key concept refers to the use of electricity by vessels when they are in port.
• Electricity is provided to service onboard power demand (e.g. from lighting, refrigeration etc) via a shore-to-
ship connection (known as a shore power system).
• The term was first used to refer to coal-fired ships when they were moored in harbour – the iron furnaces
didn’t need to be fed and would literally cool down.
• Cold ironing is used to reduce emissions when in port, which are produced by burning fuel for onboard
power generation.
Shore power
connection
Onboard electricity
loads serviced

Key concept: methane and ammonia slip
• ‘Slip’ in this context is used to refer to the leakage of unreacted fuel into the atmosphere from the onboard
system.
• Methane slip can occur from LNG-powered vessels, which, due to the potency of methane as a greenhouse
gas, can offset any carbon emissions savings even when emitted in relatively low quantities*.
• Ammonia slip could similarly occur from ammonia-powered vessels, or from vessels using some types of
NOx emissions abatement technology, resulting in a negative impact on local air quality.
• We will discuss these concepts in more detail as part of the relevant fuel sessions.
*Methane has a global warming potential of 28[1], meaning that 1 tonne of methane causes the same global
warming effect as 28 tonnes of CO2.
[1] GWP100 value. IPCC 5th Assessment Report. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf

Key concept: Technology lock -in
• Technology lock-in describes a situation where a particular technology becomes a dominant incumbent
solution, presenting barriers to adoption of alternatives.
• This issue is particularly relevant to the maritime sector, given the long lifetimes of vessels.
• Technology lock-in can be driven by several factors, for example:
• Changing from an incumbent technology to a new technology may involved financial barriers, such as new upfront
investment or sunk costs that cannot be recovered.
• Regulatory environments, supporting infrastructure and industry practices may have developed in accordance with the
specifics of a particular technology, requiring time and investment to change or adapt to suit new solutions.
• Driven by uncertainty associated with new options (e.g. regarding safety or reliability), strong stakeholder preferences for a
well-known incumbent solution may develop, hindering adoption of alternatives.
• If a technology that does not deliver required reductions in GHG emissions becomes ‘locked in’, this could
present a risk to meeting GHG reduction targets.

KEY CONCEPTS
3. WHOLE VALUE CHAIN

Key concept: Technology readiness level (TRL)
• Technology readiness levels are used to describe the stage of development of a piece of technology.
• They are measured on a scale from 0 – 9, as set out below.
TRL 0 TRL 1 TRL 2 TRL 3 TRL 4 TRL 5 TRL 6 TRL 7 TRL 8 TRL 9
First-of-a-
Idea/ Full
Basic Technology Applied Small-scale Large-scale Prototype Demonstra- kind
concept commercial
research formulation research prototype prototype system tion system commercial
stage application
system

Key concept: Lifecycle perspective
• In our assessment of alternative fuel options, we need to look beyond an end-user perspective and consider
the ‘whole picture’ from before production to after it’s been used.
• This provides a lifecycle perspective, and it allows us to account for impacts that would otherwise be
missed.
• In the context of marine fuels, there are common terms that are used to describe key sections of a fuel’s
lifecycle:
• Well-to-tank
• Tank-to-wake
• Well-to-wake

Key concept: Lifecycle thinking (greenhouse gas emissions)
Production Distribution and Operational

emissions transport emissions emissions
Well-to-tank Tank-to-wake
Well-to-wake

APPLYING THESE CONCEPTS TO THE TRAINING

Coverage of course material by fuel type
Drop in fuels Alternative fuels
Course section
Biofuels LNG LPG Methanol Hydrogen Ammonia Batteries
Day 2 / Day 3
Fossil-based Fossil Fossil Blue Blue
Fossil LPG
alternative fuels LNG methanol hydrogen ammonia
HVO/FAME
Bio- Bio- Bio-
Biofuels HTL/Pyrolysis Bio-LNG Bio-LPG
methanol hydrogen ammonia
fuel oils
Green Green
E-fuels E-LNG E-methanol
hydrogen ammonia
Other Batteries

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
ENERGY CARRIERS FOR
SHIPPING
Session 2 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 1
March 2021
AGENDA
1. Alternative fuels in detail: introduction
2. Liquified natural gas (LNG)
3. Liquified petroleum gas (LPG)
4. Methanol
5. Drop-in biofuels
ALTERNATIVE FUELS IN DETAIL: INTRODUCTION

Introduction
• Today’s session will focus on the alternative fuels that are more commercially available (although not
necessarily widely available today)
• Tomorrow’s session will focus on those alternative fuels and energy sources that are in demonstration and
development
• For each fuel we will consider the following aspects (among other specific areas):
• Feedstocks and energy sources
• Production technologies
• Onshore requirements
• Onboard requirements
• Regulations, standards and guidance
• Environmental impact
• Cost overview
• Barriers and risks

First, a look at the today’s dominant fuels…
• Before we look at the various alternative fuel options, an overview of heavy fuel oil (HFO) and marine gas oil
(MGO), the main fuels in use today for shipping, is shown below.
• HFO will be used as a comparison as we look at each of the alternative fuels, given that this is the main fuel
used in international shipping.
HFO MGO
• Residual fuel • Distillate fuel
• Energy density: 42 MJ/kg • Energy density: 45 MJ/kg
• Flashpoint: 60°C • Flashpoint: 60°C
• Generally used by larger vessels in international • Generally used by smaller vessels for inland or coastal
shipping shipping (including where HFO is unsuitable)
• Dominant option due to its low cost, widespread • Less dominant than HFO (and more expensive), but
availability and high energy density still widely available with a high energy density

ALTERNATIVE FUELS IN DETAIL:
COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE OPTIONS

LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG)

Overview
• Background and key characteristics

• LNG fuel production value chain
• Cost overview
• Summary

Background and key characteristics
HFO
• Energy density: 42 MJ/kg = 35 MJ/dm3.
LNG bunkering availability at ports[1]
• Flashpoint: 60°C.
• Water solubility: None.
• Most widely-used ship bunker fuel.
LNG (CH4)
• Energy density (@-162°C ): 53.6 MJ/kg = 22.2 MJ/dm3.
• Liquid at –162°C at atmospheric pressure.
• When liquefied, takes up 600x less space than its gaseous state.
• Volumetric density of LNG is lower than HFO, so volume of ship
required to accommodate storage tanks is larger.
• In liquid state, LNG, is non-flammable, non-explosive and non-
toxic. Flashpoint in gaseous state is -188°C. 2019 global supply = 359 million tonnes[2].
• Commonly used in power generation. [1] DNV GL. Role of Natural Gas and LNG as Marine Fuel. La Jolla:
presented at the XXV La Jolla Energy Conference.
[2] Shell LNG outlook 2020.

LNG fuel production value chains
Raw Natural Gas Animal waste Municipal waste Low-carbon electricity CO2
Feedstocks/
energy source
Anaerobic Digestion Electrolyser DAC/PSC*

Production Gas Processing Gas processing
technology and H2 CO2
processes
NG Synthesis
Liquefaction Liquefaction
Liquefaction
Storage and Bio-LNG E-LNG

LNG
use
Session 2 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 1 *DAC = Direct air capture / PSC = Point source capture 84
Small scale LNG distribution value chain

Feedstocks and energy sources
Natural Gas Low-Carbon Electricity CO2 (DAC) CO2 (PSC) Residual Biomass Municipal Waste
Current
availability
DAC = Direct air capture / PSC = Point source capture
Widely Availability Availability

Available Constrained Very Restricted
Key Points Global LNG Production by Feedstock

• Nearly all LNG is currently produced using fossil natural gas which are
widely available.
• Alternative feedstocks currently have supply constraints, but these are
expected to reduce over time.
• Ability to produce E-LNG is determined by local availability of renewable
power.

Production technologies
Anaerobic Digestion
Gas Processing Electrolyser DAC/PSC*
Production
Gas processing H2 CO2
technology
and processes NG Synthesis
Liquefaction Liquefaction
Liquefaction
Readiness TRL 9 TRL 7 - 8 TRL 6 - 7
*DAC = Direct air capture / PSC = Point source capture

LNG Production

Production technologies - Liquefaction
LNG AP-X Liquefaction Process

Onshore requirements
Storage
Storage
LNG • Existing storage infrastructure is widespread – many ports already have existing LNG
and use
storage facilities particularly where strong natural gas markets exist.
• Storage tanks must be insulated to minimise heat loss and prevent the LNG from
vaporising. Any vapour, or Boil Off Gas (BOG), must be managed to avoid over-
pressurisation of the tank.
• LNG may be kept at atmospheric pressure in flat bottom tanks or pressurised in
spherical or cylindrical tanks.
Transportation
• LNG is currently widely transported globally by ship, truck, pipelines and rail.
• There is widespread familiarity with loading and unloading LNG as a bulk product.

Bunkering
Storage
LNG
and use • Ship-to-ship bunkering, terminal to ship and truck to ship bunkering are all available.
• LNG bunkering infrastructure is currently offered at 96 ports with a further 55 ports
in the process of developing facilities.[1]
• LNG bunkering vessels continue to grow in numbers.
• LNG bunker vessels are costly compared to methanol and LPG storage due to the
requirement to store LNG at cryogenic temperatures.
• More infrastructure required in Southern Hemisphere in future, majority of current
ports with LNG bunkering infrastructure are in Northern Hemisphere.
[1] Sea-LNG (sea-lng.org)

Onboard requirements
Storage Storage
LNG
• Double walled pipes required as a low flash point fuel. and use
• LNG stored in cryogenic insulated tanks to minimise Boil Off Gas (BOG).
• Tanks need to be of a material which is suitable for use with a cryogenic liquid.
• Larger tanks (2.3x) are required for equivalent energy content of HFO/MGO (due to
lower volumetric energy density).
Handling
• LNG is widely handled as a bulk cargo and the risks are therefore well understood.
• Handling of LNG as a fuel is covered by the IMO’s IGF code and requires additional
crew training in accordance with established international standards and codes.

Onboard LNG Storage Technologies
IMO Classification: Type A Type B Type C Membrane
Pressure Atmospheric Atmospheric Pressurised Atmospheric
Secondary Barrier Full Partial None Full
Typical Capacity >5,000m3 >5,000m3 Up to 1,000m3 >5,000m3
Cost High High Medium High
Space Efficiency Medium Medium Low High

Propulsion Storage
LNG
and use
• LNG combustion engines already commercially available (including dual-fuel model).
• Retrofit Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) conversions are possible. Adaptations
include modifying the fuel injection system.
• Purging system required (N2 or other inert gas) to enable safe maintenance.
• Low and high pressure 2-stroke ICE and low pressure 4-stroke ICE are widely available.
• LNG based fuel cells are in an earlier development stage but could provide higher
efficiency than combustion engines, if commercialised.
• Unburnt methane in the exhaust gas is referred to as “methane slip” which will have
an adverse effect on GHG emissions. Methane slip is a key issue in low-pressure
engines where lifecycle carbon equivalent emissions can, in some cases, exceed that
of MGO or HFO[1][2].
[1] The climate implications of using LNG as a marine fuel - Working Paper 2020-02, The International Council on Clean Transportation, 2020 94
[2] Life Cycle GHG Emission Study on the Use of LNG as Marine Fuel, Thinkstep, 2019
LNG propulsion options
Existing engine retrofit LNG-ready

Option Fuel cell
conversion combustion engine
TRL 9 TRL 9
Readiness TRL 7 (Under
(commercially (commercially development)
available) available)
Capital cost Highly project specific

(including required Estimated Highly project specific
changes to ancillary Estimated
onboard systems e.g. fuel ~410 USD/kW [1],[2] ~190 USD/kW [1]
supply)
Efficiency <47% (project specific) ~47% ~60%

(at shaft)
[1] LNG Supply Chains and the Development of LNG as a Shipping Fuel in Northern Europe, The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, 2019
[2] LNG as Ship Fuel, DNV GL Report, 2014 95
Regulations, standards and guidance
Body/Organisation Documentation Status/Comment

IMO IGF Code (The International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or other
Low-flashpoint), adjunct to SOLAS. IGF code was proposed to the Marine Safety
Available
Committee (MSC) of IMO in 2004 and contains requirements for using LNG as a
IMO Fuel.
IMO STCW (International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers) contains requirements for crew training and Available
qualification on ships subject to IGF code.
ISO Standard 23306:2020 Specifies the quality requirements for LNG as a fuel for
ISO Available
Marine Applications
Class Society Use of LNG as a ship’s fuel is regulated by Class Rules and Regulations. Class Rules Available
Society for Gas as a Marine Fuel is a Non-Governmental Organisation which Guidelines produced
SGMF produces guidelines for LNG Fuelled vessel operations. on a regular basis.
Supplier Supplier’s standards Available from supplier

LNG powered vessels
[1] LNG as a marine fuel, SEA-LNG report, 2020

Examples of LNG vessels and related infrastructure
Vessels
Examples of LNG fuelled vessels
• Glutra: First LNG Fuelled Ferry, built in 2000 at Langsten
Yard, Norway. Operating in Norwegian Fjords.
• Fjord1 (Norwegian Ferry Company): operating
approximately 12 LNG fuelled ferries on Norwegian
Fjords. Viking Queen, LNG powered PSV
• El Coquí & Taíno (ConRo vessels): delivered in 2018 and
on dedicated service between Jacksonville and San Juan
• HSC Francisco (High speed craft): operated by Buquebus
between Buenos Aires & Montevideo. Delivered 2014
from Incat.
• Siem Confucius & Siem Aristotle (Car Carriers): delivered
in 2018/2019 from Xiamen Shipyard in China and
chartered to Volkswagen group for trade Europe to
Glutra, LNG powered Ferry
USA/Mexico.

Examples of LNG vessels and related infrastructure
Bunkering and infrastructure

• In 2017, the world’s first sea-going large LNG bunker
vessel, M.V. Green Zeebrugge, entered operation based in
Zeebrugge. This vessel has a capacity of 5,100 m³ and is
owned and operated by NYK.
• The Gate LNG import terminal in the port of Rotterdam
has also provided the infrastructure to accommodate
smaller vessels for LNG Bunkering and feeder vessels to
STS LNG Bunkering in Zeebrugge supply locations throughout Europe. Several LNG
Source: Port of Zeebrugge bunkering vessels now operate from here including Shells
M.V. Cardissa and inland waterways barges.

Environmental impacts
LNG Bio-LNG E-LNG
• Reducing methane slip** • Reducing methane slip** • Reducing methane slip**

Emission • Source of energy for • Source of energy for • Source of energy used for
reduction production & production & production and
drivers transportation transportation transportation
• Nature of feedstock (e.g.
farmed/waste) -58% to -94%[1]
Reduction in [2]
Potential for high Potential for high
up to 15%
GHG emissions* -58% to -94%[1]
savings*** savings***
*vs MGO well-to-wake
emissions **Methane slip will reduce as the Engine Technology advances. Methane slip causes
Emission reductions[1] increase in overall GHG emissions.
***For Bio-LNG and E-LNG, the CO2 released when the fuel is burnt derived from CO2
SOx absorbed in plant growth (for bioLNG) or captured (for E-LNG). E-LNG likely to have
PM NOx greater potential for emissions reduction than Bio-LNG.
~-100% ~-100% ~-80%
[1] LNG fuel and the ship emissions debate, Riviera 2018, (https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/lng-fuel-and-the-ship-emissions-debate-23849)
[2] The climate implications of using LNG as a marine fuel, The ICCT, 2020 – Note: maximum life-cycle GHG benefit of LNG compared to MGO over 100- 100
year GWP.
Fuel cost overview
Production route LNG Bio-LNG E-LNG
Key drivers • Biomass feedstock • Green electricity

• Natural gas price
(Expected trend:
positive/negative/either)
cost and supply price
Current cost
(per GJ fuel) 7-10 USD [1] 8.5 – 28.5 USD [2] 23 – 110 USD [2]
Current cost vs. HFO Additional

Additional Current LNG market
market price (per GJ ~=
fuel)[1] 2 – 16 USD[1] 17 – 98 USD[1] price vs HFO market
price[3]
Potential for cost

+1 to -2
reduction vs current cost
Low Medium High USD/GJ
[1] Based on HFO market price of 250-500 USD/tonne & LNG market price of 375 to 550 USD/tonne
[2] Availability and average costs of liquified bio-and synthetic methane, CE Delft, 2020

Barriers and risks
Category Barrier / Risk Rating
Low uptake of LNG technology due to uncertainty in High – vessel owners may seek other low(er)-
Policy
future policy. carbon solutions.
High/medium – increasing commercial offering of

Cost of engine replacement/conversion.
Dual Fuel LNG engines.
Commercial
Low volumetric energy density leads to loss of
High/medium – (application specific).
space for cargo or passengers.
Medium – increasing development of bunkering
Infrastructure Availability of bunkering infrastructure.
infrastructure globally.
Methane slip is a concern. High – depends on engine technology.
Sustainability High - locked in to lower carbon methods to

Lock-in by fossil LNG which does not meet targets produce LNG which may not be most
economic/scalable, to reach targets

LNG summary
Key points
• LNG is safe to use, fully compliant and readily available as a marine transport fuel.
• Engine retrofit conversion possible, but availability of off-the-shelf Dual Fuel engines is increasing.
• Onshore infrastructure and equipment for storage and transportation of LNG is well understood.
• Cost comparisons show that while LNG is currently less expensive than MGO and HFO, lower volumetric energy
density demands more fuel tank space.
• LNG is cleaner burning with up to 20% lower GHG emissions than HFO/MGO fuels. However, methane slip can
offset this benefit.
• 20% is unlikely to be a long term compatible solution, so non-fossil production pathways will have to be used (i.e
only interim fuel solution but locking in engine and storage technology, as well as infrastructure)
• Bio-LNG can bring large well-to-wake GHG reductions (although these can be offset by methane slip), but at
present is limited.
• E-LNG is currently expensive but could bring even higher well-to-wake GHG reductions.

LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG)

Overview

• LPG fuel production value chain
• Cost overview
• Summary

HFO
• Most widely-used fuel.
Propane & Butane (LPG)

• Energy density: 49.6 MJ/kg = 25.3 MJ/dm3.
• Boiling point between -42°C (pure propane) and -0.5°C (pure n-butane).
Source: Statistical Review of Global LPG, Argus Media, 2019
• Flashpoint: - 104°C.
• Water solubility at 20°C is less than 200ppm.
• Commonly used as a domestic & industrial fuel. 2017 global supply[1] = 308 Million Tonnes.
[1] WLPGA LPG Bunkering Guide for LPG Marine Fuel Supply.

LPG fuel production value chains
Crude Oil Natural Gas Vegetable Oils & Waste Oils

Feedstocks/
energy source
Crude oil refining Gas Processing Hydrotreating HVO Bio-diesel
Production
technology and
processes
Pressurisation Pressurisation Pressurisation
Storage and LPG

LPG Bio-LPG
use

Current Crude Oil Natural Gas Vegetable Oils & Waste Oils
availability

Key Points
Global LPG Production by Feedstock[1]
• Nearly all LPG is currently produced from fossil feedstocks (crude oil and
natural gas).
• Availability of waste oils is constrained and is not likely to increase, whilst
use of vegetable oils competes with food and land demands.
• Alternative feedstocks for bio-LPG may become more dominant as
demand for biofuels increase.
[1] World LPG Association

Crude Oil Natural Gas Hydrotreating

Production Refining Processing
technology
and processes
LPG LPG Bio-LPG
TRL 9 TRL 9 TRL 9

Readiness

LPG Value Chain
LPG Processing, storage & distribution

LPG recovery from natural gas production

Source: Handbook of Liquefied Natural Gas, 2014
LPG production from crude oil refining

Source: www.enggcyclopedia.com Bio-LPG production
Source: SHV Energy

Storage
Storage
LPG • Existing storage infrastructure widespread – many ports already have existing LPG
and use
storage facilities.
• Only minor modifications are needed to current fuel storage equipment (due to low
flashpoint).
• No impact of LPG on stainless steel, ferrous metals or cast iron.
Transportation
• LPG currently widely transported globally (via ship, trucks and rail).
• Widespread familiarity with loading and unloading LPG as a bulk product.
• LPG can be transported by three ship types: refrigerated, semi-refrigerated or
pressurised.

Storage Bunkering
LPG
and use • Bunkering can be completed directly at the load terminal, either by truck or via ship-
to-ship bunkering.
• Very few current examples of LPG bunkering as relatively new use as fuel in shipping.
• IGF code, effective January 2017 allows the use of LPG as fuel.

Storage Storage
LPG
• Larger tanks (2-3 times larger [1] ) required for equivalent energy content of fossil
fuels (due to lower volumetric energy density).
• For pressurized tanks, if stored at atmospheric pressure, a reliquefaction system
will be required to handle boil-off gas.
• Low viscosity of LPG makes it prone to leaks.
Handling
• LPG is already handled as a cargo product in compliance with IGC Code.
• Regulations covering LPG as a fuel are covered by IGF Code.
[1] Comparison of Alternative Marine Fuels, SEA\LNG Ltd, 2019.

Propulsion Storage
LPG
• LPG combustion engines already commercially available (including as dual-fuel model). and use
• LPG fuelled engines have been in operation for many years ashore.
• Retrofit ICE conversions are possible, adaptations include modifying the fuel injection
system.

LPG propulsion options
Option Existing fossil engine Dual Fuel Engine

retrofit conversion
TRL 9 TRL 9
Readiness (current examples in (now commercially
service) available)
Capital cost Highly project specific.

(including required Estimated ~300 - 400
changes to ancillary Estimated
onboard systems e.g. fuel USD/kW
~600 USD/kW [2]
supply)
Efficiency <55% (project specific) ~55%

(at shaft)
[1] Costs and Benefits - Alternative fuels for an LR1 Product Tanker, DNV GL and MAN Energy Solutions joint study, 2018
[2] Pioneering programme hails shift to LPG as fuel, Riviera, 2020 116
LPG fuelled engines
LPG fuelled two-stroke dual-fuel engine
• Can run on LPG, HFO, MDO, MGO.
• BW Gemini (LPG Tanker) with carrying capacity
84,000m3 has been retrofitted with liquified
petroleum gas dual-fuel propulsion technology.
LPG Fuel System Configuration, MAN LPG Fuelled 2 – Stroke Engine on Test Bed
Source: LPG as a Marine Fuel, DNV GL, 2017.

The International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or other Low- In force from January
IMO
flashpoint Fuels (IGF Code) 2017
Mandatory under
IGC Code for LPG bunkering vessel, but does not cover requirements for
IMO SOLAS chapter VII
LPG transfer system.
since 1st July 1986
ISO ISO 8216-1:2010 – Liquefied Petroleum Gases In place
Ship to Ship bunkering of LPG is a form of LPG transfer and therefore

SIGTTO SIGTTO, Society of International Gas Tanker & Terminal Operators, In place
guidelines must be considered.
Fuel Suppliers Proprietary guidance Currently available

Examples of LPG vessels
Vessels
The first conversion of a vessel to run on LPG was completed
by BW LPG for their vessel BW Gemini. The LPG tanker was
retrofitted at You Lian Dockyard in 2020 with two fuel tanks,
fuel supply system and modifications to the main engine to
run on both diesel and LPG. BW LPG plan to complete similar
retrofits for a total of 12 vessels.
BW GEMINI, LPG tanker

Fossil LPG Bio LPG
Emission • Source of energy for

reduction production & • Nature of feedstock
drivers
transportation
Reduction in
well-to-wake 17%[1] 53 to 89%[2]
GHG emissions*
*vs. HFO
Emission reductions
SOx PM NOx
-90% -90% -20%
[1] LPG as a Marine Fuel, DNV GL, 2017

[2] RED II typical values for rapeseed (lower bound) and waste cooking oil (upper bound) feedstocks. 120
Fuel cost overview
Production route LPG Bio-LPG
Key drivers • Crude oil and • Biomass feedstock

(Expected trend: natural gas cost and supply
production
Current cost
(per GJ fuel)
~10 USD[1] ~11 USD[3]
Current production
Additional
cost vs HFO market Approx. equivalent
price (per GJ fuel)[2] ~1 USD
Potential for cost Possible in short term, less in

Low medium term
[1] Guide for LPG Marine Fuel Supply, WLPGA, 2019

[2] Based on HFO market price of 250-500 USD/tonne
[3] The role of LPG and bioLPG in Europe, WLPGA, 2020 – relative price of LPG vs. bio-LPG fuel.

Barriers and risks

Low uptake of LPG technology due to uncertainty in High – vessel owners may seek other low(er)-
Policy
future policy. carbon solutions.
Medium – Cost of LPG propulsion is less than that
of LNG
High/medium – (application specific).
Commercial space for cargo or passengers.
Low carbon production routes dependent on
Medium – other low carbon fuels may be favoured
demand of other fuels and sectors; other low
either for lower cost production and/or ease of use
carbon routes not economically favourable
Potential for sustainability concerns from some High – assuming associated with crop and waste
biomass sources. oils
Sustainability High - locked in to lower carbon methods to
Lock-in by fossil LPG which does not meet targets produce LNG which may not be most
economic/scalable, to reach targets

LPG summary
Key points
• LPG is currently widely handled as cargo substance with recognised regulations and guidelines.
• Limited deployment as marine fuel, but promising results from early adopters.
• Production uses generally well-established processes.
• Engine retrofit conversion possible and availability of off-the-shelf LPG engines is increasing.
• Onshore infrastructure and equipment for storage and transportation of LPG is well understood.
• Cost comparisons show that while currently more expensive than MGO and HFO, there is potential for future cost
reductions.

FUELS IN DEMONSTRATION PHASE

METHANOL

Overview

• Methanol fuel production value chain
• Cost overview
• Summary

HFO
Methanol availability at ports
Methanol (CH3OH)
• Energy density: 20 MJ/kg = 15.9 MJ/dm3.
• Liquid between –93°C to 65°C at atm pressure.
• Flashpoint: 11°C - 12°C.
• Water soluble.
• Commonly used in industry (e.g. production of
chemicals, adhesive products, energy carrier). 2019 global supply = 98.3 Million Tonnes[1].
[1]: Methanol Market Services Asia (MMSA).

Methanol fuel production value chains
Natural Gas CO2 Biomass/waste Low-carbon electricity CO2

Feedstocks/
energy source
H2
Reformer (+ CCS) (DAC/PSC*) Gasifier Electrolyser DAC/PSC*
Production
technology Syngas# CO2 Syngas# H2 CO2
and processes Methanol Methanol Methanol Methanol
synthesis synthesis synthesis synthesis
Storage and Fossil methanol Blue methanol Bio-methanol E-methanol

use

Session 2 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 1 #Syngas = mixture of H2/CO/CO2/CH4 128
Natural Gas Low-Carbon Electricity CO2 (DAC) CO2 (PSC) Residual Biomass Municipal Waste
Current
availability
DAC = Direct air capture / PSC = Point source capture

Key Points
Global Methanol Production by
• Nearly all methanol is currently produced using fossil feedstocks
Feedstock
(natural gas and coal).
• Alternative feedstocks currently have supply constraints, but these are
expected to reduce over time.
• Choice of low carbon production route is likely to be determined by
local availability of energy (and CO2) e.g. cheap NG plus CCS, renewable
power or sustainable biomass.
Source: Methanol Institute.

Reformer + DAC/PSC* Electrolyser DAC/PSC*

Reformer Gasifier
CCS
Production
technology Syngas# H2 CO2 Syngas# H2 CO2
and processes
Methanol Methanol Methanol Methanol
Synthesis Synthesis Synthesis Synthesis
Readiness TRL 9 TRL 6 TRL 8 TRL 7

#Syngas = mixture of H2/CO/CO2/CH4

E-methanol production infrastructure, Thyssenkrupp
Source: Thyssenkrupp methanol plants brochure.

Bio-methanol production, Enerkem

Source: Enerkem, via Methanol Institute Renewable Methanol Report, 2018.

Storage
Storage
Methanol • Existing storage infrastructure widespread – many ports already have existing
and use
methanol storage facilities.
• Only minor modifications are needed to current fuel storage equipment (due to low
flashpoint).
• No impact of methanol on stainless steel, ferrous metals or cast iron.
Transportation
• Methanol currently widely transported globally (via ship, trucks and rail).
• Widespread familiarity with loading and unloading methanol as a bulk product.

Storage Bunkering
Methanol
and use • Ship-to-ship bunkering can be carried out with same barge types as HFO/MGO.
• Very few current examples of methanol bunkering due to low level of use as fuel.
• European standard for methanol bunkering approved in June 2020.
• Cost estimates[1]: small bunkering unit installation = 480k USD; bunkering vessel
conversion = 1.8m USD.
[1] Methanol Institute: Methanol as a Marine Fuel Report, 2015.

Storage Storage
Methanol
• Tanks must be approximately 2.3x larger for equivalent energy content of fossil
fuels (due to lower volumetric energy density).
• The low viscosity of methanol compared to traditional fuels means that fuel
storage and supply systems must be well sealed and maintained to avoid leaks.
Handling
• Methanol is already handled as a cargo product in compliance with Annex II of the
MARPOL Convention.
• Regulations covering methanol as a fuel are in draft form and yet to be adopted.

Propulsion Storage
Methanol
• Methanol combustion engines already commercially available (including as dual- and use
fuel model).
• Retrofit ICE conversions are possible, adaptations include modifying the fuel
injection system.
• Use in solid oxide fuel cell (<60% efficient).
• Direct methanol fuel cells under development but low 20% electrical efficiency.

Methanol propulsion options
Existing fossil engine Methanol-ready Fuel cell (e.g. direct

Option
retrofit conversion combustion engine methanol/solid oxide)
TRL 9 TRL 9 TRL 6-7

Readiness (current examples in (now commercially (some operational examples
service) available) but limited applications)
Capital cost Highly project specific.

(including required Estimated ~320
Estimated ~420 Highly project specific
changes to ancillary USD/kW[2]
onboard systems e.g. fuel USD/kW[1]
supply)
Efficiency <55% (project specific) 55% <60%

(at shaft)
[1] Methanol Institute: Methanol as a Marine Fuel Report, 2015 – based on Stena Germanica retrofit conversion cost. Note value is uncertain for larger engine sizes.
[2] Methanol Institute : Methanol as a Marine Fuel Report, 2015 – reported estimates from MAN based on new-build methanol engine projects. 137
Methanol engines
ME-LGI two-stroke dual-fuel engine

• Can run on methanol, HFO, MDO, MGO.
• Currently powering seven 50,000 tonne
deadweight vessels, launched in 2016.
Methanol Fuel System Configuration, MAN MAN B&W ME-LGI Engine and Fuel Supply System

Interim Guidelines for the Safety of Ships using Methyl/Ethyl Alcohol

IMO Draft, not yet adopted
as Fuel
ISO Methanol Marine Fuel Grade Specification Under development
European
Workshop agreement,
Committee for CWA 17540:2020 Ships and Marine Technology – Specification for
not yet official
Standardisation Bunkering of Methanol Fueled Vessels
standard
(CEN)
Methanol Institute Technical Bulletin: Methanol Safe Handling and Safe Berthing Currently available
Fuel Suppliers Proprietary guidance Currently available

Examples of methanol vessels and related infrastructure
Vessels
As of July 2020, 11 ships are operating with methanol as a
fuel and another nine other ships are currently being built.
• MS Mariella (passenger ferry) has a methanol fuel cell
system - operated by Viking Line between Helsinki and
Stockholm since 2016.
• MS Innogy (inland ferry) has a 35kW methanol fuel cell
system – operating in Germany since 2017.
• Other current fuel cell projects with methanol as a fuel:
Viking Lady (SOFC), E4Ships, RiverCell (HT-PEM).
MS Innogy, Fuel Cell Passenger Ferry
• Stena Germanica (ferry) is the first commercial ship in Source: Netherlands Maritime Land and Ministry of Economic Affairs, Methanol as
the world to run on methanol as its main fuel. Operating an alternative fuel for vessels report.
from Gothenburg, Sweden.

Examples of methanol vessels and related infrastructure

• The MS Innogy project in Germany led to the
development of the first methanol infrastructure chain,
from production using renewable energy to trucking and
ship bunkering to the onboard fuel cell.
• In Gothenburg port, Stena Lines created a dedicated
area for bunkering the vessel Stena Germanica which
was the first example of a ship bunkering methanol.
• Antwerp Port authority plans to shift from oil derived
bunkers to methanol bunkers for its in-port vessels.
Stena Germanica methanol bunkering, Gothenburg
Three vessels there are set to be capable of using
methanol, an inland harbour tug, a pilot boat and a
Source: Methanol Institute Methanol as a Marine Fuel Report (handout).
coastguard vessel.

Blue methanol Bio-methanol E-methanol Fossil methanol
Emission • CH4 production and • Nature of • Electricity carbon

reduction transport emissions feedstock (e.g. intensity
drivers • CCS efficiency farmed/waste)
Reduction in
well-to-wake Could increase
42% to 60%[1] 85% to 91%[2] 58% to 94%[1]
GHG emissions* WtW GHGs
*vs RED II
Comparator Case study Emission reductions
Stena Line, SOx PM NOx
methanol ferry -99% -95% -60%
conversion
Source: Stena Lines
[1] E4tech analysis: Matzen (2015), ICCT (2017), Agora (2017), H21 (2018), COWI (2015) and industry data; Excludes downstream transport and distribution and refueling. MGO
pilot fuel used (8.5% on energy basis) 142
[2] European Commission (2018) REDII; Excludes downstream transport and distribution and refueling. MGO pilot fuel used (8.5% on energy basis).
Fuel cost overview
Production route Fossil

Blue methanol Bio-methanol E-methanol
methanol
Key drivers • Feedstock cost • Green power cost

(Expected trend:
• Conversion cost • Electrolyser CapEx
positive/negative/either) • CCS CapEx
and utilisation
Current
production cost 21 – 237 USD 22 – 35 USD 58 – 463 USD Current methanol
(per GJ fuel) market price vs HFO
market price
Current production Additional
Additional Additional
cost vs HFO market -1 to +19 USD
price (per GJ fuel) 8 – 231 USD[2] 9 – 28 USD[2] 46 – 456 USD[2]
Potential for cost

High for CCS Medium High
Figures quoted based on available data as of Dec 2020.

Source: E4tech analysis – Sub-Group on Advanced Biofuels Sustainable Transport Forum (2017), Building up the future.
[1]: Feedstock = Forestry residue; yield: JEC Well-to-Tank (2014). Note cost could be lower if municipal solid waste is used. 143
[2] based on HFO market price of 250 – 500 USD/tonne.
Barriers and risks

Lack of certainty on future government and
High – ongoing uncertainty can lead to inaction
Policy inter-government support for methanol
within fuel supply industries.
compared to other alternative fuels.
High – high fuel cost is a strong barrier to
widespread adoption. However, significant cost
High production costs. reductions are expected across production
pathways and policy action may make economics
Commercial more favourable.
Medium – increasing commercial offering of
methanol engines.
Medium – (application specific).
space for cargo or passengers.
Potential for sustainability concerns from some
Sustainability High – feedstock specific
biomass/waste sources.

Methanol summary
Key points
• Methanol is currently widely handled as a cargo with recognised regulations and guidelines.
• There has been very limited deployment as a marine fuel to-date, but promising results achieved by early adopters.
• Production routes use generally well understood processes, but there are some feedstock constraints.
• Engine retrofit conversion possible, but availability of ‘off-the-shelf’ methanol engines is also increasing.
• Onshore infrastructure and equipment for storage and transportation of methanol is well understood in principle.
• It is liquid at atmospheric pressure and temperature, making it relatively easier to store onshore and onboard
• Cost comparisons show that while currently more expensive that MGO and HFO, there is potential for future cost
reductions.
• All low carbon routes have components at an early stage of commercialisation: CCS for fossil routes, gasification for
bio/waste routes and combined renewable electricity, fuel synthesis and ultimately DAC for e-fuel routes.
• While the use of methanol shows promising technical readiness in several areas, progress towards a position of
widespread adoption would still be hampered by several commercial, policy and sustainability barriers, as well as
the starting point of very limited current use.

BIOFUELS (DROP-IN)

Overview

• Drop-in biofuel production value chains
• Cost overview
• Summary

Key concept reminder
‘Drop-in’ fuel
• A ‘drop-in’ substitute refers to a fuel that can be directly used in place of an existing fuel with minimal alterations to
the equipment using the fuel.
• In some cases, an alternative fuel may not be useable in its 100% pure form and may require ‘blending’ to produce a
drop-in solution.
Fuel blends and blending limits

• ‘Blending’ refers to mixing an amount of one type of fuel with another type, Example: 20%
expressed as a percentage (%) of the total mixture. blend by volume
• Usually describes the amount of an alternative fuel added to a traditional fuel. 20% fuel type A
• Maximum limits on how much alternative fuel can be added are often dictated
by quality standards, technical requirements and the properties of the 80% fuel type B
alternative fuel.
• Blending is carried out prior to bunkering (not onboard the vessel).

Drop-in biofuel production value chains
(Advanced) (Advanced) (Advanced) (Crop-based) (Waste oil)
Feedstocks/ Energy Lignocellulosic Novel oil Waste oils
energy source Biomass Oil crops
crops crops and fats
Production
technology Hydrothermal Pressing/
and processes liquefaction (HTL) Fast pyrolysis
extraction
Blue/green HTL bio- Pyrolysis Blue/green Vegetable oil
Methanol
hydrogen crude bio-oil hydrogen
Hydrotreatment Hydrotreatment Hydrotreatment

Transesterification
+ hydrocracking + hydrocracking + hydrocracking
Storage Distillate Residual Distillate Residual

HVO FAME
and use fuel fuel fuel fuel

Drop-in biofuel applications and blending – distillate alternatives
(HTL) (Pyrolysis) (Hydro-processing) (Transesterification)

HVO FAME
Up to 100%* *higher blend Up to 100%[1] Up to 7%[1]

=
more upgrading and
processing
Typical distillate fuel vessel type =
Source: Stena Line Higher processing cost
Key points:
• FAME has a specified blending limit dictated by ISO 8217 standard (however, engine manufacturers permit higher blends).
• HVO has been trialled at a range of blends, but limitations, if they exist, are not yet widely understood.
• HTL/pyrolysis fuel oils will be limited primarily by the cost of achieving high blending limits.
[1] ICCT Working paper 2020-21- The Potential of Liquid Biofuels in Reducing Ship Emissions 150
Drop-in biofuel applications and blending - residual alternatives
(HTL) (Pyrolysis) (Hydro-processing) (Transesterification)

HVO FAME
*higher blend
Up to 100% = Uncertain Uncertain
more upgrading and
processing (but less
than for MGO)
Typical residual fuel vessel type =
Source: Maersk higher processing cost
Key points:
• No widely-agreed limit for HVO or FAME, but trials at 20% blends are known to be in progress.
• HTL/pyrolysis fuel oils will be limited primarily by the cost of achieving high blends.

Oil crops Waste oils and Lignocellulosic Novel oil crops

Current fats Biomass
availability
Key Points
Widely
• Crop-based feedstocks such as palm oil and soybean are widely available, but in some Available
geographies, such as Europe, their use is limited by policy and is expected to decrease as it is
not viewed as a long-term solution (due to ILUC). Availability
Constrained
• Used waste oils and fats have high GHG savings but limited potential globally, and the maritime
sector will face competition for supply from other transport sectors such as road and aviation.
Availability
• Lignocellulosic biomass (forestry and agricultural residues, woody and grassy energy crops, Very Restricted
municipal wastes) has much greater long-term potential
• Other solutions to increase feedstock supply include use of novel oil crops (such as camelina
and carinata) which could reduce land competition through winter growing, use of degraded
land.

Hydrothermal Pressing/
Fast pyrolysis
Production liquefaction (HTL) extraction
technology Blue/green Vegetable oil
and processes HTL bio- Pyrolysis
hydrogen
Methanol
crude bio-oil
Hydrotreatment Hydrotreatment Hydrotreatment
Transesterification
+ hydrocracking + hydrocracking + hydrocracking
Readiness Bio-crude production:

Fast pyrolysis: TRL 8
TRL 5-6 TRL 9 TRL 9
Upgrading: TRL 5-6
Upgrading: TRL3-4

Example feedstocks
Used cooking oil Source: Neste Forest residues Source: GoodFuels
Energy crops Source: USDA

Fast pyrolysis plant, BTG Source: BTG HVO production process Source: UPM Biofuels

Storage Drop-in
Storage
and use biofuels • Pyrolysis and HTL fuels – may require additional investment for acid-proofing but
this could be mitigated through upgrading and blending.
• HVO – very good storage stability, not prone to oxidation or microbiological
growth, suitable for long storage durations. No significant modifications required to
traditional storage infrastructure.
• FAME – prone to oxidation (which can degrade fuel quality) and to leaving deposits
(which can clog elements like filters). Relatively short degrading time means it
should not be stored for long periods (max 6 months)[1]. Risk of microbial growth
due to water absorption. Additional investment for control of storage conditions
may be required.
• Blending limits will also apply to fuels in storage.
[1] IBIA, 2016 from ICCT

Storage
Storage Transportation
Drop-in
and
anduse
use biofuels • HVO can be transported in same way as standard diesel.
• FAME requires more onerous controls on conditions for transportation, loading
and unloading (such as avoiding water contamination).
• Loading and unloading equipment for HTL and pyrolysis oils requires acid-
proofing, which may need additional investment depending on level of
upgrading and/or blending.
Bunkering
• All biofuel blends can be used in current bunkering methods, although some
modifications to the equipment may be necessary in line with storage upgrade
requirements (e.g. acid-proofing for HTL and pyrolysis fuel oils depending on
upgrading and/or blending).

Storage Storage Drop-in

• FAME – potential additional storage controls and practices needed. FAME can lift
and use biofuels
deposits during early use, potentially blocking elements such as filters. Oxidation
instability and risk of microbial growth can also cause issues for vessels with long
periods in between bunkering. Some onboard fuel storage may also be
designated for highly infrequent use (such as emergency power generation and
auxiliary engine or lifeboat supply) and should therefore not use high FAME
concentrations.
• No significant additional requirements for storage of HVO onboard.
• Increased viscosity and quantities of micro-carbon residuals from use of
HTL/pyrolysis fuels could impact onboard filtration and pumping systems.

Handling Storage Drop-in

• ISO standard on marine fuels permits use of biomass-based hydrocarbon fuels and and use biofuels
the use of FAME up to a stipulated blending limit of 7%.
• Some other additional standards and specifications are relevant to use on board
(such as European and American standards on handling practices of FAME due to its
high oxygen instability.
• Clear policies and guidance for handling, storage and use will need to be developed
for use of biofuel alternatives if they are not simply supplied as a blended product.

Propulsion (1) Storage Drop-in

• FAME – potential engine refurbishment/upgrade work needed (e.g. fuel supply and use biofuels
hoses, filters). Manufacturer tests have found no negative effects of using FAME in
marine engines up to 10% blends.
• The use of a traditional residual fuel with a FAME blending component has been
successfully trialled, and will be made available for use in the near future.
• HVO – no engine upgrades required.
• HTL and pyrolysis fuels – may lead to increased risk of fuel injector and injection
system component wear.
• Use of a drop-in residual alternative to HFO has been trialled both in laboratory
tests in 2018 and onboard during 2019 and 2020. Further trials and investigations
into use of the fuel at a larger scale are ongoing.

Propulsion (2) Storage Drop-in

• Engines using new biofuel blends would require certification in accordance with and use biofuels
MARPOL Annex VI Regulations. It is likely to be very challenging on a practical level
to recertify all engine types that are currently deployed and in-use.

Biofuel propulsion options
• As discussed in the onboard requirements section, biofuels are a ‘drop-in’ solution (either in pure form or as a
blend) and as such they can be used in existing engines, albeit with the potential modifications discussed.
Dual fuel
bunkering
• Dual fuel bunkering can also be used, with separate tanks designated for biofuels and traditional fuels, allowing a
vessel to use either option depending on location.
• While using biofuels with existing engines may be technically possible, there are likely to be other barriers or
difficulties in doing so, such as the need to recertify engines to use the fuels.
• We will look at these wider barriers later in the session.


States that any fuel not derived from
petroleum refining must not cause
IMO MARPOL Annex VI (Regulation 18)
engines to exceed sulphur content or
NOx emission limits.
European
EN 14214 Liquid petroleum products - Fatty acid methyl
Committee for European standard specification for
esters (FAME) for use in diesel engines and heating
Standardisation FAME fuel.
applications
(CEN)
Allows up to 7% FAME blend for
distillate grades, and extends fuel
ISO 8217:2017 Petroleum products — Fuels (class F) — definition to include hydrocarbon
ISO
Specifications of marine fuels fuels from renewable biomass
sources (such as HVO, HTL and
pyrolysis fuel oils)

Examples of vessels using drop-in biofuels
Stena Immortal Source: Stena Bulk MS For-Ever Source: Interreg Danube MS Polarlys Source: Bioenergy International
~50,000dwt MR tanker 90m inland container vessel trialled with Trial of HVO that is ‘free of
operated using 100% 30%, 50% and 100% blends of advanced palm oil’ in cruise ship
advanced biofuel produced biofuel from ‘sustainable waste streams’. (gross tonnage 11,341t,
from cooking oil and length 123m).
forestry residue feedstocks.

Environmental impacts (GHG emissions)
Pyrolysis fuel
HTL fuel oil HVO FAME
oil
• Hydrogen production • Hydrogen • Hydrogen production • Feedstock type

Emission method production method method
reduction • Feedstock type • Feedstock type • Feedstock type
drivers (waste oils/fats)
Reduction in
well-to-wake 80% to 82%[1] 77% to 80%[2] 53% to 89%[3] 53 to 89%[3]
GHG emissions*
* per unit energy of fuel, as 100% blends vs RED II Comparator
# considering achievable blending limits and feedstock availability
[1] E4tech analysis: De Jong et al. (2015), Short term techno-economic feasibility of renewable jet fuel production. Excl. transport and distribution and refueling. Feedstock: Forest residues.
[2] E4tech analysis: IRENA, 2016. Innovation Outlook: Advanced Liquid Biofuels. Excludes downstream transport and distribution and refueling. Assumed feedstock: Forest residues. 165
[3] RED II typical values for rapeseed (lower bound) and waste cooking oil (upper bound) feedstocks.
Environmental impacts (air quality)
Pyrolysis fuel
HTL fuel oil HVO FAME
oil
Reduction in Up to 100% (assuming Up to 100% (assuming low

low sulphur in feedstock) sulphur in feedstock) 100%[1] 99% to 100%[2]
SOx
emissions*
Reduction in Uncertain, depends on Uncertain, depends on

fuel properties fuel properties 0% to 20%[1] 0%[2]
NOx
emissions*
Reduction in
~0%[3] ~0%[3] Generally reduced Generally reduced
PM emissions*
*as 100% blends vs MGO, positive values

reflect lower emissions.
[1] ICCT Working Paper 2020-21: The potential of liquid biofuels in reducing ship emissions. Data derived from lab testing.
[2] ICCT Working Paper 2020-21: The potential of liquid biofuels in reducing ship emissions. Data derived from life-cycle assessment modelling. 166
[3] E4tech analysis
Fuel cost overview
Production route HTL fuel oil Pyrolysis fuel oil HVO FAME
Key drivers • HTL CapEx • Fast pyrolysis CapEx • Feedstock cost • Feedstock cost
(Expected trend:
positive/negative/either) • Hydrogen cost • Hydrogen cost • Hydrogen cost
Current
production cost 51 – 98 USD 31 – 45 USD 24 – 39 USD 20 – 35 USD
(per GJ fuel)
Current production
cost vs HFO market
Additional Additional Additional Additional
price (per GJ fuel) 38 – 91 USD[1] 18 – 39 USD[1] 11 – 33 USD[1] 7 – 29 USD[1]
Potential cost reduction

(% reduction vs current
Up to 72% Up to 36% Low Low
cost)
Source: E4tech analysis: IRENA, 2016. Innovation Outlook: Advanced Liquid Biofuels. & ICCT – The potential of liquid biofuels in reducing ship emissions, 2020
[1]: based on HFO market price of 250 – 500 USD/tonne.

Barriers and risks

Lack of certainty on future government
and inter-government support for High – ongoing uncertainty can lead to inaction within fuel
Policy
biofuels compared to other alternative supply industries.
fuels.
Volatility or uncertainty of feedstock Low (HTL/pyrolysis), high (HVO/FAME) – risk can be mitigated
(and therefore production) costs. through use of supply contracts, market hedging practices etc.
Feedstock competition (leading to Low (HTL/pyrolysis), high (HVO/FAME) – high risk for parties
decreased availability and increased with long-term contracts but potential to mitigate through
Commercial/ price). actions such as setting clear policies on feedstock use.
economic Low/medium – high CapEx and high costs of higher levels of
upgrading suitable for higher fuel blends, which has potential
Potentially poor production economics to become prohibitively expensive. Given size of upgrading
for HTL and pyrolysis routes. plants that would be required, feedstock unavailability and
lack of large offtake contracts are barriers to their deployment
at scale.
Barriers and risks

Medium – depending on the type and blend, existing engines
may need to be recertified to use some biofuel options, which
Existing equipment would require
would be challenging on a practical basis. Assurance would
recertification.
need to be sought that engine warranties would not be
Regulatory invalidated.
Lack of standards for raw or Low/medium – standards are of high importance although use
upgraded HTL and pyrolysis fuel of them will be familiar to relevant parties once they are
oils developed.
High – sustainability concerns likely to limit use of some
Significant differences in
feedstocks in some countries. For other feedstocks, agreed
Sustainability sustainability impacts between
sustainability schemes required to minimize impacts and give
different feedstocks
confidence

Drop-in biofuels summary (1)
Key points
• With the ability to be used as ‘drop-in’ fuels or to be blended with existing fossil fuels, biofuels have a strong
potential use case for short-term deployment to realise net GHG emission reductions quickly.
• The extent to which they can be directly used as drop-in fuels depends on:
• The ability to blend the fuel.
• In general there is currently a reasonable amount of uncertainty and lack of standardisation surrounding blending limits
(e.g. inconsistencies between manufacturers and lack of standards).
• However, the technical feasibility of using higher blends of some biofuel options is becoming clearer with pilot programmes
and trials.
• Other barriers to short-term deployment, such as practical challenges of recertifying existing engines and the onboard
retrofit and adaptation required to use some biofuel types.
• The sustainability of biofuels is heavily dependent on the type of feedstock used.

Drop-in biofuels summary (2)
Key points
• Near term biofuels deployment will depend on policy measures to overcome the increased costs of biofuels use.
• In the mid to long term, achieving higher biofuels deployment will rely on continued policy support, as well as
reducing conversion costs for HTL and pyrolysis oils, and increasing access to sustainable feedstocks for HVO and
FAME.
• There is likely to be competition for oil-based feedstocks for HVO and FAME in the near term, given demands from
road transport and aviation. In the longer term, competition could emerge from across the economy for
lignocellulosic feedstocks for HVO and pyrolysis oils. It is possible that governments and regulatory bodies may
respond to concerns over feedstock competition through intervention or prioritisation efforts, ensuring that
feedstocks are used for applications that have the fewest alternative fuel options available, such as aviation.

ENERGY CARRIERS FOR
SHIPPING
Session 3 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 2
March 2021
AGENDA
1. Battery
2. Hydrogen
3. Ammonia
4. Summary and comparison of alternative fuel options
FUELS IN DEMONSTRATION PHASE (CONTINUED)

BATTERY

Overview

• Battery technologies
• Cost overview
• Summary

Batteries – key concepts
• When a battery is charged and then discharged

during use, this is referred to as a use cycle.
• As the overall number of cycles that a battery is Number
subjected to increases, the overall useful energy of cycles
storage capacity of the battery decreases
• The number of cycles that a battery can withstand
before reaching a certain proportion of its initial
capacity is known as its cycle life.
• Commonly a level of 80% of initial capacity is Depth of
used in a cycle life definition. discharge

Applications for shipping
• While batteries have seen dramatic technological improvements in recent years, their applications in
shipping for propulsion purposes are primarily still constrained by energy density.
• Currently ships using batteries and electric motors for propulsion are unable to travel more than
approximately 95km[1] (dependent on voyage conditions), and are therefore most suited to vessels with
short inland or coastal voyages such as ferries.
• We will examine some current examples of battery powered vessels later in this session.
HFO volumetric HFO gravimetric

energy density
35 MJ/l energy density
42 MJ/kg
Li-ion battery Li-ion battery

volumetric Approx. gravimetric Approx.
energy density 1.4 MJ/l energy density 0.6 MJ/kg
[1] IRENA (2019), Navigating to a renewable future: Solutions for decarbonising shipping, Preliminary findings, International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi’

• The primary onshore requirement to support battery-powered vessels is the provision of a shore-to-ship
electrical connection. Such a supply system is known as shore power.
• Shore-to-ship electrical connections are well understood, and while not widely used for charging batteries
used for propulsion, they are used to power auxiliary electrical systems when berthed. This is referred to
as cold ironing.

• Depending on its size and onboard power requirements, the onboard power systems for vessels will operate
at different voltage and frequency levels (e.g. some may operate with low voltage supply at 400V, others may
operate with high-voltage supply at 1,100 V).
• Depending on location, shore-based electricity supplies will also operate at different voltage or frequency
levels. For example, frequencies will be at either 50 or 60Hz, in line with the power infrastructure
characteristics of that country (e.g. Europe operates on 50Hz, and America operates on 60Hz).
• The power demand required from the shore power unit will also vary for different ship types (e.g. small ships
may require 300 kVA, but cruise ships could require 20 MVA, which is 20,000 kVA).
• Ships will often carry onboard voltage and frequency converters, providing them with universal compatibility
no matter where they berth.

Onshore requirements – battery charging for propulsion
• While ships using shore power for cold ironing is well understood, using shore power to charge large onboard
battery systems for propulsion power does present different challenges.
• Generally power requirements for recharging batteries used for propulsion will be larger than those used for
cold ironing (supplying the auxiliary power to the vessel only when in port).
• Whereas some liquid fuels can be bunkered ‘ship-to-ship’, current charging systems all require the ship to be
berthed in order to provide a direct connection.
• If charging infrastructure is to be widely installed, this will likely require significant upgrades to electricity
distribution and transmission infrastructure local to port areas.

Onshore requirements – example power connections
Example charging and power supply solutions Stemann-Technik

Onshore requirements – example power connections
Induction charging system Wärtsilä and SINTEF MF Folgefonn Norled
Induction charging uses a magnetic field generated by the This system is in use in Norway on MF Folgefonn,
onshore charging station to induce a charging current a ferry operated by Norled.
onboard the vessel.
It means no physical cable connection is required between
the shore and the ship, which is well suited for ships with
fast charging time requirements such as ferries.

Onboard requirements - battery propulsion systems
Batteries can be used as part of vessel propulsion systems in two main configuration types:
Hybrid (battery with conventional

Fully electric (battery only)
combustion engine)
Hybrid propulsion system for tugboat Rolls Royce Proposed large battery propulsion system Kawasaki

Other onboard requirements
• Safety onboard is an important consideration for vessels with large amounts of

onboard battery storage.
• Additional precautions are therefore recommended in the following areas:
• Temperature control – battery systems must be housed in a space that is adequately ventilated
and temperature controlled.
• Fire prevention and detection – additional requirements for monitoring of battery spaces


Published. Globally
UL LLC UL1642 Standard for Lithium Batteries recognised safety
standard.
Adopted. Example of
classification standards
related to onboard
DNV GL Rules for classification and class programmes
battery storage and
associated electrical
systems.
New joint industry report
with recommendations
DNV GL and others Maritime Battery Safety Joint Development Project - Report
on improved safety of
battery use on vessels

Examples of battery powered vessels (1)
Ellen, fully-electric ferry EU Horizon 2020 Project Aurora, fully-electric ferry ForSea
• 60m vessel, 200 passengers and 30 cars • Converted diesel-electric ferry (diesel generators
• 4.3MWh battery system retained for back-up or occasional hybrid use)
• 4MW charging rate (less than 25 minutes • 4.1MWh lithium ion battery system installed in
for full charge) containers on deck
• 22nm voyage length • 46 crossings per 24 hours
• 4km route, with short (<10 minute) charging times
at each port
• 28,000 tonnes CO2 saved per year

2000dwt fully-electric tanker Guangzhou Shipyard Int. Stena Jutlandica, hybrid Stena Line
• 70m long, 14m wide • Project began in 2018, and has three phases:
• 2.4 MWh battery storage capacity (>1000 Li-ion • Phase 1: Initial integration of electrical
batteries) operation (manoeuvring, reduced use of
• 2hrs charging time for inland voyage of 43nm generators)
• Operational in southern province of Guangdong • Phase 2: increase battery storage to provide
10nm of fully-electric range
• Phase 3: increase battery storage to provide
50nm of fully-electric range

• 120 TEU battery-powered container

ship, completed in 2020
• 80m long, 15m wide
• Designed to be fully autonomous
• 7MWh battery
• ‘Eco’ speed: 6-7 kts, max. speed: 13 kts
• Due to undergo full testing
Yara Birkeland, Fully-electric container ship Kongsberg/Yara Intl.

• When using a propulsion system fully powered by batteries, there are no emissions at the point of use, as
no combustion takes place.
• However, the overall environmental impact of fully electric vessels is dependent on:
• The carbon intensity of the electricity used to charge the batteries (this will depend on the electricity generation mix for
the power supply at the charging location).
• Lifecycle emissions of battery manufacturing (however, because batteries can be recharged, these account for the total
propulsion energy provided over the lifetime of the battery).*
• Battery recycling or re-deployment when their end of useful life is reached.*
Reduction GHGs NOx SOx PM

at point of
use -100% -100% -100% -100%
*Note that for other fuels, we have not considered associated lifecycle emissions beyond those of the production process and end-use, such as those
associated with engine manufacture for that option.

Cost of batteries in shipping (1)
• The capital cost of batteries depends on the battery technology, with Li-ion batteries (increasingly adopted
for shipping electric propulsion purposes) have seen dramatic cost reductions over recent years.
• The chart below provides an overview of how battery technologies are expected to improve in the future, in
terms of capital cost and cycle life.
LA: Lead-acid
LFP: Lithium iron phosphate
LMO: Lithium manganese oxide
LTO: Lithium titanate.
VRFB: Vanadium redox flow battery
NaNiCl: Sodium nickel chloride flow
battery
NaS: Sodium sulphur
NCA: nickel cobalt aluminium
NMC: nickel manganese cobalt
VRLA: Valve-regulated lead-acid
ZBFB: Zinc bromine flow battery
Image source: IRENA (2019), Navigating to a renewable future: Solutions for decarbonising
Session 3 – Alternative fuels in detail: Part 2 shipping, Preliminary findings, International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi 192
Cost of batteries in shipping (2)
• The operational cost of using batteries is dependent on the price paid for the electricity used for charging.
• This could vary significantly depending on:
• Commercial supply arrangements (e.g. type of consumer, offtake relationship)
• Other current demand levels on the relevant system
• Generation mix at the current time (e.g. amount of power supplied by renewables)
• For 2018, the average electricity prices paid by industrial consumers globally was:
Average cost of (Global average

electricity 6 – 67 USD/GJ[1] = 27 USD/GJ)
Cost compared to Additional

HFO market price -6 to 61 USD/GJ[2]
[1] IEA (2020), Energy Prices 2020, IEA, Paris. Prices for industrial consumers for 2018.
[2] based on HFO market price of 250 – 500 USD/tonne.
Barriers and risks
Energy density may put limitations on High – either shorter distance vessels or frequent recharge
voyages that could use battery requirements are needed
Technical
Lack of standardised shore power Medium – further development of international standards
connections needed.
Med/high – this presents a strong barrier to initial uptake as
Lack of available charging infrastructure
it would lead to severe operational constraints.
Commercial/ Med/high – while the development of charging

economic infrastructure at ports would follow known engineering
Infrastructure upgrade costs practices and understood technologies, the costs
associated with upstream power infrastructure upgrades
are likely to be high. Potential for split incentives.
Sustainability depends on source of Low – in general most power sectors globally have separate
Sustainability
electricity plans to decarbonise (albeit at different rates).

Batteries summary
Key points
• The use of batteries for propulsion in shipping is primarily limited by energy density.
• Battery energy density and technology has improved dramatically over recent years (and is expected to improve
further), although the overall motive energy requirements of long-distance voyages mean that widespread use of
batteries for international shipping is highly unlikely.
• However, they provide a good solution for some short-distance coastal and inland applications, or where there is a
fixed route where the vessel and infrastructure can be designed to the voyage distance and charging frequency.

FUELS UNDER DEVELOPMENT

HYDROGEN

Overview

• Hydrogen fuel production value chain
• Cost overview
• Summary

HFO Gravimetric Volumetric

• Energy density: 42 MJ/kg = 35 MJ/dm3. energy energy density
density MJ/kg MJ/dm3
HFO 42 35
• Most widely-used fuel. LH2 8.5
–240°C 4 x less
than HFO
Hydrogen (H2) GH2
120 (LHV)
4.5
3 x greater
• Stored as compressed gas (GH2 up to 700 bar) or as a liquid (LH2 700 bar ~8 x less
than HFO
below -240°C) or chemically bound rt. than HFO
• H2 is already considered as a fuel for land-based transport in GH2 2.8
fuel cell vehicles (cars, buses, trucks and trains) 350 bar ~12.5 x less
• Highly flammable (explosion range 4-75 vol %) rt. than HFO
• In 2019 global hydrogen demand was 74 Mt
• Commonly used in refineries, ammonia and methanol synthesis

Hydrogen fuel production value chains
Natural Gas Low-carbon electricity H2O Residual biomass Municipal waste

Feedstocks/
energy source
Anaerobic
Gasifier (+CCS)
Production Reformer (+CCS) Electrolyser digestion
technology
and processes
Reformer (+ CCS)
Storage and Grey (or blue) Green hydrogen Bio-hydrogen

use hydrogen
#Syngas= mixture of H2/CO/CO2/CH4

*CCS can be added which makes these biomass routes produce carbon negative hydrogen
Natural Gas Low-Carbon Electricity H2O Residual Biomass Municipal Waste

Current
availability

Key Points European hydrogen generation

capacity by technology
• Nearly all hydrogen (95%) is currently produced using fossil feedstocks
(natural gas and coal).
• Electrolysis of water has no feedstock limitation, but some regions have
higher renewable energy potential and lower costs than others
local availability of energy e.g. natural gas plus CCS, renewable power
or sustainable biomass as well as the economics of transporting
hydrogen
Source: Clean Hydrogen Europe (2019)

Anaerobic
Gasifier (+ CCS)
Production digestion
technology Reformer (+ CCS) Electrolyser
and processes
Reformer (+ CCS)
TRL 6-7 TRL 6-7

Readiness TRL 9 (CCS TRL 7) TRL 7-8
(CCS TRL 5) (CCS TRL 5)
Biomass gasifier: Source: www.haiqimachinery.com
Steam methane reforming Source: Air Liquide
PEM electrolyser: Source: Nel Hydrogen (PEM electrolyser)

Storage Storage
and use Hydrogen • Finding volume-efficient ways to store H2 is challenging and in its elemental form
these are limited to compressed gaseous (GH2) or cryogenic liquid hydrogen (LH2)
• GH2 is stored in high pressure tanks (<700 bar) but safety issues from high pressures
• LH2 at −253◦C in cryogenic tanks but high energy requirements and boil off losses
• Hydrogen can also be chemically stored in carrier molecules e.g. LOHC/NH3/PtX fuels
Transportation
• If a network is in place, pipelines are the most attractive method for GH2 distribution
• If trucked, distance to be travelled determines if GH2 (<300km) or LH2 is preferred
• Ships have been designed to transport both LH2 (Kawasaki) and GH2 as cargo

Storage Bunkering
and use Hydrogen • No current hydrogen bunkering or regulations due to such low level of use as fuel.
• Bunkering method will be dependent on method of fuel storage (GH2 or LH2)
• GH2 likely to be transferred to ship by direct compression or via a pressure differential
• LH2 will be bunkered using cryogenic pumps drawing analogies with LNG
• Bunkering could also occur via the direct exchange of container racks

Storage Storage
• Compression and liquefaction are expensive and energy intensive. and use Hydrogen
• Liquefaction at −253 ◦C is problematic because of boil-off losses; heavily insulated
reservoirs with thick or double-walled vacuum-insulated containers are needed.
• Cold/cryo compression is a hybrid method (40-80K and 300 bar) with no boil off loss.
• 4-13 times larger tanks required for equivalent energy content of HFO.
• GH2 and LH2 tanks have fixed cylindrical shapes so cannot pack into void spaces.
Handling
• General safety consideration around the storage of a high-pressure flammable gas
on vessels as high-pressure tanks carry the risk of explosion.
• No regulatory requirements available today for hydrogen as a marine fuel
• Crew should be trained on how to maintain a hydrogen system on board a ship and
how to handle fire safety.

Propulsion Storage
• Hydrogen can be burnt in a specialized internal combustion engine or gas turbine and use Hydrogen
• Retrofit engine conversions are possible e.g. by modifying the fuel injection system
but H2 is blended with conventional fuels (diesel/LNG) in ICE to aid combustion.
• Hydrogen can be used to generate electricity in fuel cells (PEMFC or SOFC), which can
then drive electric motors
• FCs have higher powertrain efficiencies than ICEs, no GHG or air pollutants
• H2 ICE conversions exist, but FCs at present are only at demonstration level as
currently only have 1-2MW power output

Hydrogen propulsion options
Internal combustion
Option PEM fuel cell Solid Oxide fuel cell
engine (new or retrofit)
TRL 7 TRL 7
Readiness (current examples in (current examples in TRL 6
service) service)
Capital cost Highly project specific 137 USD/kW[1] Highly project specific
Efficiency <55% (project specific) 40-50%

50-65% but <85% if
(at shaft) waste heat used
[1] Estimated cost value for mobile applications based on current technologies under development. Royal Society Policy Briefing, 2020, £1=$1.37
208
Hydrogen engine example
Hybrid PEMFC-Battery engine
• 2x50 kW PEMFC system with a lead gel battery
• 50 kg of GH2 stored onboard in 350 bar
pressurized tanks
Fuel Cell Ship “FCS Alsterwasser” Source: www.blue-growth.org PEMFC developed by Proton Motors for FCS Alsterwasser

Body/ Organisation Documentation Status/Comment

Current edition doesn’t cover H2 storage or H2 as a fuel. H2 storage and
use must follow the alternative design approach in accordance with
IMO IGF Code
SOLAS Regulation II-1/55. IGC and IGF Codes cover the storage of
liquefied gas on board ships, and the C-tank rules in principle cover LH2
Guidelines for the use and storage of GH2/LH2. Identifies basic safety
ISO/TR 15916:2015
ISO concerns, hazards and risks, describes properties of H2 relevant to
safety.
Under preparation for its final publication. Bunkering and port
ISO 20519 - "Ships and marine
regulations for bunkering H2 fuel do not currently exist The bunkering
ISO technology - Specification for
of hydrogen-fuelled ships is subject to national regulations and
bunkering of gas fueled ships"
therefore needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
ISO ISO 14687 H2 purity regulation
There is no binding international regulatory framework for maritime FC
DNVGL Rules for Ships – Part 6 Chapter 2 Section
applications but this can be used to classify ships with FCs as
Classification 3 – Fuel Cell Installations
FC(Power) or FC(Safety).

Examples of hydrogen vessels and related infrastructure
Vessels
• Relatively few (~20) hydrogen boats/ferries are in operation or
under construction worldwide.
• The most advanced projects on future commercial application
are part of the e4ships lighthouse project in Germany.
• Only small maritime FC applications with an electrical power
output of <1MW are currently in operation.
• Hydroville is the first passenger shuttle that uses hydrogen to
power a diesel engine (Germany).
• HyDIME project has a green H2/diesel dual fuel conversion
system in a RoPax ferry (Orkney Islands). Hydroville vessel, Passenger Shuttle
Norled has developed two H2 powered ferries with 400 kW fuel

Source: http://www.hydroville.be/en/hydroville/
•
cells, one powered by LH2 and one by GH2 (Norway).
• HySeas III: Developed first vessel powered by green H2 and FC.

Examples of hydrogen bunkering and related infrastructure

• The RH2INE partnership will develop 3 hydrogen bunkering
stations for inland shipping between Rotterdam and Cologne
to power at least 10 hydrogen powered vessels by 2024.
• As part of the MARANDA project, hydrogen-storage containers
and a fuel-cell system have been designed that are currently
being tested and improved before their integration on-board
the ship.
• The FLAGSHIPS project has meant vessel operators have
started to discuss safety aspects of hydrogen applications on
push boats for inland waterways.
RH2INE project inland waterway bunkering • In December 2019, the ‘Hellesylt Hydrogen Hub’ was awarded
NOK 37.6m (US$3.4m) from ENOVA for a H2 supply facility to
ships in the Geirangerfjord, 200 km NE of Bergen

Grey/blue H2 Green H2 Bio H2
• Choice of feedstock • Electricity carbon intensity • Choice of feedstock
Emission • CH4 production method • CH4 production method
• Renewable sources vs. grid
reduction drivers (SMR vs ATR) (SMR vs ATR)
• CCS efficiency • Electrolyser efficiency • CCS efficiency
Well-to-wake 22% reduction (blue) [1] Highly feedstock

70% increase (grey)
87% reduction [1] dependent
GHG emissions vs HFO
Key Points
• Well-to-Wake emissions also depend on the propulsion method, and phase of fuel (GH2 vs LH2).
• If a pilot fuel is used alongside H2 (e.g. MGO) this will lead to CO2 emissions.
• NOX cannot be eliminated from ICE but FCs do not produce CO2, NOX, SOX or particulate matter emissions.
• ICE burning H2 is more difficult to control NOx, but have the potential to comply with the Tier III NOx limits without requiring
exhaust gas treatment in Otto-cycle engines.
• Compression and liquefaction have different (and significant) energy requirements so WtW emissions will depend whether GH2
(and its pressure) or LH2 is used as the fuel.
• Storage and transportation of hydrogen are energy intensive, contributing to overall WtW emissions.
[1] E4tech analysis: Excludes downstream transport, distribution and refueling. Values for liquid hydrogen. MGO pilot fuel used (4.8% on energy basis).
213
Fuel cost overview
Production route Grey/Blue H2 Green H2 Bio H2
Key drivers • Natural gas price • Green power cost • Biomass feedstock
(Expected trend: • CCS Capex and OPEX • Electrolyser Capex, cost and supply
• Cost of carbon utilisation, efficiency • Gasifier capex
Current cost 11 – 26 USD (unabated)

(per GJ fuel) 16 – 33 USD 20 – 54 USD 2020 hydrogen
13 – 27 USD (+ CCS*) market price vs HFO
market price
Current cost vs. HFO
market price (per GJ
Additional Additional Additional
+5 to +42 USD
fuel)[1] 5 – 14 USD[1] 10 – 21 USD[1] 14 – 42 USD[1]
Potential for cost

High for CCS High High for gasification
*high cost uncertainty associated with CCS technology
Source: E4tech analysis

[1]: Based on HFO market price of 250 – 500 USD/tonne.

Barriers and risks
Category Barrier / Risk Comment
High - Excessive fuel cost is strong barrier to widespread adoption.

High hydrogen production costs,
However, significant cost reductions are expected across production
especially green but also blue
pathways and policy action may make economics more favourable.
Medium - Increasing offerings in terms of hydrogen

Commercial engines/replacements
Low volumetric energy density leads to

Medium - Loss of cargo/passenger space has varying degree of
large tank volume requirements (in fixed
concern depending on the intended application of the vessel
shape containers)
Medium – in short-term this is a large barrier to commercial

Currently no bunkering infrastructure
operation

Barriers and risks

Lack of regulations for bunkering and High – Hydrogen as fuel is not included in the IGF Code, bunkering
Policy
storage onboard and offboard procedures, storage and fuel cell standards need identifying.
Variable sustainability impacts of Medium – Important to have agreed sustainability criteria for fuel value
biomass and waste feedstocks chains
Sustainability
Dominance of fossil fuels in hydrogen High – Hydrogen is almost entirely supplied from natural gas and coal
production today, which would not meet reduction targets
Industrialization and scale up of
Medium - Lifetime of stacks and reformer units need to be proven
electrolyser and fuel cell components
Safety challenge from high
Medium – Increased ventilation, gas detection, tighter control on
flammability range and low ignition
sources of ignition
temperature
Technical
Medium – Insufficiencies of current methods for safely and effectively
Infrastructure requirements in the storing and transporting large quantities of high density hydrogen.
development of suitable transport, and Hydrogen causes embrittlement for hydride forming metals and
storage technology hydrogen-assisted cracking for steels, which will affect pipeline and
trucking materials and compressor designs.

Hydrogen summary
Key points
• There has been extremely limited deployment as a marine fuel to-date, but promising results achieved by early
adopters.
• Production routes use generally well understood processes.
• Decarbonisation success will depend on electrolysis from renewable electricity (green H2) and CCS (blue H2)
• Costs are dominated by cost of underlying primary energy source
• Distribution (storage and transportation) – Compressed GH2 is less complex, cheaper and less energy intensive than
liquefaction to cryogenic temperatures. LH2 also suffers boil off losses but has a higher volumetric energy density.
• Bunkering infrastructure for ships and its regulation does not currently exist and the bunkering method will be
highly dependent on the method of fuel storage
• Combustion engines offer proven robustness, reliability and durability as well as lower costs. Conventional internal
combustion engines can be modified to run on hydrogen blends which can be done for new engines or as a retrofit.
However, further development is still required
• Fuel cells have higher efficiencies, can be zero emission, do not emit NOx and create less noise and vibrations.

AMMONIA

Overview

• Ammonia fuel production value chain
• Cost overview
• Summary

HFO
Ammonia availability at ports for
transport as a cargo (not as a fuel)
Ammonia (NH3)
• Energy density: 18.6 MJ/kg = 10.8-12.7 MJ/dm3 (liquid NH3)
• Easily liquified by cooling to -33°C or compression to 10 bar
• Low ignition energy, narrow flammability limit (15-28 vol %)
• Water soluble but toxic to aquatic ecosystems
2019 global production = 186 Million Tonnes[1].
• Commonly used in industry (80% in fertilizers, also refrigerants)
• Well established infrastructure, safe handling and
usage procedures

Ammonia production value chains ( N 2 + 3H 2 → 2NH 3 )
Natural Gas Low-carbon electricity Residual biomass Municipal waste

Feedstocks/
energy source
Reformer (+ CCS) Electrolyser Anaerobic

Gasifier
digestion
Production
technology
H2 H2 Reformer (+ CCS)
and processes
H2
Haber-Bosch N2 Haber-Bosch N2 Haber-Bosch N2
Storage and Fossil (or blue)

Green ammonia Bio-ammonia
use ammonia

Natural Gas Low-Carbon Electricity Air (N2) Residual Biomass Municipal Waste
Current
availability

Key Points
• Nearly all ammonia is currently produced using fossil feedstocks Global Ammonia production by feedstock
• The aim is to synthesise ammonia from hydrogen produced from the
electrolysis. This currently has a small market share (<1%).
local availability of energy e.g. cheap natural gas plus CCS, renewable
power or sustainable biomass and ammonia transportation economics
IEA 2012

Anaerobic
Reformer (+ CCS) Electrolyser Gasifier (+ CCS)
digestion
Production
technology
and processes H2 H2 Reformer (+ CCS)
H2
Haber-Bosch N2 Haber-Bosch N2 Haber-Bosch N2
Readiness TRL 5-6

TRL 9 (CCS TRL 7) TRL 5-6 TRL 5-6
(CCS TRL 4) (CCS TRL 4)
Haber Bosch process:
Source: thyssenkrupp

Storage Storage
and use Ammonia • Existing storage infrastructure widespread, many ports have existing ammonia storage
facilities up to 40,000 tonnes, could form basis of a bunkering infrastructure
• 120 ports worldwide are already equipped with facilities to import or export ammonia
• Modifications would be required to use current fuel storage equipment (due to
analogies with LPG).
• Ammonia is corrosive to some materials so care must be taken e.g. for piping
• >0.5% H2O content significantly improves the safety of storing ammonia by reducing
corrosion stress cracking. C-grade ammonia is 99.5% pure and suitable for use as a fuel.
Transportation
• Ammonia currently widely transported globally (via pipeline, ship, trucks and rail).
• Widespread familiarity with loading and unloading ammonia as a bulk product.

Ammonia poses safety issues; these are currently managed but
should be scrutinised if its use is to be scaled up
• The safe transportation and use of ammonia in current situations brings an accumulation of safety experience, a mature international set of laws
and regulations and a sophisticated support sector providing ammonia users and first responders with safety equipment, training, and education.
• Ammonia distribution is well-established and currently managed with existing standards and procedures, but considering new applications for
ammonia such as marine fuel will require careful risk assessment.
• The health risks from ammonia exposure and the environmental risks arising from leaks must be closely scrutinised and all systems must be
designed to minimise, and effectively eliminate, these risks.
Safety Issue Comment

Ammonia is toxic; it causes irritation to humans at low concentrations and is Ammonia can be quickly and easily detected by human smell due to
life threatening at high concentrations. its strong odour even in low ppm quantities, far below concentrations
hazardous to health meaning leaks can be quickly identified.
Ammonia is highly volatile, which enhances the risk of human contact as it will Ammonia is less dense than air so will quickly dissipate from the
evaporate easily in the case of spills/leakages and if not well contained scene of a spillage.
Ammonia is toxic to aquatic life; it is very soluble in water which must be When ammonia is present in water at high enough levels, it is difficult
considered if ammonia is to be distributed by ship and used to power ships for invertebrates and fish to sufficiently excrete the toxicant, leading
to toxic build-up in internal tissues and blood, and potentially death.

Storage Bunkering
and use Ammonia • Bunkering can be carried out with similar infrastructure to LPG
• Loading and unloading from terminals to ammonia cargo ships is currently handled
safely
• A bunkering grid could be established fast and cost efficiently by utilizing the existing
storage facilities at ports
• Small gas tanker vessels could be converted to bunker barges. Cost estimates[1]:
Ammonia bunker barge CAPEX = $ 15,000,000 / vessel with a capacity of 3,500 tons
[1] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Marine Highway
Transport of Toxic Inhalation Hazard Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Storage Storage
• On-board, storage under pressure (<17 bar) in Type C pressurized 2,000 m3 tanks is and use Ammonia
preferred over refrigeration as no liquefication system is required
• Type C tanks are flexible installations situated on the deck and can be easily
integrated in a consolidated design of a commercial ship.
• Larger tanks required for equivalent energy content of fossil fuels. In a type C tank
under pressure, ammonia requires ~3 times the volume of MGO for the same energy
content and the weight penalty for this is 1.8 times greater than using MGO.
Handling
• Transportation of ammonia by ship is covered by IGC Code but this does not allow for
the use of ammonia as a fuel
• Double walled pipes must be used inside enclosed spaces

Propulsion Storage
• Ammonia can be used in diesel combustion engines with modifications and use Ammonia
• Dual-fuel models are common; diesel, kerosene, MGO or ~5% cetane is added to
NH3 to start combustion or NH3 is partially cracked producing a 70:30 NH3:H2 blend
• NH3 or NH3/H2 blends can be burnt in a gas turbine and may have higher efficiencies
• Fuel cells can either use NH3 directly (SOFC) or H2 cracked from NH3 (alkaline or PEM
FC)
• PEM fuel cells are irreparably degraded by >0.1ppm of NH3 in the H2 gas stream
which creates challenges for PEM FC applications.
• Direct ammonia fuel cells under development but currently very low power density.
• Hydrogen release from ammonia (cracking) for use in an ICE or fuel cell is less
advanced

Ammonia propulsion options
Option Existing fossil engine Ammonia-ready Fuel cell (e.g solid

retrofit conversion combustion engine oxide/alkaline)
Readiness TRL 6 TRL 6 TRL 3-4
Capital cost
(including required Highly project specific Will be highly project
changes to ancillary Highly project specific
onboard systems e.g. fuel
~5 million Euros [1] and technology specific
supply)
Efficiency 30-40% Not yet available Fuel cell specific

(at shaft)
230
[1] https://nh3fuelassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/0900-Ammonia_vision-Rene-Sejer-Laursen-MAN.pdf
Ammonia engines
ME-LGI two-stroke dual-fuel engine
• Diagram shown is for methanol but this engine
can run on ammonia as well as
methanol/LNG/biofuels
• The same systems can be used for NH3 as for
LPG but double walled gas piping is required.
Methanol Fuel System Configuration, MAN MAN B&W ME-LGI Engine and Fuel Supply System

Body/ Organisation Documentation Status/Comment

• Ammonia is precluded from use as a fuel under current safety regulation and there is no
recognized fuel standard common across all the regulated industries
• The AEA Fuel Standard Committee has developed a draft product specification to
IMO IGF Code
facilitate the acceptance of NH3 as a fuel.
• Lloyds register has approval in principle for a NH3 fueled 23k TEU containership and an
Aframax tanker.
Different types of ships need different actions to set safety standards for NH3 fuel:
• Liquefied gas carriers e.g. NH3 carriers, are subject to IGC code which covers NH3 but
does not allow for the use of toxic cargo (NH3) as a fuel – IMO regulation needs to be
amended
IMO IGC Code
• Other types of ship are instead subject to the IGF code and the use of ammonia as a
fuel is not covered so guidelines must be set based on safety verification.
• MAN ES are in the process of obtaining flag state approval to use ammonia as a
marine fuel in the IGC Code
US Occupation Safety NH3 exposure • 8-hour limit at 25 ppm and 15 minutes limit at 35 ppm. OSHA has defined the level at
and Health limits which persons can be exposed without suffering irreversible health effects as 300 ppm.
Administration

Examples of ammonia vessels
• Viking Energy is a retrofitted vessel that will run on ammonia fuel cells to
launch in 2024. It will be built by Eidesvik and Equinor and is expected to
sail solely on ammonia for 3,000 hours annually. This is part of the ShipFC
project funded by the EU with a budget of 230 million NOK (25 million
USD). One genset will be converted to a 2 MW SOFC. A 100 kW SOFC will
first be tested on land and then upscaled with planned installation in the
ship in late 2023.
• In August 2020 NYK launched projects for an NH3 fueled tugboat and an Viking Energy Source: Equinor
NH3 gas carrier.

• MAN ES have announced a project for an ammonia-fuelled 23,000 TEU
ultra-large container ship and an Afromax tanker.
• ITOCHU has a (Joint Development) pilot project with ammonia as a dual
fuel (with LFSO) and a JD for a ship design with ammonia fueled engine.

Examples of infrastructure for NH 3 as a marine fuel
• NYK have launched a project to build an NH3 floating storage
regasification barge.
• MAN ES are proposing to manufacture green NH3 for use as
marine fuel.
• Thyssenkrupp is developing the ‘WattshiftR concept’. RE from
offshore (floating) wind farms can be combined with electrolysis
plants (to produce green H2) fed into green NH3 plants all
situated on North Sea oil rigs. Additional storage of this green
NH3 can then be used to refuel passing marine vessels.
• There are several pilot-scale green NH3 production projects
Source:
under development (20-60 ktpy). One of the most progressed is
ThyssenKrupp: Offshore Ammonia (concept) ThyssenKrupp in the industrial hub of NEOM in KSA where a 4 GW green NH3
plant will be operational by 2025 with the intention of global
distribution.

Blue ammonia Green ammonia Bio-ammonia
Emission reduction • CH4 production and

• Electricity carbon intensity • Nature of feedstock (e.g.
drivers transport emissions
• Renewable sources vs. grid farmed/waste)
• CCS efficiency
Well-to-wake
GHG emission savings Highly feedstock
~14%[1] ~77%[1]
Vs. HFO dependent
Key Points
• Neither combustion of ammonia nor its use in a fuel cell produces CO2, so WtW emissions from NH3 alone will depend on the
production pathway for the NH3 fuel being used. Fuel cells have no emissions except N2
• However, if an ICE is used, concurrent combustion of the pilot fuel will lead to GHG emissions. The magnitude of these will
depend on what pilot fuel is being used (e.g. diesel, MGO or H2), how it was produced and to what % it is blended.
• Considering non-CO2 impacts, ICE/gas turbines should be combined with SCR devices (to stop NOX emissions) and metal halides
(to stop NH3 slip) in the exhaust and then would have no soot, NOx, particulate or NH3 emissions.
[1] E4tech analysis based on IEA (2019): Excludes downstream transport and distribution and refueling. MGO pilot fuel used (17% on energy basis).
235
Fuel cost overview
Production route Blue ammonia Green ammonia
Key drivers • Green electricity cost

(Expected trend: • Electrolyser CapEx
positive/negative/either) • CCS CapEx
• Electrolyser utilisation
Current cost
(per GJ fuel) 16 – 27 USD* 23 – 27 USD Current unabated
fossil ammonia
market price vs HFO
Current cost vs. HFO market price
Additional Additional
market price (per GJ
fuel)[1] 10-15 USD[1] 17-15 USD[1]
-50 to -200 USD
Potential for cost High for electrolysers and

reduction vs current cost High for CCS
renewable energy
*high cost uncertainty associated

[1] Source: E4tech analysis
with CCS technology

Barriers and risks

High - Excessive fuel cost is strong barrier to widespread adoption.
High ammonia production costs,
However, significant cost reductions are expected across production
especially green but also blue
pathways and policy action may make economics more favourable.
Medium - Increasing development of ammonia
engines/replacements
Commercial Low volumetric energy density leads to
Medium - Loss of cargo/passenger space has varying degree of
large tank volume requirements (in fixed
concern depending on the intended application of the vessel
shape containers)
Medium/low – in short-term this is a large barrier to commercial
Currently no bunkering infrastructure operation but ammonia bunkering could develop quickly utilising
current ammonia infrastructure at ports

Barriers and risks

Lack of regulations for bunkering and High – Ammonia as fuel is not included in the IGF Code, bunkering
Policy
storage onboard and offboard procedures, storage and fuel cell standards need identifying.
Variable sustainability impacts of Medium – Important to have agreed sustainability criteria for fuel value
biomass and waste feedstocks chains
Sustainability
Dominance of fossil fuels in hydrogen High – Ammonia is almost entirely supplied from natural gas and coal
production for ammonia today, which would not meet reduction targets
Industrialization and scale up of
Medium - Lifetime of stacks and reformer units need to be proven
electrolyser and fuel cell components
Challenge of low ignition temperature Medium – Ammonia internal combustion engines are a very active area
range for combustion engines of development
Technical
Medium – needs to be managed with development of internal
Minimization of NOx and N2O combustion engines to reach NOx regulations and minimize the
emissions negative effect that nitrous oxide emissions would have on emission
savings

Ammonia summary
Key points
• Ammonia is currently widely handled as cargo substance with recognised regulations and guidelines, but as yet
limited deployment as marine fuel
• Onshore infrastructure and equipment for storage and transportation of ammonia is well understood but would
need scaling up and extended to new locations
• Bunkering infrastructure for ships and its regulation does not currently exist
• Safety is a barrier and hazards need to be mitigated appropriately
• Production routes use generally well understood processes.
• Decarbonisation success will depend on electrolysis from renewable electricity (green H2) and CCS (blue H2)
• Ammonia internal combustion engines are in development by the major maritime engine manufacturers but are not
yet commercially available
• Fuel cell technology and cracking of ammonia to produce hydrogen needs further research and development

SUMMARY AND COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL OPTIONS

What have we looked at so far?
Availability Applicability Technology maturity

Feedstock and Existing fleet and
TRL (production
production bunkering
and use)
infrastructure infrastructure
Energy density Economic Safety

Requirement of Cost – fuel, Safety in
space for fuel bunkering and operation and
storage ship modifications toxicity
Standards Global sustainability Local sustainability

Existence of Air pollutant
Direct and
standards and emissions,
indirect GHG
certifications impacts on water
241
Summary: Energy density
242
Summary: propulsion technology readiness level

Fuel cost – summary of key drivers
Fuel production route Fuel type Key cost drivers Cost reduction potential
Blue methanol • Natural gas price
• CCS CapEx
Fossil + CCS Blue hydrogen High for CCS
• CO2 capture cost (methanol
Blue ammonia only)
• Feedstock cost
Bio-methanol Medium
• Conversion equipment CapEx
• Feedstock cost
HTL and pyrolysis oils • Conversion equipment CapEx Medium/High
Hydrogen cost
Biofuels
• Feedstock cost
HVO Low
• Hydrogen cost
FAME • Feedstock cost Low
Bio-hydrogen + • Feedstock cost
Medium
ammonia • Gasifier cost (bio-hydrogen)

Fuel cost – summary of key drivers
Fuel production route Fuel type Key cost drivers Cost reduction potential
• Green electricity cost

E-methanol
• Electrolyser CapEx and
E-fuels (with carbon) utilisation Medium/high
E-LNG • CO2 capture cost
Green hydrogen • Green electricity cost

• Electrolyser CapEx and
E-fuels (without carbon) High
utilisation
Green ammonia
• Cost of electricity
Battery Medium
• Battery CapEx

Summary: production cost
The relative economics of the fuels can vary significantly

depending on the assumptions that are used.
Assumptions can vary over time, geography and have
various levels of uncertainty depending on the maturity
of the technology.
An example of relative costs is given here…
Source: Zero-Emission Vessels: Transition Pathways (Fuel production cost estimates and assumptions), Lloyds Register and UMAS, 2019

ENERGY CARRIERS FOR
SHIPPING
Session 4 – Barriers and opportunities
March 2021
AGENDA
1. Overview of potential barriers and opportunities
2. Interactive sessions
BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES
Footer 250
How can your country contribute to an increased uptake of alternative
fuels?
Potentially become
If a lot of renewables…
a fuel supplier?
How can they be utilized

If a lot of ports…
for alternative fuels?
How can registered ships

If a major flag…
be incentivized?
How to sustain/expand
If a major ship building
leadership position by building
nation… alternative fuel ships/engines
251
Each country faces opportunities and barriers to alternative fuels
Energy supply
chain
Infrastructure Fleet profile
Industry
profile
Technology
Finance Cost reduction Regulation
NATIONAL ONBOARD ENABLERS

ONSHORE
CONDITIONS
Footer 252
INTERACTIVE SESSIONS
Footer 253

Alternative Fuels Online Slides

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alternative Fuels Online Slides

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALTERNATIVE FUELS AND

ENERGY CARRIERS FOR

E4tech is an energy and sustainability strategy consultancy. It

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 4

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 5

Where we are now? How do we get there?

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 6

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 8

There are many different ways to examine shipping:

Inland waterways Domestic/coastal shipping International shipping

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 9

The most used fuels are:

1. Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO)

2. Marine Diesel Oil (MDO)

3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)

Source: UMAS, IMO Fourth GHG study

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 10

Ongoing pilot or demonstration projects by fuel type and vessel size.

Source: Getting to Zero Coalition, https://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/news/mapping-of-zero-emission-pilots-and-demonstration-projects/

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 11

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 12

Wind Coal Oil

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 13

All these gases/substances are currently emitted from shipping

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 14

• Cheap • Greenhouse gas emissions

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 15

IMO is committed to reducing

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 16

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 17

• Initial GHG Strategy contains a list of “candidate GHG measures” with

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 18

• 50% reduction is the target for the international shipping sector

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 19

Source: Statista https://www.statista.com/statistics/264024/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-type/

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 20

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 21

Proving technology and equipment

Developing regulation and policy

Preparing supply chain (production, distribution and refuelling)

Ships are capital-intensive assets, with lifetimes of 20 – 30 years

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 22

• All these fuels or energy sources have a case for

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 23

• Environmental regulation is primarily provided by the International Convention

• Chapter 4: Energy efficiency regulations

• Includes measures to reduce GHG emissions through energy efficiency

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 24

• Refers to oxides of nitrogen including NO2 and NO.

• Causes health problem; in particular on respiratory system.

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 25

NOx emission limits of

Source: DNV GL (2019)

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 26

• PM (Particulate Matter) is produced due to incomplete combustion of fuel.

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 27

Limits the sulphur in the

Source: DNV GL (2019)

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 28

• On 1 January 2020, the 0.50% global sulphur cap -

Source: DNV GL (2019)

Session 1 – Context, background and key concepts 29

SHIP DESIGN SHIP OPERATION