Framing the discussion was the recent International Maritime Organization’s call for a 50 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 compared with a 2008 baseline, and for phasing them out as soon as possible in this century. Carbon intensity in shipping is to be reduced by 40 percent by 2030, and 70 percent by 2050.
In his opening query to participants, moderatorJohn Snyder addressed the fundamental capability of the industry to meet these ambitious goals: “Is the technology available to get us to a zero-emission future?”
Optimizing options: a complex equation
“As we see it, there is no single technology as of today that will get us to zero emissions,” related Anshul Tuteja, Associate VP, Global Fleet Optimization, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (RCCL). Scaling is the fundamental issue when faced with a number of options, he continued: “What is the investment required for each technology? Technology leaders need to invest as well, not just operators, and we need government support in the mix.”
Michael Carter, Acting Associate Administrator for Environment and Compliance in the U.S. Department of Maritime Administration (MARAD), cited the examples of California and Washington State, both taking steps to support the green shift, including looking for partnerships.
In this setting, international partnerships become more important, he maintained. “Why should the players use time and resources reinventing the wheel? Go ahead and do some tests and then share the results. Good things are happening, but everyone needs to know how to get involved.”
Edward Schwarz, Vice President Sales, ABB Marine & Ports US, pointed to the contradiction in distribution of new technology in the markets. “We have seen a polarization between established and developing segments emerging in the U.S. Why is this?”
Derek Novak, Chief Engineer at the American Bureau of Shipping, offered the power of the bottom line as explanation: “I think a lot of it comes down to economics. Not all nations are funding developments, and the shipping industry is still recovering from past crises. There is just not a lot of capital to be invested. And it should also be mentioned that emissions compliance measures like scrubbers are taking much of the energy in the market right now. This makes it difficult to prioritize development of batteries or alternative fuels in the way we otherwise might have.”
Ole-Jacob Irgens, Global Sales Manager, Propulsion Systems, ABB Marine & Ports, pointed out that lifecycle costs also drive decisions on ship propulsion.
“Green is more expensive, yes, but not exponentially,” Schwarz replied. “What is really keeping our industry from embracing green solutions? Is the problem with regulations? Are there too many players? Why does the maritime industry compete at the bottom of the price range compared to other industries?” he asked.
“I think there is a fundamental mechanism at work in finding the business trade-off,” said Novak. “For example, batteries will be a supplement in most cases, not a primary power source. We can use technology to offset expenses and emissions, but if the dollars do not back up the case, no one will make bold moves on technology.”
Building the case for electrification
Jennifer States, Director for Blue Economy at DNV GL and Project Director for Washington Maritime Blue, noted that the government-led initiative to electrify Washington State Ferries is beginning to have an impact further down the supply chain. “Seattle was already supporting electrification before the decision from WA State Ferries to go with electric hybrid was made, but the industry side was not as far along in the process. Now we are starting to see companies locate to Washington to be a part of this effort,” she said.
“We are beginning to learn from other places as well. The charging infrastructure is still tricky. What is the impact on the grid? Operators shore power requirements need to be addressed together with the utilities and grid operators. There are lots of lessons to be learned, and needs are different onboard versus onshore.”
Catherine Hale, East Coast Representative and Systems Engineer at Elliott Bay Design Group of Seattle, noted: “EBDG is actively involved in eco-friendly vessel design including the design of fuel-efficient hybrid vessels. Although hybrid-electric propulsion will have higher initial installation costs, it can significantly reduce emissions and fuel consumption. A route profile is critical. All vessels and operators are unique, understanding key motivators that drive decisions (economical, costs, green, cutting-edge technology) is key to a successful project.”
States questioned whether investments in new technologies could be recouped by market demand alone. “Resiliency is also needed in the market. Can these new solutions be used to meet other needs beyond port or maritime applications? For example, could we see battery barges or barge-based fuel cell systems serving in multiple locations in emergency situations?”
The new energy mix
Jostein Bogen, Vice President, Global Product Manager Energy Storage & Fuel Cells at ABB Marine & Ports, pointed out that although batteries are gaining traction in many applications, they will not provide an answer for all. “Fuel cells using hydrogen are being investigated in many different applications. Not all hydrogen is green right now, but we see this as doable in the near future, especially for short sea shipping. We need hydrogen to produce methane and ammonia too, so there could be many sustainable roles for green hydrogen.”
Hydrogen is on its way to establishing a wider footprint, Carter confirmed. “The Department of Energy has been working on potential hydrogen applications for many years. Containerized solutions are showing promise, and the same fuel cell solutions can be used to provide shore power using hydrogen.”
Despite progress in alternative power sources, the bulk of work remains ahead, Carter maintained. “There is no silver bullet. We will need to fit the pieces together for each situation. Even in one harbour, vessels have different operating profiles that require different solutions. Also, given the significant capital costs of new technologies, change takes time in the maritime industry. So identifying and demonstrating alternatives now allows the industry to plan ahead.”
The role of alternative fuels
While batteries and fuel cells hold great promise in the longer term, internal combustion engines dominate marine propulsion and will continue to play a central role for decades to come, demanding alternative fuel solutions. Paul Benecki, Staff Writer for The Maritime Executive, queried the group on the business case for liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Tuteja began with bottom-line reasoning: “Prices for MGO (marine gasoil) and LNG are basically same right now, but the gap between HFO (heavy fuel oil) and lighter fuels remains large. Where LNG will go in price is uncertain, and that will influence thinking.”
Carter reported that when they investigated LNG options about four to five years ago, the cost difference compared to oil was significant. “When that changed in favour of LNG, it made the case more interesting. We still see certain storage and emissions issues, but the technology and market continue to evolve.
At the same time fuel options are becoming more flexible, he observed. “Biofuels are becoming more attractive, but there are still unresolved issues with quantity, price and infrastructure.” Issues aside, he pointed out that a viable infrastructure for biofuels is needed. “The Department of Energy, the Department of Defense and we have invested in biofuels research, testing and demonstration for maritime applications, but the current market does not appear to support its widespread application yet.”
Insurance is a factor in this development as well, he pointed out. “A lot of players are still wary of hydrogen, and even LNG. We need more and stronger standards in order to reassure those with doubts. For this we can look to leaders other places where progress has come further. We want to see global solutions for alternative fuels, but there is only so much we can do with each fuel. Each one is feasible in its own right, and they need to be applied to the situation where they are best suited.”
Arenas for future solutions
“We believe that evaluating and demonstrating a variety of technologies and alternative fuels continues to be key to providing an array of options to the maritime industry. We have been able to use our own vessels and school ships as platforms for those kinds of projects. We hope to continue to do so,” Carter continued. “MARAD is dedicated to assist the maritime industry in these areas if they are interested, and we are keen to share our own results with the industry. Partnering and sharing benefits all parties, and the opportunities are there.”
Bradley Golden, professor at Webb Institute, agreed that the arguments for pursuing options outweigh the obstacles. “This is a reactionary industry, not proactive, and everyone remembers the mistakes that have been made. Alternative fuels will still have emissions, so we need to compensate for this. Batteries also have issues, even going back to the manufacturing process. We might be ‘damned if we do, damned if we don’t’, but we need to keep looking and trying to find the best options for the future.”
He urged the industry to use academia to help them explore the most promising options. “The institutions are eager to learn more about future fuels and how they can influence change. Every college is looking for research opportunities, and unlike businesses with safety or commercial obligations, we can take chances. The universities can play a role, and they can work with anyone, including owners, governments, and original equipment manufacturers.”
Carter confirmed that MARAD is working to get maritime schools and students involved. “Students are good at finding solutions, partly because they are open to unexpected solutions. We would definitely like to see more effort focused on maritime specific challenges and engaging our future mariners in finding solutions.”
States noted that the entire maritime ecosystem should be at the table when new solutions are being discussed. “This is an issue of workforce development too. Right now we are struggling to fill maritime jobs. Getting these opportunities out and known would influence career choices. Sustainability is a key element in the thinking of the younger generation, and collaboration is essential in informing them of these opportunities. We can also use these collaborative arenas to build more long-term relationships. It’s amazing how people open up when they are faced with a common task.”
Learning by sharing
“Sometimes all that is needed is awareness of projects in need of support,” Golden offered. “Some may not even require that much support. For many initiatives, it is more about sharing ideas.” Carter agreed: “The Department of Energy is interested in maritime energy investments, and we can all do more to share information about relevant projects.”
Tuteja highlighted the importance of gathering the knowledge of all invested parties into a common space. “The IMO Global Industry Alliance is a good arena for this. If we find fuel options that have worked for us, we contribute it to the common pool.” The fundamental question is how to build better partnerships and share the burden of mutual challenges, he added.
“We recently participated in a project on battery safety that brought all stakeholders together,” Carter reported. “We found that none of these had talked together at one time before. Getting them together as a group made a big difference. If industry players do not share, we are not going to find the right solutions.”
Christopher Glynn, President of Maid of the Mist, the operator ferrying tourists to the foot of Niagara Falls, shared the learning process behind their decision to invest in an all-electric fleet. “Given our close association with hydropower at the falls, when it came time to renew the fleet, we wanted to consider electric propulsion.”
To familiarize himself with the available options, Glynn attended a conference on electric and hybrid marine propulsion technologies in Amsterdam in 2018. “Basically, I listened and learned. That conference opened my eyes to the attractiveness of electric propulsion.”
Once the decision to go electric was made, their primary inspiration came from the Ampere electric ferry project in Norway: “There were strong parallels in our respective operations, not least in the charging cycles.” Propulsion experts subsequently assured Glynn and his team that they could get the output they needed from batteries. “In fact we have never been large fuel consumers,” Glynn acknowledged. “We spend more on raincoats than we do on fuel.”
Rallying all resources
“Even though the public is pushing for a green power shift, the smaller companies are working for the bigger players, and they cannot take a chance on failing and letting their customers down,” Hale said, receiving support from Novak: “The big players, including the oil and energy majors, need to help out further down the supply chain, but they are dependent on viable solutions.”
Carter asked to what degree lack of proof might be to blame for lagging commitments to green solutions. “Can we really expect investments in unproven technologies?” He noted that not all stakeholders possess the resources necessary in order to produce the required verification.
In reply, Golden again encouraged the participants to entrust knowledge institutions with a central role in steepening the learning curve: “Academia can help to put all the information together, as long as we are not sharing secrets. Remember that students are the designers of the future. They could gain valuable experience and perspectives and take this knowledge on to the maritime industries. I think the key to assuring robust development is to take full advantage of all the options available to us.”
