Tag Archives: ocean shipping

UMAS report details green priorities for shipping

UMAS is an acronym for University Maritime Advisory Service, a commercial advisory service, or consulting firm, focusing on the maritime segment. It makes use of the University College London shipping team as subject matter experts, and takes on relevant projects for the maritime industry.

Recently they’ve released a report entitled A Strategy for the Transition to Zero-Emission Shipping, which tries to spell out ways that a pathway to a 1.5 degree Centigrade increase could be found. It’s an interesting study because it deals with not only the science-based facts about fuels and propulsion systems, and ship designs, but also with the organizational, regulatory, private investment, and geopolitical aspects of a transformation.

The study outlines three scenarios for a fuel transition away from fossil fuels. These are:

  • A spread from a strong first-mover country to others
  • Independent spread from several countries
  • Global actions (such as the IMO) to drive international spread.

The report goes on to identify levers for change in each scenario, covering three phases of the transition to 1.5 degrees C. The phases are Emergence, Diffusion, and Reconfiguration. They are captured in Figure 19, on page 67 of the report. Here you can see the importance of developing new technologies and investing to expand deployment in the first two phases.

The question they address is how to get all the factors necessary to work for the change in each phase. Especially important are the Energence and Diffusion phases, partly because that’s where we are now, and partly because success there largely determines how we reach the final phase.

The report sees a place for all three scenarios in the effort. It’s quite clear about how companies, governments of states, and international organizations could participate and make the transition easier.

One interesting point is the attention paid to constructing green corridors between different ports, both domestic routes and international ones. The green corridor movement is a powerful driver, and there are now lots of examples starting to appear; they are outlined in the report. The analysis is quite detailed, with actual corridor possibilities outlined, and key national players identified. Experience with the difficulties of establishing them will be important to make the process easier in the future.

The report is also positive about the IMO and its role, while acknowledging some of the difficulties relying on it introduces.

It’s quite an exceptional work, and I recommend reading it. I wish I’d been part of it!

You can read the report pdf here:

Sam Chambers April 5, 2023

UMAS report details green priorities for shipping this decade – Splash247

 Sam Chambers April 20, 2023

IMO study makes the case for more ambitious green targets

ABS simulating green maritime corridors

American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), a US-based classification society, has announced that it is developing simulations of potential green maritime shipping corridors. Such a tool will allow users to determine if a particular corridor is feasible, and what the costs will be.

Simulations will also allow us to determine the range of improvements that will be required, and the sensitivity of costs to many different choices, like size of bunkering facilities for different alternative fuels. These sorts of metrics are very important when deciding how much to invest in a green corridor development.

The article below doesn’t reveal very much. But it’s clear that a major classification society can play a major role to influence the greening of maritime routes.

Seatrade logo

Marcus Hand | Apr 21, 2023

ABS simulating green maritime corridors

Anyone got a meth lab?

This article compliments Maersk on their efforts to build a methanol-powered ship, and deploy it in the Baltic running on green methanol. I agree- it’s a great idea, and will actually be green, if they can pull off the creation of the sources of methanol properly.

But the author is less complimentary about how shipowners are approaching the fuel dilemma. He suspects that the craze for dual-fuel vessels is a way to hide the continued use of high-sulfur fuel oil (HSFO). Dual-fuel vessels can operate on methanol or ammonia or hydrogen, but don’t have to. When those fuels are available they could be used. But will they? It will probably be a lot cheaper to use HSFO, for quite a long time. These ships can claim ‘greenness’ without actually being green.

This could especially be a problem for ships reading in the ‘gray’ markets, such as sanctioned shipments. There’s no reason Russia or China for that matter should not continue to accept and make shipments delivered using HSFO. They are not participating in agreements to reduce maritime pollution from hydrocarbons.

It’s a real conundrum, and the splitting of world trade into two camps that follow different rules makes any sort of control harder.

We could be in for a long contest to actually reduce carbon output from ocean shipping.

Andrew Craig-Bennett April 11, 2023

Anyone got a meth lab? – Splash247