Tag Archives: ocean shipping

Federal Maritime Commission investigating Flags of Convenience

Posted on September 5, 2025 by | Leave a comment

It’s about time for some agency to look at flags of convenience. Some states are abetting sanctioned trade, and quite a few do not have the means or intent to enforce regulations for safety, environmental, and labor standards. It’s increasing risk for marine traffic and for mariners.

The US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) may not be the best positioned for this investigation right now. The US government has shown that it may use its powers to punish views of other nations, rather than in the interest of collaboration on mutual goals. And the US has withdrawn from some international agencies and agreements, showing a lack of collaboration. Recently the US State Department has threatened the International Maritime Organization (IMO) over its push to impose greenhouse gas emission controls and standards on international shipping.

These actions reduce the effect of any unilateral action by the US. It’s likely they will be ignored. That is something the current US administration will not like, but it’s inevitable.

Let’s hope the FMC figures out real actions that will help flag states increase compliance with international shipping standards.

Seatrade logo

Barry Parker, New York Correspondent

September 3, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/regulations/federal-maritime-commission-investigating-flags-of-convenience

Seatrade logo

Nick Savvides, Europe correspondent

September 4, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/regulations/imo-member-states-tire-of-us-threats-over-climate-rules

Leave a comment

Posted in Logistics, Shipping, Strategy

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LNG bunker supply chain emissions

Posted on September 4, 2025 by | Leave a comment

It’s difficult to quantify the emissions load generated by LNG bunkering for oceangoing ships. Rystad Energy has released a study of this from Well to Tank.

Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is currently an important maritime fuel as the industry tries to transition to a lower carbon footprint. LNG-fuelled ships now account for over 20% of the current order book.

The question is this: how does LNG perform in terms of greenhouse emissions? One needs to consider how it’s produced (Well!), transported, liquefied, stored, and processed for bunkering, as well as the loading process. That’s the study’s focus.

They found 13.9 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule heating value, known as LHV. This broke down into 4.2 gCO23/MJ, for upsteam; 1.3 for transportation and processing; 5.9 for liquefaction; 1.8 for shipping and distribution; and 0.7 for bunkering operations.

The total of 13.9 compares with the FuelEU Maritime figure of 18.5 gCO2e/MJ, which Rystad says is too high.

A key quote from the article:

Rystad’s Vice President Emissions Research, Patrick King, commented: “Our analysis is based on asset-level data that ties specific gas fields to liquefaction facilities. This approach, supported by satellite-detected methane plume data and reported asset information, gives a more accurate picture of the LNG actually used for bunkering, rather than relying on outdated or overly broad averages.”

It seems like the right way to do the analysis.

The study is available from Rystad Energy or asoffered by Rystad

2025 LNG bunkering emissions WtTDownload
Seatrade logo

Paul Bartlett, Correspondent

September 4, 2025

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/lng/rystad-releases-findings-on-lng-bunker-supply-chain-emissions

Leave a comment

Posted in Logistics, Shipping, Sustainability

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Ammonia cheapest long-term for IMO carbon rules?

Posted on May 30, 2025 by | Leave a comment

University College London has published a new study considering in detail how shipowners can comply with the IMO rules for carbon emission compliance. It’s very detailed and takes into account not only the different technologies available, such as methanol and LNG, but also the timing of implementing the various regulations. One has to consider all these factors over the 25 or so years of the lifetime of a ship.

Granted, new technologies and availability of different fuel choices can change from what we can see now, but this impartial study favors ammonia-powered ships over the longer time frame. They suggest dual-fuel ammonia ships might be the best bet for investors in new shipping.

“Although there are significant complexities and uncertainties in what was agreed [at IMO MEPC 83] in April, even conservative projections of how remaining policy details will be finalised results in a ‘no brainer’ choice for shipowners in dual fuel ammonia,” said Dr. Tristan Smith, Professor of Energy and Transport at the UCL Energy Institute. 

The report is available here.

This figure from the report indicates when different fuel choices become cheapest in terms of abatement cost. It seems that e-ammonia never outcompetes blue ammonia before 2050. And LNG remains viable for quite a while, especially with integrated carbon capture.

There are a lot of assumptions in any such study, and the IMO could change the rules in the meantime. But shipowners should be thinking hard about ammonia, and so should international bunker fuel providers.

Published May 29, 2025 9:08 PM by The Maritime Executive

https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/ucl-ammonia-is-the-cheapest-compliance-option-for-new-imo-carbon-rules

Update 6/5/2025: Fortescue is jumping on the dual-fuel ammonia bandwagon, and has some not-so-polite comments about others in shipping sticking with LNG.

Sam Chambers June 5, 2025

https://splash247.com/fortescues-mission-to-champion-ammonia-goes-global/

Leave a comment

Posted in maritime, Sustainability

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,