The Copenhagen-based Global Maritime Forum (GMF) has completed a study that concludes ammonia-powered gas carriers could compete effectively as soon as 2026.
The findings are based on a route from the US Gulf Coast to northwestern Europe. The route has been approved in principle by DNV, a classification society and expert in assurance and risk management. The ship would fuel only in the US, and make the most of subsidies from the US government via the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and the EU’s Fit for 55 measures. So, not subsidy-free!
The design is completed and could be used for a shipyard tender.
Gas carriers are important today because of the Ukraine War sanctions and actions by the EU to eliminate gas imported from Russia. The EU is now a prominent destination for US export gas.
It’s clear that the EV ‘supply chain’ of charging stations has to expand to make EVs a success. So far, it takes longer to charge than to fill up with a liquid fuel, and the charging stations are not common enough. Couple that with a lack of standards for charging ‘nozzles’, and we see help is needed.
The European Union (EU) took a big step forward by passing a law that would greatly increase the number of EV charging stations. Every country in the EU now has to provide charging stations every 60km along roadways. Hydrogen stations also have to be provided every 200km. The number of stations is tied to the number of EVs sold in the countries.
By 2025, that would make about 600,000 charging stations in the EU, according to an estimate. There are 450,000 stations now. It’s not so many.
The new law is an example of how the EU leads the world in emissions control rules and intentions. Other nations need to step up.
This article features an interview with Michael Webber, who has been tracking corporate governance in ocean shipping firms since 2016. He produces an annual corporate governance scorecard for shipping, now at his own firm, Michael Webber Research and Advisory.
One significant issue in shipping is the constantly changing mosaic of companies. Firms are constantly merging in companies and creating new spinoff firms, some containing only a single ship. It’s a chore to keep track of it all, let alone try to rate how well the firms are looking after shareholders. The ratings Michael provides are simply to inform readers of the practices the firms engage in. This helps investors and traders to understand whether the firm is practicing good corporate governance or engaging in bad practices.
Webber claims that companies that score low on his rating have trouble raising capital using equity. He thinks investors are becoming more selective. It’s not only affecting stocks on the market; IPOS are failing due to governance issues as well.
There are a lot of related party transactions in shipping. Some benefit public investors and some don’t. Because no one was looking very hard in the past, it can be complicated for an older firm, say from the 2000’s, to unwind old structures that were not examples of good governance. Some firms have been successful doing this, but Webber says shareholders are at an informational disadvantage when these transactions are proposed. His rankings try to shed light on the corporate governance of the actors, for the benefit of the shareholders.
Webber thinks governance is improving overall, and shipping has improved its image on Wall Street. His ratings help public shipping companies find opportunities to conform to best practices in governance, and that improves the image and reality.
The scorecard rankings for 2023 are shown below.
(Source: Chart: Webber Research & Advisory)
The stock symbols of each firm are given. Webber has marked the firms that make no carbon disclosures.
Update: The University of Plymouth and the National and Kapodistrian University of Greece have announced a new ESG index to be revealed September 11th. It will be interesting to compare their work against Michael Webber’s.
Supply Chain and Logistics 