‘Green’ ships can curb climate change – 11/09/2023 – Market

At the port, on a sunny September day, hundreds and hundreds of people gathered to welcome Laura Maersk on her official arrival.

Unlike many of those present, Laura was not a European authority among the visitors. She was an immense container ship, 30 meters above the crowd, representing the clearest evidence yet of an effort by the global shipping industry to reduce its role in warming the planet.

Commissioned by Maersk, a Danish shipping giant, the ship was designed with a special engine capable of burning two types of fuel – the black, viscous oil that has powered ships for more than a century, or a more “green” type. , environment friendly, made from methanol. By switching to “green” methanol, this single ship will produce one hundred fewer tons of greenhouse gases per day, equivalent to the emissions of eight thousand cars.

The impact of global shipping on climate cannot be underestimated. Cargo is responsible for almost three percent of global greenhouse gas emissions – producing approximately the same amount of carbon per year as the aviation industry.

It has been a challenge to find ways to limit these emissions. Some ships are resorting to an old strategy: taking advantage of the wind to move. But ships still require a more regular energy source powerful enough to propel them around the world.

They cannot be powered frequently enough by batteries and the electrical grid, unlike cars and trucks; they need clean, portable fuel.

The Laura Maersk is the first in its class to sail with an environmentally friendly methanol engine, representing a significant step in the industry’s efforts to lessen its contribution to climate change. It is also a notable example of how far the global shipping industry still has to go. Currently, there are around 125 orders for methanol-powered ships from global shipyards, both from Maersk and other companies, but this represents only a small portion of the more than 50,000 cargo ships sailing the oceans today, responsible for transporting 90 percent of goods traded in the world.

The “green” methanol market is also in its early stages and there is no guarantee that the new fuel will be produced in sufficient quantities – or at viable prices – to supply the large fleet of cargo ships operating around the world.

Maritime shipping is surprisingly efficient: Transporting a commodity on a container ship halfway around the world generates far fewer greenhouse gases than when it is transported by truck across the United States.

Part of this is due to the scale of modern cargo vessels. Today’s largest container ships surpass the size of aircraft carriers. Each can transport more than 20,000 metal containers, reaching a length of around 120 kilometers if placed in a straight line.

This incredible efficiency has reduced the cost of transportation and enabled the modern consumer lifestyle, allowing retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, Ikea and Home Depot to offer a wide variety of products at a much lower price than previously practiced. .

But this easy consumption came at a price: a hotter and more polluted planet. According to Teresa Bui, director of climate policies at the environmental organization Pacific Environment, in addition to affecting the atmosphere, ships that burn fossil fuels also emit pollutants that reduce the life expectancy of a large part of the world’s population living near ports.

She reported that this pollution was particularly intense during the Covid pandemic, when supply chain bottlenecks caused ships to back up at the Port of Los Angeles, generating pollution equivalent to that produced by nearly one hundred thousand large trucks per day. She added: “The shipping industry has been under-regulated for decades.”

In more recent years, some companies have attempted to reduce emissions and meet new global pollution standards by fueling their vessels with liquefied natural gas. Environmental groups and some shipping executives, however, consider adopting another fossil fuel that contributes to climate change to be a step in the wrong direction.

Greener fuels such as methanol, ammonia and hydrogen are now seen by Maersk and other shipping companies as the most promising path forward for the industry. Maersk aims to reduce its carbon emissions to zero by 2040, and, together with other investors, is investing billions of dollars in cleaner fuels. But making the transition – even to methanol, the most commercially viable of these fuels today – is no easy task.

The switch to methanol requires building new ships or retrofitting old ships with different engines and fuel storage systems. Global ports must install new infrastructure to supply docked ships.

The fact that it is necessary to create an entire industry to produce “green” methanol, the demand for which involves airlines and factory owners, as well as maritime transport companies, is perhaps the most important thing.

Methanol, used in the production of chemicals, plastics and fuel, is typically produced from coal, oil or natural gas. “Green” methanol can be produced in a much more environmentally friendly way, using renewable energy and carbon captured from the atmosphere, or taken from landfills and cow and pig manure, or other organic waste.

But the world still doesn’t produce much “green” methanol. Maersk has committed to using only sustainably produced methanol, but it won’t be better for the environment if other shipping companies end up using methanol produced from coal or oil.

Ahmed El-Hoshy, CEO of OCI Global, which produces methane from natural gas and more sustainable sources such as landfill gas, said companies are producing “infinitesimally small” volumes of “green” methanol from renewable energy: implementing rules Frankly, they still haven’t done much for our industry. It’s all exaggeration.”

He added that fuel producers still need to master the technology to build these projects. And to finance them, they need buyers willing to commit to long-term contracts for sustainable fuels, which can be three to five times more expensive than conventional fuels.

According to El-Hoshy and others in the shipping and methanol industry, the missing piece is regulation that helps level the playing field between companies trying to reduce their emissions and those still burning dirtier fuels.

The European Union is implementing rules that encourage the decarbonization of ships, including new subsidies for “green” fuels and penalties for the use of fossil fuels. The United States is also encouraging new investment in green fuel production and more modern ports through generous programs to make improvements within the country.

But advocates say the key to a “green” transition in the shipping sector are pending global rules at the International Maritime Organization, the UN body that regulates global shipping.

Still, Maersk recognizes that sustainable methanol is unlikely to be the final solution. Experts say the reliance on fuel from exhaustible sources such as corn husks and cow dung means there will not be enough fuel to power the entire global shipping fleet.

In an interview, Vincent Clerc, CEO of Maersk, stated that it is unlikely that the entire maritime sector will be predominantly powered by methanol, but that Maersk has no regrets regarding the current shift of part of its fleet from fossil fuels to methanol and that it intends adopt new technologies as they become available. Pointing to the ship with six-metre containers stacked in front of it, he added: “This represents real systemic change for the sector.”

Eric Leveridge, climate campaign manager at Pacific Environment, said the group is pleased that Maersk and other shipping companies are moving towards more sustainable fuels. But the organization still fears that “it is more for appearances, and that the impact is potentially being exaggerated”: “Ultimately, even if this investment is made, there are still many ships burning heavy fuel oil in the water.”