新造船双燃料解决方案技术及操作咨询

TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL ADVISORY TABLE OF CONTENTSWhile ABS uses reasonable efforts to accurately describe and update the information in this publication, ABS makes nowarranties or representations as to its accuracy, currency, or completeness. ABS assumes no liability or responsibility forany errors or omissions in the content of this publication. To the extent permitted by applicable law, everything in thispublication is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, theimplied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or noninfringement. In no event will ABS be liable forany damages whatsoever, including special, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages or damages for loss of profits,revenue or use, whether brought in contract or tort, arising out of or connected with this publication or the use or relianceupon any of the content or any information contained herein.EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOverall ConsiderationsKey Points to ConsiderWhat to Look ForConclusionINTRODUCTIONNEWBUILD SPECIFICATIONDF LNG VesselDF Methanol VesselDF Ammonia VesselREGULATORY CONSIDERATIONSIDG CodeABS Rules and RequirementsEmmissions ComplianceCost of ComplianceCONCLUSIONACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 11233457121723232526293437 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe maritime industry faces increasing regulatory pressure to decarbonize, driven by theInternational Maritime Organization (IMO) emission reduction targets and the EuropeanUnion (EU) maritime emission regulationsShipowners are exploring different dual-fuel (DF)propulsion options as a pathway to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to supportfuture-proofing their assets against upcoming regulationsThis advisory provides a comprehensive examination of DF propulsion options for a newbuild vesselThese DFsolutions typically include traditional hydrocarbon-based fuel and an alternative fuel (such as liquefied natural gas[LNG], liquefied petroleum gas [LPG], methanol, etc)This publication will focus on LNG, methanol and ammonia aspotential alternative fuels only, as alternatives such as LPG and ethane are considered specialized (for LPG and ethanecarriers respectively) short-term solutions, as green alternatives for these fuels are not expected to be developedOVERALL CONSIDERATIONSFUEL OPTIONSLNGIt is currently the most mature fuel solution; offering significant emissions reductionscompared to conventional marine fuelsIn addition, biogas (BioLNG) has the samechemical composition as LNG and is a drop-in fuel in LNG systemsHowever, challengesinclude the complexity of fuel containment systems, high costs, and methane slip, whichcould limit long-term compliance with stringent emissions regulationsIn the short term,using a green version of LNG (biogas or synthetic LNG) for LNG carriers will be morechallenging because they usually burn the cargo they carryMethanolMethanol is emerging as a viable alternative for the marine industry due to its lowercarbon footprint and simpler onboard handlingSimilarly to LNG, the green versionsof methanol (biomethanol and synthetic methanol) can easily be used as drop-in fuelsin methanol systemsThe existing infrastructure for methanol bunkering (based on itswide use in the chemical industry and the large volume shipped around the world) isa benefit, but its lower energy density and high flammability require carefulmanagement and additional safety measuresAmmoniaAmmonia is a promising carbon-free fuel, but its adoption faces significant hurdlesrelated to toxicity and handlingDespite these challenges, ammonia’s potential fornear-zero emissions makes it a key contender for future-proofing against ever morestringent GHG reduction regulationsGreen ammonia can be produced without theneed for biogenic carbonThis is a significant advantage compared to the otherfuelsSimilarly to LNG and methanol, blue and green ammonia is a drop-in fuel forammonia systems on board shipCH3OHNH3 1 REGULATORY LANDSCAPEThe industry is transitioning from conventional Tank-to-Wake (TtW) emissions evaluations to a Well-to-Wake (WtW)approach, accounting for the entire life-cycle emissions of fuelsThis shift demands that shipowners consideralternative fuels that can meet both current and future regulatory standards, such as the IMO’s Revised Strategyand the relevant elements of EU’s Fit for 55 legislative package (eg, EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS),FuelEU Maritime, etc)ECONOMIC AND OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONSEconomic analysis suggests that while DF LNG and DF methanol vessels have higher initial investment costs, theyoffer varying levels of regulatory compliance and operational cost savings over timeAmmonia, though currently lessdeveloped, could provide substantial long-term compliance benefits due to its near-zero GHG emissions potentialThe choice of fuel impacts not only the design and construction of vessels but also their operational efficiency, safetyand long-term viability in a decarbonizing industryThe key de