ship.energy

SEA-LNG: Waiting for new bunker fuels to come onstream ‘is not an option’

‘Adopting a policy of waiting until a future fuel is proven and available, as some appear to prefer, will only exacerbate the GHG challenge the world is confronting,’ says the pro-LNG industry coalition.

In a statement issued yesterday (17 February), SEA-LNG said that by continuing to burn fuel oil instead of switching to already available LNG, shipping is exacerbating the GHG emission problem.

The coalition also highlighted the issue of methane slip, which critics of marine LNG have suggested as a reason why shipping should not switch to LNG-fuelled shipping. Methane slip ‘has become an overused argument for those wishing to justify inaction,’ said SEA-LNG, noting that ‘there are marine engines on the market today with virtually no slip’.

It continued: ‘It is only an issue for certain LNG engine technologies, and even they exhibit lower GHG emissions than the equivalent HFO/MGO operation. For this specific subset of engines, reductions are now available from the latest engine designs with further improvements on the horizon. ‘

Investing in dual fuel (DF) engine technology can achieve up to 21% GHG savings on a well-to-wake basis and up to 28% tank-to-wake, and these reductions include all methane emissions, says SEA-LNG. Using LNG also ‘paves the way for the introduction of sustainable bio-LNG in the near term and zero emission synthetic-LNG in the long term’.

SEA-LNG emphasises that: ‘LNG provide a pathway to decarbonisation in its own right, but it also provides the physical infrastructure and asset base that can be used by other alternative fuels, when and if they become commercially viable.

‘The cost to society will be substantially less than the trillions of dollars estimated to construct the full infrastructure for future alternative fuels.’

Lesley Bankes-Hughes

Lesley Bankes-Hughes