"Uncertainty Reigns" for Marine Fuel Choices

Nick Brown of Lloyd's Register said large vessels are unlikely to switch fuels

Ship owners face complex questions with no clear answers on meeting emissions requirements, but deep-sea vessels are unlikely to switch to alternative fuels, Nick Brown, marine communications manager at Lloyd's Register writes in a blog post.

Discussing the SEAaT Fuelling the Future Conference in London last week, Brown said "uncertainty reigns" for ship operators who are approaching the 2015 reduction in sulfur limits in emissions control areas (ECAs) with no way of knowing how expensive various fuels will be.

Brown said all potential solutions will increase costs and could end up closing ferry routes and driving traffic onto roads.

"Overall, it was a bleak picture for those who have to make operational decisions," he wrote.

But he also noted that ECAs are of minor concern for the large, worldwide trading ships that consume the vast majority of the world's bunkers.

"Could the deep sea players switch to gas or renewables?" he wrote.

"On the basis of the evidence we saw, as long as HFO is available - and scrubbers work by 2020, it's hard to see any other alternative being attractive to most of the deep sea players."

New worldwide rules on sulfur emissions go into effect in 2020.

For the moment, Brown wrote, deep sea ships will see the most environmental and financial impact from efficiency measures, but he said alternative energy sources including methanol—a fuel produced from natural gas without the infrastructure required for liquefied natural gas (LNG) bunkering - hold potential for the long term.

Some European regional leaders issued a statement last month saying they will have difficulty complying with European Union (EU) rules on sulfur emissions because of the complexity and expense of changing fuels.