A new ship on the horizon?

A new ship on the horizon? Using technology to plot a course to a lower carbon future for international shipping A report on the shipping technology roadmapping workshop, UK Chamber of Shipping - January 15, 2013 A Tyndall Centre report on a shipping technology roadmapping workshop, held at the UK Chamber of Shipping January 15 2013 CONTENTS 02 4 6 8 10 Introduction A fair and proportionate contribution: The challenge for international shipping Mapping the potential of technology in a decarbonised future Small ships: a low carbon vision of the future 14 18 24 26 27 Container ships: a low carbon vision of the future Tankers and bulk carriers: a low carbon vision of the future Overcoming barriers: turning visions into reality Next steps Conclusion ” Introduction The origins of international maritime trade can be traced as far back as the first Phoenician galley ships carrying cedar wood, purple dye, gold and fine linen. Those first ships set sail in search of new markets in Greece and north Africa as early as 1000 BC. Over three thousand years later, despite the development of a variety of alternative transport methods in the interim, shipping remains the most common method of moving goods from one country to another. Today, it facilitates over 90 per cent of all global trade, according to the International Maritime Organization (IMO). With such heritage and scale comes great responsibility. Accordingly, the IMO has stated its commitment to ensuring that the shipping industry “will make its fair and proportionate contribution” to tackling what is widely regarded as the greatest threat this planet has ever faced: climate change. Yet the significant and alarming growth in global CO2 emissions across all sectors appears to be unchecked by the repeated pledges of the international organisations responsible for developing meaningful emission reduction policies. The pressure on all governments and industry sectors to take decisive action to prevent calamitous climate change grows by the day. In an effort to articulate how technology could enable the shipping sector to make a proportionate contribution to the climate change challenge, a participatory workshop was held on 15th January 2013 at the UK Chamber of Shipping. The workshop was the last in a series of engagement activities run as part of the University of Manchester’s High Seas project funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) that began in April 2010 and ends in December 2013. The aim of “High Seas” is to assess the technical and operational potential of a rapid and significant carbon emission reduction by This report describes the international shipping. This outputs from a ‘technology report is not designed to be a roadmapping’ workshop, organised and facilitated by the fully comprehensive collection School of Mechanical Aerospace of all the points raised at that workshop (they are available and Civil Engineering and online), nor an exhaustive the Tyndall Centre for Climate academic exploration of Change Research The workshop brought together all the technologies potentially available. stakeholders from a variety of What it should do, however, is technical, research, policy and industry backgrounds to explore offer a concise and readable summary of the key points potential options and timelines discussed, set within the for achieving a significant context of the challenge faced reduction in CO2 emissions by shipping, and every other from the global shipping fleet sector, to cut CO2 emissions. with a focus on technological developments. The aim of “High Seas” is to assess the technical and operational potential of a rapid and significant carbon emission reduction by international shipping. ” 05 “ To achieve these challenging targets, international shipping will need to think and act differently, throw off the shackles of the status quo and see this issue as a unique opportunity to create a resilient industry for the next 3,000 years, rather than an insurmountable threat. A fair and proportionate contribution: The challenge for international shipping Shipping faces an enormous challenge: to secure its future as the primary channel for international trade, while simultaneously overseeing a dramatic and rapid reduction in its global CO2 emissions. At the international climate change summit in Durban in 2011, the IMO stated that the sector it represents would “make its fair and proportionate contribution towards realising the objectives… that the global community pursue”. The ICS went a step further in its response to the Durban conference and suggested that any emission reductions achieved by the shipping industry “should be at least as ambitious as the CO2 emissions reduction agreed under any new UNFCCC”. The challenge faced by both the IMO and the ICS in keeping to their stated commitments lies in implementing regulations in the 06 face of the sometimes conflicting positions of member states, or coalitions of member states. There appears, therefore, to be a discrepancy between the stated commitments of the industry to ensure a leading role for international shipping in keeping a lid on potentially dangerous levels of CO2 emissions and the policies it currently advocates to support those commitments. Over the last 20 years, annual CO2 emissions from international shipping have doubled to levels around 900 metric tonnes (Mt) and continue to grow, in contrast to many other industrial sectors, particularly within industrialised nations. If the shipping industry is to make a truly “fair and proportionate contribution” to the reduction of global emissions in line with the stated goal of the international community, research conducted by the High Seas project team suggests it would need to reduce emissions urgently, by as much as 40 per cent (from 2010 levels) by 2030 (Anderson and Bows, 2012). In reality, despite the recent implementation of emission reduction policies by the IMO, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP), international shipping appears to be on course an increase - not a cut - in CO2 emissions of over 100 per cent from current levels by 2050. In recognition of this situation, the IMO is also exploring complementary market-based measures to control overall greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, but the longer this takes to materialise, the greater the challenge becomes to limit cumulative CO2 to within the target range. The shipping industry is far from being alone in facing this unfortunate dilemma. A range of international summits, accords and protocols over the last 20 “ Both the UN regulatory agency responsible for shipping and ship operators (the IMO) and the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) have made clear their support for globally agreed action to reduce emissions. years have all agreed that action must be taken to restrict CO2 emissions and avoid a subsequent global temperature rise of more than 2ºC that scientists agree is likely to lead to “dangerous climate change”. Yet global emissions have continued to grow and concentration levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are at a record high. At this rate, the planet is headed for a temperature well above the 2ºC of the international consensus. Indeed, the International Energy Agency (IEA) believes that the current trend suggests a 6ºC increase is more likely, which it says would have “devastating consequences”, far beyond those caused by a 2ºC rise. According to Efthimios E Mitropoulos, Secretary General of the IMO for eight years until December 2011, the shipping industry, like the rest of us, has some very tough decisions to make. “Faced with facts we cannot argue against, we need to consider our priorities and accept that we have to make certain sacrifices; we need to start putting ‘life’ ahead of ‘lifestyle’,” he said on World Maritime Day in 2009. Acknowledging these words, the High Seas project team recognises the challenge facing international shipping in their paper Executing a Scharnow turn: reconciling shipping emissions with international commitments on climate change (Anderson & Bows 2012) and concludes that “fundamental change” is essential. Concluding his introduction to the technology roadmapping workshop at the UK Chamber of Shipping, one of the authors of that paper, Kevin Anderson, told the participants that international shipping would need to go far beyond the approach taken through the EEDI and SEEMP. In particular, he told the assembled delegates that the industry should commit to achieving a 40 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 and as much as a 90 per cent reduction by 2050. To achieve these challenging targets, international shipping will need to think and act differently, throw off the shackles of the status quo and see this issue as a unique opportunity to create a resilient industry for the next 3,000 years, rather than an insurmountable threat. The benefits of innovation also have the potential to extend more widely than reducing CO2 alone. Making new use of some technologies, such as sails or batteries for power, could help to reduce emissions of other pollutants. For those companies looking to improve the environmental performance of their supply chains, the most carbon efficient ships could prove the most attractive. Mapping the potential of technology in a decarbonised future So just how can international shipping achieve a dramatic and rapid reduction in its CO2 emissions, without losing any of its vibrancy and influence as a global industry? The shipping sector provides a service to other sectors, facilitating the movement of trade, and will therefore be affected by changes in demand for goods. If a country, like the UK, was to reduce its dependence on coal, oil and gas, for example, the number of large ships required to carry that cargo would probably fall in line with a fall in demand for fossil imports (Mander et al, 2012). Operational changes, such as more efficient scheduling of shipping routes may also deliver reductions in emissions, but these are unlikely to do more than scratch the surface of the reductions required by 2030 and 2050. There are some technologies, on the other hand, that have the 08 potential to deliver significant, rapid and long-lasting change, albeit once a number of gaps and barriers are identified and overcome. The workshop at the UK Chamber of Shipping challenged participants to develop technology roadmaps for three ship types: • Bulk carriers and tankers (>100,000dwt); • containers (>50,000dwt); • and smaller ships (ferries, coastal freighters). This differentiation was made as ships in each of these categories have different superstructures, hull designs and power requirements, serve different types of market, and therefore different technologies have greater or lesser applicability. A roadmap is a strategic plan that describes the steps required to reach a defined goal. Roadmaps support decision-making by helping to anticipate future obstacles, mapping out the most efficient way to reach an objective and communicating the route as clearly as possible. Typically, it takes a three-step approach and this was adopted by the workshop, as follows: Choose your destination Workshop participants were asked to envision a series of vessel concepts for new-build zero emissions ships capable of achieving significant penetration by 2050 and to consider how retrofitting technology could contribute to significantly reducing the emissions from the existing fleet between now and 2050. Survey different paths For each ship type, participants were asked to create a vision of what these ships would look like in terms of hull design, materials, fuel and propulsion systems. to be overcome. A roadmap is intended to be a visual means of communicating how a particular goal can be reached, in this case how the visions of the different ship types can be achieved.an be achieved. Plot the course The three groups were then asked to develop the roadmap for their ship type, outlining the stages of technology development, the likely timescale and the gaps and the barriers that would have 09 Small ships: A low carbon vision for the future According to figures published by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development for their 2012 Review of Maritime Transport, the global fleet was made up of a total of 104,305 commercial seafaring ships in service. Of these, 20 per cent were classified as “general cargo” ships, with an average size of 5,182 deadweight tons (dwt). According to UNCTAD’s classification, this category of ships would include refrigerated and specialised as well as general cargo ships. A further 55 per cent were classified as “other ships”, with an average size of 1,726 dwt. source in new build smaller ships. Biomethane, generated from the anaerobic digestion of, for example food waste, was proposed as a viable fuel to supplement wind power and could potentially be available widely within the next five years. While ships using biomethane would not be emission-free, it was agreed that they would carry “zero global warming potential” as the biogenic CO2 would essentially be sequestered from the atmosphere rather than created directly from burning fossil fuels. The use of fuel cells was also considered for new build small ships, most likely using methanol rather than hydrogen. Numerous technology options were proposed to reduce the carbon impact of small ships. Certainly, no other method of propulsion can boast the same depth of development. One important starting point would be reducing hull friction through the use of microbubbles - tiny air bubbles injected into the outer layer of the hull that have been shown in small-scale tests to reduce drag and therefore enable the ship to use less power. 5,000 years of building and sailing ships of all shapes and sizes suggests that wind will always be an effective way of powering vessels at sea. The challenge here moving forward will be scaling up the power output of the fuel cells while ensuring that they remain small enough in size to use on a ship. It was agreed that with further development, wind would be capable of powering ships of up to 10,000dwt by 2030. Currently there are hightemperature fuel cells producing power of 1MW on land. This category includes chemical tankers, liquefied gas carriers, passenger ferries, fishing boats and offshore supply vessels. In terms of the source of that power, the following energy sources for new build ships with zero CO2 emissions were suggested: wind, liquid biomethane, solar and nuclear. By way of comparison, the global distribution of the different ship types and associated size bands results in a global mean ship size of 14,700 dwt. Fuels cells or other energy storage devices would be required to convert or store the energy from these new fuel sources. For the purpose of the High Seas workshop, both categories were included within the discussion of potential technology roadmaps for smaller vessels. The example of B9 Energy Group’s ship design illustrates how wind is already a viable option for cargo ships up to a size of 3,000dwt. The main barriers to widespread penetration across the fleet were identified as being logistical rather than technical, most particularly ensuring that either ports and bridges around the world are capable of accommodating ships with tall masts or Flettner rotors or that the masts can be lowered. The unpredictability of wind, particularly over short sea routes, would likely necessitate a backup or complementary power The consensus from this group, at least, was that it would take until at least 2030 to create a fuel cell capable of generating 10MW that was suitable to power a 10,000 dwt ship. Emissions generated from using non-bio-derived methanol would also require some form of carbon capture and storage to be built into the design, which could further delay deployment. Energy storage, although not a form of power generation in itself, was also expected to play an important role in a decarbonised short sea shipping fleet. With significant research into energy storage being funded by a variety of industries, if not shipping itself to any great degree, it was felt likely that by 2025, there would be an efficient and cost effective means of energy storage. Potential energy storage technologies include supercapacitors, fly wheels, superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES), redox and liquid batteries. With effective energy storage onboard, there is also the possibility of using cold ironing when in dock or solar panels during the voyage, although this latter option would require a significant fall in the relative price of photovoltaic technology. Nuclear was briefly discussed as a potential power for new build ships in this segment, although there was considerable concern that there would be major political and regulatory barriers to overcome first, pushing any small-scale implementation out until 2040 at the earliest. (14 knots or less), greater engine and propeller efficiencies and a smoother flow of water over the hull were recommended as the first steps to take. While microbubbles may not be a practical retrofit option, blasting or using coatings could help create a smoother and friction-reduced hull. Propeller inefficiency, meanwhile, may be improved by the introduction of contra-rotating propellers, an idea that has been around for a long time. With significant investment now being made, notably in Japan, within 10 years they may become commercially viable, offering as much as a (one-off) 5-10 per cent benefit, especially in combination with podded drives. Improved propeller designs such as rim-driven propellers offer further hope for efficiency savings. It was proposed that power for existing small ships could be generated from retrofitted kites or Flettner rotors where deck space allowed, or through the fitting of methanol-fuelled hightemperature fuel cells. The cost of redesigning or retro-fitting vessels was deemed to be particularly high for small ships Class approval is now risk based compared to the cost of building and the burden of evidence would be on the designer to prove a new vessel. the safety of any technology. Thus, scrappage schemes Most new technologies take 5-10 were suggested as a means years to gain approval, nuclear of encouraging shipowners to would require a minimum of invest in the latest, most 25 years. up-to-date ships. In terms of adapting the existing fleet with the aim of emissions reduction, slower ship speeds Vision for a 2050 SMALL ship: Low friction hull made from recycled steel with lightweight, composite materials; optimised propeller; sail propulsion combined with high temperature methanol fuel cells and batteries KEY: Superstructure Energy Storage/Fuel cells Propulsion Fuel BARRIERS HULL 2013 2020 Importance of hull friction recognised Hulls designed to reduce friction Design for recycling Auto industry best practice / ISO standard Fibre glass accommodation blocks Composite propeller, fibre glass mast and superstructure STEEL FIBRE GLASS WIND PROPULSION Scale/applicability of materials; classification; Infrastructure barriers e.g. bridges and ports, or design to be lowered PROPELLERS FUEL CELLS ENERGY STORAGE BIOFUEL No fuel (H2 or methanol) infrstructure; costs of fuels cells are high Scale, life, charge rate, discharge rate; requires low carbon electricity grid Competition with other sectors and lack of re-fuelling infrastructure 2030 Easily removed coatings 2040 2050 ENABLING MECHANISMS Low friction hull Reducing hull friction to improve energy efficiency Recycling in regulated facilities Economic model that values materials - extra value for vessel Build modernisation Demonstration - 3000dwt 10000 - 30000dwt Hub-driven Rim-driven Light weight for ships/ Electrical unit with good propulsive effiency High temp (1MW) High temp - 10MW (5000dwt @ 14 knots) Range of possible tech Reliable Niche Widespread refuelling infrastructure Standard and training to design and build with new materials Route optimisation; infrastructure barriers e.g. bridges and ports, or design to be lowered; business models that recognise higher upfront but lower operating costs Counter rotating propeller/Electric drive Container ships: A low carbon vision for the future Container trade has increased steadily over the past 30 years, although growth rates have dipped slightly in recent years in line with the global economic slowdown. Despite being responsible for the transport of over a billion tonnes of dry cargo every year, container ships only represent 5 per cent of the global shipping fleet, according to UNCTAD’s 2012 Maritime Transport Review. The average size of ship in this category, according to this Review, was 39,505dwt, although the size of container vessels these days is more commonly expressed in twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU). The largest container ships in the fleet today are around 18,000 TEU. • Travelling at slower speeds, or slow steaming, would use less fuel and therefore generate fewer emissions; an operational speed of 5 knots was proposed, which would create a significant reduction in the propulsion power demand; • Counter-rotating and/ or tractor propellers could increase the efficiency of the ship’s propulsion, again reducing the requirement for fuel; • At slower speeds, hull friction in the water becomes Looking to the future and a increasingly important, so hull targeted reduction in emissions shape and coatings need to be to the levels stated earlier in this considered. report, a variety of technologies From a new-build perspective, and energy efficiency ideas a two-tier vision was proposed, could be considered for comprising a big (20,000 container ships. TEU) and a small (3,000 TEU) In terms of energy efficiencies, container ship type. three main ideas were explored: 14 The small ship would be designed to be compatible with most ports, including the smallest ones, and therefore provide operational flexibility. Its smaller size, meanwhile, would also allow it to be powered, principally by wind, most likely in the form of air foils. Fuel cells would provide auxiliary power and increased speed reliability. With a power demand of 30MW, compared to a suggested power demand for smaller ships of 5MW, wind could never be the primary energy source for the larger ship without a complete rethink in design, but could provide a proportion of propulsive power in combination with biofuels (that were carbon neutral over their lifecycle) and fuel cells. Both ships would be designed to run at a maximum speed of 10 knots, with an operational speed of 5 knots – the reserve for manoeuvring and bad weather. For a power demand of 30MW, a fuel cell of 10MW and a largescale wind installation of at least 2-3MW could be combined with biofuels. For these ships to achieve significant penetration of the global fleet, a timeline for development might look something like this: • By 2015 - Hydrogen and biomass production is increased significantly, as well as continued research into fuel cell development • By 2020 - Significant regulatory change, with carbon reductions made mandatory, leading to an increased uptake in biomass by ship operators. • By 2030 - Fuel cells are capable of producing up to 10MW of power, there is a reliable infrastructure in place for biofuel and hydrogen production and 5,000m2 kites are feasible. A staggered approach to rolling out fuel cell infrastructure is taken, initially set up on the major routes (eg China/Singapore/Northern Europe). • Switch to LNG as a bridge Financing of take-up of low technology, shifting to biofuels carbon technology could be done after 2030 (potential 10 per through a rebate mechanism cent CO2 reduction) from funds gathered from a carbon tax or other market• Use kites (potential for based mechanisms within the between 10 and 20 per cent industry. This could also help CO2 reduction). These are more with technology transfer to nonstraightforward to retro-fit than Annex 1 countries where these sails or Flettner rotors due to funds are used to compensate necessary structural changes the original IP holders. to the ships. It was suggested that the systems to enable the Turning to the existing container use of real-time (and accurate) fleet, a ship size of around global weather forecast data 10,000 TEU was thought to be would be available by 2030, to most suitable for retrofitting allow operators to decide when alternative technologies. and where they make the best The following measures and use of the kites. their potential savings were identified: • Install counter rotating/tractor propellers (potential 5 per cent CO2 reduction) • Adapt engines to run at reduced speeds (potential 35 per cent CO2 reduction) • Adopt bulbous bow (potential 5 per cent CO2 reduction) • Optimise voyage planning to enable operation at more constant speeds. Constant ship speeds are not a problem on the high seas but access and entry to canals and ports require speed to be slowed. By 2030, it is possible that a global virtual docking system would be widely in use to enable this change Together, these retrofitting measures could potentially provide a 55 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions from adapted container ships. CO2 scrubbing was considered as a potential means of reducing footprints further, but due to uncertainty over the technology’s current effectivectiveness, it was not considered likely to be a viable option until after 2020. 15 Visions for a 2050 CONTAINER ship: 3000 TEU, principally powered by wind (air foils) with fuel cells for auxiliary power or 20000 TEU, powered by a 10MW fuel cell, a kite installation of 2-3MW and biofuels KEY: Superstructure Propulsion Energy Storage/Fuel Cell Fuel BARRIERS 2013 DESIGN SPEED HULL WIND PROPULSION BIO FUEL HYDROGEN 2030 Optimised ship design to operate at 5 knots, with 10 knots maximum speed Global virtual docking system in place Designs optimised to facilitate travelling at slow speed 5000m2 area sails feasible Weather data systems maximise use of wind propulsion Kites and airfoils emerging 2050 Optimised propeller shape and set-up 1MW Upscale production Propeller design optimised to maximise efficiency over operating profile 10 MW fuel cell Increased use Refuelling infrastructure widespread Refuelling infrastructure widespread H2 in niche onshore applications Infrastructure in place LNG 2040 Low friction hull PROPELLERS FUEL CELLS ENABLING MECHANISMS 2020 LNG is used as a bridging fuel in short term and phased out as H2 and biofuels penetrate the market LNG use ends Bulkers and Tankers: A low carbon vision for the future By number of ships, bulk carriers and tankers make up over 20 per cent of the global shipping fleet, according to UNCTAD’s data. By size of ship, they represent over 70 per cent of the fleet, with an average tanker size of 45,251dwt and an average bulker size of 63,420dwt. In terms of potential carbonreducing measures for these giants of the sea, both for newbuild and adaptations to the current fleet, there are two main considerations: energy saving measures due to ship speed, ballast and hull design, and alternative means of propulsion. From an energy saving perspective, the following measures would be appropriate: • Slow steaming - as with the smaller ships and containers, slower speeds open up the potential for the use of wind power • Ballast - a zero ballast ship could deliver enormous savings but safety assurances would also have to be built into the design 18 • Design improvements to both the hull and the structure of the ship, including minimizing the accommodation onboard Workshop participants came to the view that, together, these measures have the potential to reduce the energy consumption of each ship by between 10 and 40 per cent. In terms of propulsion, the following methods were prioritised: • Nuclear • Fuel cells (either as the main source of propulsion post 2030 or as auxiliary power) • Algae fuel generated and loaded at sea or other biofuels • Flettner rotors (more applicable to bulkers than to containers) • Other wind and renewable sources (including solar) All these elements were considered in creating a vision of new build ships that might penetrate the global fleet by 2050. These ships would be optimised for slow steaming at around 5-6 knots, but would have a wider range to enable them to navigate through difficult weather conditions. They would have improved hull design, zero ballast, minimised accommodation and benefit from more efficient and effective global logistics agreements and trade route planning. Propulsion in these bulkers of the future would be provided not by a single technology, but by a combination of Flettner rotors and kites, nuclear, fuel cells or biofuels, like algae fuel. Micro-algae is low in sulphur and nitrogen and has the potential to be produced at sea while the ship is en route, but there are concerns currently over securing sufficient quantities to make this a viable proposition in the long-term. These ships could also potentially store supercritical steam that is then put through a turbine for steam propulsion. A variety of measures were proposed for reducing the emissions of existing bulkers and tankers. It was proposed that a co-generation system could be retrofitted, which would recover excess heat energy and store it for auxillary energy use when needed. Savings could also be made by tuning the engine, reducing the amount of hotel capacity required onboard, making adjustments to the propellers or using hull coatings as also suggested for smaller and container ships. When combined, these efficiency improvements could potentially help reduce emissions by as much as 10-15 per cent. Cold ironing, or shore power, was also suggested as a means of reducing emissions while the ships were in port, particularly if the energy generated on shore was from a renewable source. In terms of energy to power these ships on the high seas, nuclear, hydrogen, biofuels and wind were the main technologies discussed.A nuclear retrofit was thought to potentially be viable. The main barrier identified was concern over gaining political and regulatory approval and the length of time required to achieve this. Hydrogen could also potentially be used in existing ship designs, but as well as sharing some of the same issues as nuclear over approval timelines, there were also practical concerns over designing ships capable of storing sufficient hydrogen safely, effectively waiting for a step-change in storage and transport technology. A less disruptive transition to a lower carbon bulker fleet might be made through the use of biofuels, although these would not strictly be zero-emission ships. Currently, biofuels are used to power small boats but nothing close to the size of a tanker or bulker. Fuel cells were discussed but were thought currently to be unable to generate sufficient amounts of power as a primary propulsion source. Hydrogen fuel cells are in use in various land-based applications but not yet at sea.Batteries were thought to be a good idea for auxiliary energy use, while wind through Flettner rotors or kites could provide additional or supplementary sources of power. 19 ” In terms of potential carbon reducing measures for these giants of the sea, both for new-build and adaptations to the current fleet, there are two main considerations: energy saving measures due to ship speed, ballast and hull design, and alternative means of propulsion. 20 ” Kites have already been developed for use on bulkers but have experienced some teething trouble in their implementation. It was agreed that carbon capture and storage devices or the use of “CO2 scrubbers” would be needed to reduce the impact of emissions between now and 2050, as low-carbon technologies gradually penetrated the fleet. Looking ahead to the potential decarbonisation of the bulker fleet as a whole, the following milestones were imagined: 2020 • The engineering concept for modular nuclear reactors is developed and demonstrators create 100-300MW of power. There are still few licensed ports for maintenance and refueling however • Enough feedstock is sourced for third generation biofuels, there is some penetration but they still need to prove their viability • Significant research into hydrogen storage 2015 2025 • Biofuels tested in ships in dual fuel engines • The first zero ballast ships set sail • Zero ballast ships designed • More widespread use of kites and better route planning • Flettner rotors and sails retrofitted on some ships 2030 • There is significant penetration of biofuels • The first thorium nuclear power designs for bulkers and tankers emerge • The first small modular reactors start being retrofitted to ships • Research and testing 2040 • The production of algae fuel at sea for refuelling tankers and bulkers begins • Hydrogen is produced at sea on refuelling platforms and begins to be used in fuel cells and in engines of bulkers and tankers • The first ships appear with wind turbines to produce hydrogen to refuel while at sea; this overcomes the issue of pipeline materials becoming brittle due to exposure to hydrogen 21 Vision for a 2050 BULK ship: Fuelled by nuclear, H2 and biofuels; kites to provide additional propulsion; design optmsed for slow steaming; CO2 scrubbing for emissions reduction prior to 2013 KEY: Superstructure Propulsion Energy Storage/Fuel Cells Fuel BARRIERS HULL WIND PROPULSION 2013 2020 Zero ballast ship designed Deployment of zero ballast ship. Optimised accommodation block design Demonstration use of kites 2030 2040 2050 ENABLING MECHANISMS Hull and accommodation block design optimised to improve fuel efficiency Route planning to facilitate use of wind propulsion Big penetration of sails and kites Superstructure design optimised for energy efficiency BIOFUEL Mixing and blending standards Some use on small boats Biofuels tested in duel fuel engines Significant penetration Production of biofuels at sea for re-fuelling 3rd generation biofuels HYDROGEN Political and social perception; regulatory approval; knowledge of new technology; capital investment NUCLEAR Political and social perception; de-commissioning costs; availability of uranium; regulatory approval ;economic model H2 not used for ships Niche uses Effective H2 storage New, less brittle materials Engineering feasibility for modular reactors demonstrated H2 produced from wind on offshore fueling platforms Modular reactors retro-fitted to ships First designs for thorium reactors All bulk ships Overcoming barriers: turning visions into reality So it’s clear that there are lots of ways for ships of all sizes to start reducing their CO2 emissions, both from new build ships and across the current fleet. Turning the various visions discussed at the UK Chamber of Shipping workshop into reality will not be without some significant challenges, some of which appear to have potential resolutions at hand and others that do not. These were the main “gaps and barriers” identified at the workshop: Carbon capture and storage. With CCS still uncommercialised, onboard removal of CO2 is largely dependent on the progress of that technology deployment away from shipping Political barriers. Both to nuclear and to major changes to the shipping fleet in general. Is there the political will for nuclear when there are potentially other options available? If some countries or 03 representative organisations like the IMO are stalled on significant climate change prevention measures, why should that stop ship operators or ‘port states’ from going ahead with mitigation policies? Costs. In order to achieve a significant take-up of these technologies, they need to be proven to be cost-effective and preferably cheaper to run than any existing technologies. The more evidence there is of these technologies in action, the more likely ship operators are to take an interest, particularly if supported by independently-produced information on payback periods. Funding support for particular technologies from government may also help to incentivise developments. Regulatory (CLASS) approval. Many of these low and zero carbon technologies are ready to be installed today, but when even something as seemingly simple as installing a fire alarm can take months to be approved, there is a concern over how long it would take to introduce something as significant as a new engine, set of Flettner rotors or new propeller. Slow steaming. Despite the evidence that shows slower speeds save fuel and reduce emissions, the just-intime market dynamic is still very much the dominant force for bulkers and containers. Making the most of the opportunity offered by slow steaming requires highly reliable logistics networks. Uncertainty and risk Everyone, from governments, the IMO to ship operators themselves need to understand the technologies in front of them. They need assurance of performance, timescales and costs from people they can trust, for example Lloyds, classification societies, Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCMIF), Baltic and International Marine Council (BIMCO) and the ICS. Are alternative fuels just a pipe dream? Until significant upscaling is achieved and demonstrated, hydrogen, renewables, fuel cells and biofuels will not be considered as serious energy sources for the global shipping fleet. Currently there is also a lack of infrastructure for large-scale production of methanol, hydrogen and nuclear. Effective communication and co-ordination. Shipping market conditions. Without this, widespread and rapid take-up of new technologies will be impossible. Transparency and publicly available data and information are essential elements of this. At present, there is overcapacity in the shipping market and an absence of a market for new ships that could hamper those looking to fund investment in new technologies. Competition. Contractual arrangements. Many of the fuels identified within the workshop will also be in demand from other industries and sectors as the pressure grows to find their own lower carbon roadmaps. Competing demand for very low supplies of low carbon fuels like biomethanol derived from food waste or biofuel will continue to be a real challenge for every industry and sector. The shipping sector, with its many different markets and complex contractual arrangements, clouds the design of economic incentives to promote investment in low carbon technologies. 04 Next steps Conclusion Undoubtedly, one of the most difficult barriers to overcome will be the lack of political will. In the absence of a carbon cap and/or price that reflects the 2ºC target, regional and national governments need to devise regulatory regimes which offer economic incentives to the traditionally conservative shipping businesses for the adoption of new technologies. As this report makes clear at the outset, climate change is an issue that challenges all of us, not just shipowners, operators and their representative organisations. This represents a particular challenge for the IMO as it would require the participation of member states that do not support the development of climate change mitigation regulations if they are considered to pose a national disadvantage. On the whole, policy makers have, to date, been unable to implement regulations with real teeth, preferring instead to opt for more flexible guidelines, indexes or plans. 26 But as the High Seas project team and their wider research show, significant change is urgently required. So if tough new regulation or a state-sponsored nuclear fleet refit is unlikely, how can international shipping begin plotting a course to a future with radically fewer CO2 emissions, along the lines of some of the technology routes identified in this report? The consensus appears to be that if political pressure won’t do the job, then economic pressure offers the only other realistic alternative. The form that this economic pressure should take is, however, unclear, though such a mechanism will undoubtedly have to be innovative. For example, reduced port charges and preferential treatment for greener ships could persuade more shipowners to risk retrofitting their fleets with wind or substituting conventional fuel for biofuel or even investing in a radical new build design. The planet is warming at an unprecedented rate due to a similarly unprecedented rise in man-made CO2 emissions. Further incentive to change may also come down through the supply chain if large corporations like supermarkets are keen to demonstrate to their customers and the public how seriously they take their environmental commitments. Decisive action must be taken sooner rather than later if we are to avoid the catastrophic 6ºC global temperature rise that the IEA think we are currently headed towards. Technology is not a panacea. Many of the big supermarket chains have talked in recent months about the need to reduce the footprint of their supply operation as well as their own direct operations. Successful reduction of global CO2 emissions will require an unheralded mix of social, political and commercial innovation, academic rigour and endeavour, collaboration and determination. Technology will clearly play a hugely significant role within that mix. As this report outlines, there are a range of options for ships of all sizes to reduce emissions from new-builds and the existing fleet, albeit options that face significant if not insurmountable barriers to implementation and widespread use. For more than 3,000 years, shipping has opened our horizons, geographically, commercially and metaphorically. Now it has the opportunity to play a leading role in securing our future for the next 3,000 years. New ships headed towards a new horizon. As the words of former IMO Secretary General Efthimios E Mitropoulos from his stirring 2009 address remind us: “This cannot, and should not, go on. We need to make some tough decisions and we need to make them now.” ” To change the propulsion technology of a significant section of the global shipping fleet to a fuel such as hydrogen or nuclear would require national governments to play a central role. Similarly, tough regulation to force shipowners to seek low or zero CO2 emitting technology pathways would require institutions like the European Union and the IMO to take a line that would be unpopular with some member states. For more than 3,000 years, shipping has opened our horizons, geographically, commercially and metaphorically. ” 27 The High Seas team would like to acknowledge the financial support from the EPSRC RCUK Energy programme who have funded this work. We would also like to thank all those who attended the workshop and generously offered their time and expertise. The roadmapping workshop was devised and facilitated by members of the High Seas project: Kevin Anderson, Alice Bows, Paul Gilbert, Sarah Mander, Amrita Sidhu, Michael Traut and Conor Walsh. Finally, we would like to thank Bill Bows and Paul Johnson for their creative content support in the writing and design of this report. If citing this report, please cite as High Seas, 2013, ‘A new ship on the horizon?’ Report of a stakeholder workshop, Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester.