New Fuels and Old Skills for Ships and the World

Ships are vital to world trade. The old chestnut of 90% of everything is moved by sea is trotted out for a reason. Whatever the exact figure, if there were no ships, then the world would be a very different place. So, how then do we manage the demands to decarbonise, to change fuels and to keep the world turning?

FUELS RUSH IN

The past hundred years have seen ships grow, new ports, trades, new kinds of cargoes. What has remained is that ships have been the beasts of burden, carrying everything everyone wants and needs around the globe.

It has done so, in living memory, on a diet of coal, diesel and then heavy fuel oil. Slowly though, the environmental impact of all this stuff has been added and it is time for a change.

The UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) has led the charge for this change — though perhaps meander would be a better expression. Changing the direction of a big industry is not easy, and it takes momentum to get swinging.

Now though, with fuel rules in place and with pressure to reduce greenhouse gasses, then we are in a position of rapid and incredibly wide-reaching change. The impact of ships, and of shipping, is being totted up and there a going to be new ways of doing old things.

BABY STEPS…

With the adoption and entry into force of IMO2020, which mandates the use of low sulphur fuels, or requires the emissions of normal fuels to be cleaned, scrubbed in fact. This was a real herald of change to come. While there were certain places in which ships had to clean their acts, in the main, there was a grudging acceptance that ships did what they needed to do, as they were needed to do it for trade.

There was a sense that the global nature of shipping, the complexities made it above the noise of environmental pressures. However, things have moved fast and now shipping is very much in the crossfire.

No more able to jink between jurisdictions, or hide behind corporate veils or be obscured by literal and metaphorical smoke. Shipping is exposed like never before — and while some of the criticism is unfair, some of it is just a net closing which probably should have been cast a long time ago.

So, all this means that ships are going to change and drastically. Some owners have backed the likes of LNG as a future fuel, but really that is just a placeholder. The war on carbon means that any taint of the past will have to be erased and painting hulls green will not be able to buy anything more than a little time.

INTO GIANT LEAPS

There is a very simple equation, which is a trade-off between the space onboard, the weight of the fuel and the power it produces. With numbers being crunched, the fuels of the near future are here now, and it seems likely that the likes of ammonia, hydrogen and even nuclear power will be the mix in the ships which will be entering service in the years to come.

The fact remains that HFO was handy — it was readily available, it could be stored, used, understood and it packs a punch. If it wasn’t for the pesky killer emissions it was great. There is no point harking back to the days of black gloop, what is needed is future fuels to balance the pros and cons.

Ammonia, for its part, is not an energy-rich choice. It doesn’t give that much bang for your buck. It has less than half the energy density of HFO. It is also pretty darn toxic. It is not pleasant stuff…but it is already in production, as it’s used for fertilizer globally. So, it is high on the future fuels list.

Hydrogen has long been touted. Indeed, the idea that it produces just water vapour as an emission makes it feel like the holy grail of fuels. It’s not quite that simple though. Hydrogen is abundant and can be made by renewable energy, but it is expensive and needs extremely high-pressure storage facilities and a lot of space.

NUCLEAR OPTION

There are others in the conversation, such as methanol — though fears that methane emissions will be next in the spotlight mean that enthusiasm for that may wane a little. Another which seems to be increasingly raising its head is the nuclear option.

Nuclear packs a punch — but you don’t need me to tell you that. If anything, it could even be too powerful. A nuclear reactor would provide more miles per unit of raw fuel compared to combustion-driven power sources. Go nuclear and you’re going places…if the port lets you in.

Indeed, as with so many things in life, its complicated. Research into nuclear ships started in the 1940s, and while there has been military take up the cons of nuclear have always hampered it as a commercial shipping fuel source. That said, we’re probably closer than we have been before. The rising tide of legislation and societal pressure, the costs of other “green” fuels and a desire to change. Well, if not now for nuclear, then when?

This has seen the potential rise of modern modular molten salt nuclear technology. Indeed, shipping companies have been signing up to help fund research and development, and there is perhaps a sense like never quite before that this could be the nuclear future for shipping.

NEED FOR SKILLS

While it seems we are on the edge of a brave new propulsion precipice, some will jump over and thrive, others will fall over and may struggle. Whatever fuel and propulsion choices we make, there needs to be the skills to support them. That is the dilemma face by shipping. There seems to be a technological renaissance, with data, maritime informatics combining with a greener footprint. However, all this comes at the exact point we seafarer skills, knowledge and our supply of people is threatened.

There is a crew change crisis going on, there are seafarers trapped onboard for months. Industry reports, such as the BIMCO/ICS manpower survey show that we are about to hit a major manning crunch. All this should be cause for major concern.

The new fuels, the hopes and opportunities they bring, all require skilled, experienced and knowledgeable ship’s officers and crews to make the transition happen safely and to make sure ships are powering into the future.

Shipping is investing massively in equipment, in developing fuel options. Is this being matched by a commitment to people? If it isn’t, then we could be in big trouble. It is time to educate, to train, to encourage and make sure that the industry has the skills it needs now, tomorrow and long into the future…regardless of what is in the tank.