For much of the maritime industry, the energy transition has been discussed in terms of alternative fuels – primarily LNG, methanol, ammonia, or hydrogen. Batteries have often been treated as a narrow
For much of the maritime industry, the energy transition has been discussed in terms of alternative fuels – primarily LNG, methanol, ammonia, or hydrogen. Batteries have often been treated as a narrow tool for limited-purpose vessels, such as water taxis and harbor craft. That view is becoming too constrained.
The importance of batteries comes not from technology enthusiasm alone. Global shipping accounts for roughly 3% of planet-warming emissions. Meanwhile, International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) 2023 GHG Strategy targets net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from international shipping by or around 2050. A 2030 ambition is for zero or near-zero GHG technologies, fuels, and energy sources to represent at least 5%, striving for 10%, of energy used by international shipping.
Compliance is becoming a material cost line item.
Under current and emerging IMO and European Union (EU) regulations, including the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the Fuel EU Maritime Regulation, compliance costs are projected to reach around $600/tMGO by 2030 and above $1,000/tMGO by 2035 (Figure 1), while world bunker prices stand at about $700-800/MT. That makes electrification not just an environmentally friendly choice, but a financial and operational strategy. The practical question is not whether batteries will replace marine fuels
Content Original Link:
" target="_blank">
