The pursuit of a Net-Zero future has led to a race within the marine industry. Immediate savings in greenhouse gas emissions, along with other environmental benefits, are being overlooked in favour of more long-term and speculative alternatives like hydrogen, ammonia, and methanol. These investments come at the cost of potential short-term benefits.
To achieve noticeable reductions in emissions across the industry, the focus should shift towards the rapid adoption of transition fuels. These fuels act as a bridge, moving current carbon-intensive fleets towards future Net-Zero fleets. As they are already available, they offer immediate savings in greenhouse gas emissions. Quadrise has compared the commonly used transition fuels, LNG and FAME, with its own biofuel, bioMSAR™, using several key factors for assessment: emissions savings, cost, availability of feedstock, storage and handling, and safety.
In terms of emissions, all three—bioMSAR™, FAME, and LNG—offer a reduction of 10-25% in CO2 when compared to traditional fuel oils. However, LNG presents a major challenge in the form of ‘methane slip’, which results in methane—a potent greenhouse gas—escaping into the atmosphere. This significantly impacts the overall emissions savings of LNG. FAME, on the other hand, can provide CO2 savings of up to 25%, though this depends on the amount of FAME used in the biofuel blend. bioMSAR™ shows CO2 reductions ranging from 10% to 50%, largely due to the inclusion of renewable glycerine, a by-product from biodiesel and FAME manufacturing processes. Its efficiency is further enhanced by improvements in combustion efficiency, reducing overall fuel consumption.
Regarding cost, LNG was once the cheapest transition fuel due to large-scale production but recent price fluctuations have made it less predictable. Handling LNG is also more expensive compared to traditional fuels due to the additional infrastructure and modifications needed. The cost of biofuels like FAME has surged, driven by supply disruptions during the pandemic and rising demand. While the price of glycerine, an ingredient in bioMSAR™, has similarly increased, bioMSAR™ remains a more cost-effective option in terms of energy production.
Feedstock availability is another area where LNG has an advantage due to its large-scale global production. However, this also leads to competition from other sectors, such as heating and petrochemicals, which puts additional pressure on supply and costs. FAME and crude glycerine are produced in smaller quantities compared to LNG. While FAME faces competition from other industries, glycerine has no significant competition, as Quadrise has a unique technology to blend it with oil and residues to create bioMSAR™. Quadrise is also exploring ways to increase the production of glycerine, including through alternative methods like algae and yeast.
Fuel storage and handling play a crucial role in the feasibility of these fuels. LNG, due to its low energy density, requires significantly more storage capacity—up to 80% more than traditional fuels. It also needs to be stored at extremely low temperatures, which adds to the complexity and cost. LNG also faces challenges in maintaining its sub-zero temperature during transport and storage. In contrast, both FAME and bioMSAR™ require fewer modifications to existing onboard fuel systems and less additional storage capacity. BioMSAR™ also avoids the risks associated with fuel solidification and blockages that can occur with FAME.
Safety is another critical factor. bioMSAR™ poses less risk compared to current marine fuels since it is biodegradable, non-toxic, and non-flammable. FAME is considered non-hazardous but does not disperse in water as efficiently as bioMSAR™ in the event of a spill. LNG presents the highest safety risks due to its highly flammable nature when in a gaseous state, and any accidental release of methane could have severe environmental consequences.
Looking towards the future, hydrogen, ammonia, and methanol are often considered the most promising candidates for net-zero marine fuels. However, none of these fuels are truly net-zero without carbon offsetting at present. They also face numerous challenges. Hydrogen and ammonia have low energy density and significant safety concerns, particularly in terms of storage and handling. Production costs are also high, as renewable sources of hydrogen and ammonia are not yet widely available. Methanol requires either biomass gasification or carbon capture to produce green or blue methanol, and the necessary infrastructure and technologies are still in development.
Quadrise is currently working on the development of bioMSAR™ Zero, its first zero-carbon biofuel. This fuel aims to replace the heavy residue component in MSAR® and bioMSAR™ with a fully renewable source while continuing to deliver the same efficiency and emission benefits. The company is targeting 2030 to bring a commercially competitive Net-Zero fuel to market.
The marine industry must carefully balance its push towards Net-Zero fuels with the significant emissions reductions that can already be achieved today by adopting transition fuels. bioMSAR™ stands out when compared to LNG and FAME, offering notable advantages such as higher CO2 savings, lower costs, no competition for biofuel feedstock, and reduced safety risks. Quadrise’s ongoing discussions with MSC Shipmanagement regarding bioMSAR™ trials on container vessels highlight the company’s role in helping the marine industry move towards decarbonisation while also realising cost savings.
Quadrise plc (LON:QED) is an energy technology provider whose solutions enable production of cheaper, cleaner, simpler and safer alternatives to fuel oil and biofuels, proven in real world applications. Quadrise technologies produce transition fuels called MSAR® and bioMSAR™, which allow clients in the shipping, utilities and industrial sectors to reduce carbon emissions whilst also saving costs.
