Energy Musings - December 30, 2024

Happy New Year. The global effort to decarbonize the shipping fleet is moving forward, but now the global fishing fleet is being targeted. This effort will prove harder and take longer.

A Maritime Decarbonization Challenge

The United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO) is working hard to design a scheme to decarbonize the global shipping industry. This effort follows the successful reduction of global sulfur emissions, which began in 2000. According to the IMO, global shipping accounted for roughly 2% of the world’s CO2 emissions. However, eliminating them is proving harder than expected, and the industry continues experimenting with multiple alternative fuels and power systems.

In 2022, the IMO reported that global shipping emissions were 706 million tons. The IMO’s revised Green House Gas (GHG) emissions strategy, adopted in 2023, seeks to get the industry to net-zero GHG emissions by 2050. To ensure the industry adopts alternative fuels, there are interim targets for alternative zero and near-zero GHG fuel use by 2030, with the 2030 target calling for reducing emissions to 605 million tons.

Will alternative fuels make it to market by 2030?

Reaching the interim alternative fuel net zero goal means the global shipping industry will use fossil fuels to provide 7.9 exajoules (EJ) of energy, with biofuels providing 0.6 EJ, ammonia 0.5 EJ, hydrogen 0.1 EJ, and Methanol 0.1 EJ. The total fuel use of 9.2 EJ is equal to what the industry used in 2022, which was met almost entirely by fossil fuels. This fuel forecast projects little maritime industry growth between 2022 and 2030.

While not a part of global shipping, the fishing industry also contributes to global carbon emissions. It has become a target of the UN’s efforts to decarbonize all maritime activities. Fishing vessels contribute between 0.1% and 0.5% of global carbon emissions. This represents about 4% of carbon emissions from global food production. Although a small share of global carbon emissions, the industry’s reliance on fossil fuels must be addressed. The UN report recommends that the experience of the IMO and FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) be utilized to collect data and develop strategies for reducing fishing industry emissions. A suggestion was to explore turning fish waste into biofuels. Additionally, green hydrogen and green methanol need to be considered in the industry’s future fuel mix.

EU and Japan fishing fleets have curbed emissions.

Interestingly, the European Union (EU) and Japan have been collecting and reporting the emissions of their fishing fleets. The chart shows that both fleets have seen emissions decline since 1990. Between 1990 and 2021, EU emissions fell 52%, mainly driven by a reduction in fleet size during the past two decades and investments in energy efficiency, including diesel-electric engines, efficient refrigeration, and propeller systems. Japan’s fleet emissions declined 37% due to similar efficiency investments.

Global fishing fleets and their carbon emissions.

IN 2020, according to UN data, the global fishing fleet totaled 4.1 million boats, but only 2.5 million were motorized. Asia, including China, accounted for 65% of the fleet, 2.7 million boats, with 23.5% in Africa, nearly one million. China’s fleet has 564,000 boats, larger than the Americas, with 361,000 boats. Europe has about 95,000 boats, and Oceania has 15,000.

Asia not only has the largest fleet, but it also produces the largest share of CO2 emissions. Europe has a smaller fleet than Africa, but it produces more emissions because of larger vessels and more deep-sea fishing that necessitates these vessels spending more days at sea. Less than 30% of Africa’s fishing fleet is motorized, with few large, motorized boats.

Just as decarbonizing the global shipping industry is hard, doing it for the global fishing fleet may be harder. A series of presentations at the Diesel Difference Panel at Pacific Marine Expo 2024 highlighted problems for decarbonizing the U.S. fishing fleet. The discussion focused on the efficiency improvements of diesel engines and the state of alternative fuels and electrification for maritime vessels. For fishing vessels, the answer to the question of which technology is right was “It depends on your vessel and your fishing profile,” according to Mike Complita of Elliott Bay Design Group.

Diesel remains the best choice for fishing vessels.

Source: Elliott Bay Design Group.

Complita addressed the question with a chart that shows the distance a ship could travel with similar volumes of the different fuels. It also showed how much space each system would need on a vessel.

“Wartsila, MAN, and Caterpillar are all working on engines that can burn methanol, LNG, and other fuels, but the roadblock to that is that many of these options are not EPA certified, and it will take some time before they are available here in the U.S.,” said Complita. He said his work has been primarily focused on non-fishing vessels, “but realistically, the day when these technologies are appropriate for fishing is still far off.”

Some comments pointed out issues that are complicating IMO’s decarbonization efforts. Complita noted, “Right now, the technology is complicated and very expensive. You have to have the machinery, the fuel cells, and, of course, the batteries to store the energy, but it’s in the development stage….” The problem is compounded by the reality that the fuel and engine spare parts may not be universally available.

Christian Stark of Aurora Marine Design pointed out that fishermen want reliability. Therefore, diesel is their best bet. While “fishermen are pushing the edge on lower emissions and hybrid power,” fuel quality is becoming a greater issue as Tier III diesel engines “are very sensitive.”

The best advice for fishermen was to focus on “maintenance and the use of remote monitoring to get the most out of your engine.” Keeping vessel bottoms clean and experimenting with bottom paints were other areas where fishermen could gain greater fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

As the vessels pictured in the charts showed, the fuel choice impacts the distance the ship can travel. Significantly, the fuel choice can also affect the space on the fishing vessel for its catch, which is its primary purpose. More efficient Tier III diesel engines require larger engine rooms than exist on many fishing vessels. Therefore, these vessels may become uneconomic if their diesel engines are upgraded, and additional engine room space must be taken from the ship’s catchholds. Decarbonizing the fishing industry fleet will take a long time and prove costly.