Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How do variations in ship operation impact the techno-economic feasibility and environmental performance of fossil-free fuels?: A life cycle study
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Safety and Transport, Maritime department.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3385-3627
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Safety and Transport, Maritime department.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6005-7824
Show others and affiliations
2023 (English)In: Applied Energy, ISSN 0306-2619, E-ISSN 1872-9118, Vol. 350, article id 121773Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Identifying an obvious non-fossil fuel solution for all ship types for meeting the greenhouse gas reduction target in shipping is challenging. This paper evaluates the technical viability, environmental impacts, and economic feasibility of different energy carriers for three case vessels of different ship types: a RoPax ferry, a tanker, and a service vessel. The energy carriers examined include battery-electric and three electro-fuels (hydrogen, methanol, and ammonia) which are used in combination with engines and fuel cells. Three methods are used: preliminary ship design feasibility, life cycle assessment, and life cycle costing. The results showed that battery-electric and compressed hydrogen options are not viable for some ships due to insufficient available onboard space for energy storage needed for the vessel’s operational range. The global warming reduction potential is shown to depend on the ship type. This reduction potential of assessed options changes also with changes in the carbon intensity of the electricity mix. Life cycle costing results shows that the use of ammonia and methanol in engines has the lowest life cycle cost for all studied case vessels. However, the higher energy conversion losses of these systems make them more vulnerable to fluctuations in the price of electricity. Also, these options have higher environmental impacts on categories like human toxicity, resource use (minerals and metals), and water use. Fuel cells and batteries are not as cost-competitive for the case vessels because of their higher upfront costs and shorter lifetimes. However, these alternatives are less expensive than alternatives with internal combustion engines in the case of higher utilization rates and fuel costs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Ltd , 2023. Vol. 350, article id 121773
Keywords [en]
Ammonia; Costs; Electric energy storage; Environmental impact; Environmental management; Fossil fuels; Fuel cells; Global warming; Greenhouse gases; Hydrogen fuels; Hydrogen storage; Methanol; Methanol fuels; Ships; Electro-fuel; Energy carriers; Environmental performance; Life cycle assessment; Life cycle costing; Non-fossil fuels; Reduction potential; Renewable; Ship operation; Techno-economic feasibility; ammonia; combustion; design; electric vehicle; energy storage; equipment component; fuel cell; life cycle analysis; resource use; toxicity; Life cycle
National Category
Mechanical Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-67973DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121773Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85168531719OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-67973DiVA, id: diva2:1814372
Note

This research was funded by the Swedish Transport Administration through the industry program Sustainable shipping led by the Swedish Maritime Competence Centre (Lighthouse), grant number FP2_E_2020 , Assessment of hydrogen, ammonia, and battery-electric propulsion for future zero‑carbon shipping. Funding from the competence center TechForH2 (led by Chalmers and funded by industry, universities and Swedish Energy Agency ) and the project ‘HOPE’ (Hydrogen fuel cells solutions in shipping in relation to other low-carbon options - a Nordic perspective), TRV 2021/11568 , funded also by other Nordic funders is also acknowledged.

Available from: 2023-11-24 Created: 2023-11-24 Last updated: 2023-12-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Olsson, TobiasEllis, Joanne

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Olsson, TobiasEllis, Joanne
By organisation
Maritime department
In the same journal
Applied Energy
Mechanical Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 6 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf