Class expert makes case for LNG as transition fuel

Lloyd’s Register Chief Commercial Officer, Andy McKeran, has set out four fundamental reasons why LNG is a logical choice as a transition fuel since other lower- and zero-carbon fuels are still under development and lack global supply chains.

His arguments contrast sharply with those of ‘greens’ and academics. Say No to LNG (SNtL) campaigners, for example, recently expressed ‘deep concern’ at Maersk’s apparent move away from methanol to back LNG as a transition fuel in recent new ship contracts.

Setting out the backdrop, McKeran said that liner companies face a bigger challenge than other shipowners as their ships operate at higher speeds, burn more fuel, and therefore emit more greenhouse gases. Amid a spate of record contracting over recent months, he said that the choice of fuel today effectively spans the period between now and mid-century – typically the life of a new container ship ordered today.

Over the period, decarbonisation regulations will tighten dramatically towards the IMO's ambition of net zero by 2050 or soon after. But there is no single fuel available at scale today that meets liner companies’ requirements, he said.

MeKeran emphasised that LNG should not impede the development of, and investment in, other low- or zero-emission fuels. However, he pointed out that as the cleanest fossil fuel, LNG emissions are 24% less than heavy fuel oil, and there is an established supply chain and LNG distribution network already in place today.

Related:LNG to score well under new FuelEU regulations from 2025

Tackling LNG’s drawbacks head on, his first principal arguments address LNG’s biggest negative. Since the fuel is mostly methane, a greenhouse gas with 28 times greater global warming potential than carbon dioxide over a 100-year timescale and 84 times greater on a 20-year timescale, methane emissions and specifically unburnt methane in the combustion process present a major challenge. However, the issue is being tackled at pace, he said.

McKeran highlighted the work of the cross-party Methane Abatement in Maritime Innovation Initiative (MAMII), led by Safety Accelerator, itself established by Lloyd’s Register. With more than 20 prominent members including LNG carrier owners, liner companies, cruise lines, energy majors, and technology firms, methane emissions are a top priority across the sector.

Next comes the rapidly developing availability of bio-LNG which is feedstock agnostic and can be produced from organic plant matter or waste. It is, he said, the cleanest and cheapest type of biofuel and does not compete with food or land use. There’s plenty of raw material too – there are growing volumes of organic waste all around the world.

All biofuels still emit carbon dioxide when burnt as fuel, but the carbon they contain and emit came from the world’s atmosphere in the first place as the feedstock plants and algae grew. On a well-to-wake basis, biofuels including bio-LNG are closer to carbon neutrality than their fossil equivalents, which release CO2 that was previously locked away underground. A Life Cycle Assessment analysis would confirm bio-LNG's net greenhouse gas emissions, he said, with the specifics depending on the feedstock used. 

E-methane is the next plus point. As a renewable fuel of non-biological origin (RFNBO), e-LNG is produced by combining green hydrogen with recycled carbon dioxide and can be produced at scale. McKeran conceded that green ammonia would be simpler and cheaper to produce, but it has no supply chain and would require years of development and infrastructure costing billions. E-LNG, he said, ticks all the right boxes on greenhouse gas emissions, climate, and decarbonisation.

Describing the fourth benefit as his ace card, McKeran said carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is developing fast, with facilities planned for hard-to-abate sectors including cement, chemicals, fertilisers, and steel. Meanwhile, the cost of CCS is likely to fall steadily as more technology providers, infrastructure, and storage systems become available.

The classification society has already been involved in de-bunkering carbon dioxide projects from ships, he said, predicting there would be huge advances in carbon sequestration over the next decade. He pointed out that LNG is not only compatible with CCS technology aboard ships, but also comes with a 30-35% discount in CCS cost because it emits less carbon, is cleaner to burn, and therefore easier to handle in the capturing process. 

LNG, he concluded, is unique in terms of diversification against risk and, as such, could be rebranded as a decarbonisation pathway.