Onboard carbon capture and storage gaining ground

Class society DNV, in its most recent issue of Maritime Impact, issued in advance of its revised Maritime Forecast to 2050, asserts that: “On-board carbon capture is an increasingly viable option. Supported by sustainable and credible reception and storage schemes, this would enable the continued use of conventional fuels and technologies and make a major contribution to emissions reductions.”

Indeed, at seminar held at law firm Reed, Smith’s offices in midtown New York, Morten Lerø, Managing Director of DNV’s Maritime Advisory, said that DNV is looking more closely at onboard carbon capture and, after noting the challenges in sourcing adequate amounts of alternative fuels needed for shipping, said that “onboard carbon capture could be one of the most effective ways of decarbonising.”

Looking at DNV estimates of market dynamics, he said that by 2030, the demand for CO² storage from onboard carbon capture could be as much as 76 million tonnes.

On 12 September, the same day as the DNV/ Reed Smith event, the Blue Sky Maritime Coalition (BSMC), an organisation promoting decarbonisation and sustainable practices, generally, for North American fleets, issued its report on the subject: Navigating the Complex Landscape of Onboard Carbon Capture Solutions. BSMC acknowledges in its publication, which it describes as a “high level roadmap”, that carbon capture can be adapted by the maritime industry over a time-frame spanning decades.

Related:MSC fitting carbon capture system to megamax containership

It describes implementation as a “chicken and egg” type situation- requiring technology advances for separation and for onboard storage, landside storage considerations including inclusion in “Green Corridors” projects, and market incentives including changes in the US tax code.                         

Importantly, noting that MEPC82 is coming up at the IMO, BSMC also points to the need for regulators to jump aboard. They comment that: “The IMO should include carbon capture as an approved method to achieve effective CO2 emissions reduction. The EEDI and EEXI have provisions for innovative technologies, but carbon capture does not fall into any of the existing categories.”

They add that: “The IMO could create a category for innovative technologies that capture carbon with the appropriate measurement and verification criteria to allow the carbon capture to be subtracted from the calculated CO2 emissions.” They also note that CII calculations, a hot button issue for many reasons, ought to be revised to take onboard carbon capture into account.

DNV stresses that a successful implementation of carbon capture onboard vessels will need landside cooperation. In their Maritime Impact piece, they write that: “reception facilities cannot be developed everywhere, but major ports have a responsibility to move this forward, and some are. However, more ports need to take this responsibility and orchestrate carbon-capture corridors.”

Related:Carbon capture ‘a significant factor’ in managing emissions from existing fleet

BSMC makes a similar observation, writing that: “To make onboard carbon capture happen, to render it a viable tool to reduce maritime’s greenhouse gases, all stakeholders must contribute within their purview….successful adaptation and implementation of carbon capture aboard vessels will require a team effort. The burden must not fall squarely on shipowners.”

BSMC’s bottom line is that: “It is imperative that the ship owners are not left alone to try and figure out this complicated situation for themselves.”

Resources:

https://www.bluesky-maritime.org/_files/ugd/78a8d8_0095e7ba398c46248c494628724aff1f.pdf

https://www.dnv.com/expert-story/maritime-impact/decarbonizing-maritime-overcoming-challenges-with-innovation-and-ingenuity/

https://www.dnv.com/maritime/publications/maritime-forecast/