The Relevance of Liquefied Natural Gas as an Alternative for the Shipping Industry to Comply with the Global SO2 Limits

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 RESEARCH PROBLEM

1.2 AIM

1.3 METHODOLOGY

2 THE SULPHUR OXIDES LIMITS

2.1 REGULATION 14 OF MARPOL ANNEX VI

2.2 0.5% GLOBAL SULPHUR CAP BY 2020

2.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SHIPPING INDUSTRY

3 LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS

3.1 DEFINITION

3.2 LNG AS AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE FOR COMPLIANCE

3.3 GLOBAL LNG TRADE

3.4 LNG BUNKERING

3.5 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF LNG FOR SHIPPING COMPANIES

4 CASE STUDIES

4.1 THE SMALL SHIPPING COMPANY

4.2 THE LARGE SHIPPING COMPANY

4.3 MAIN FINDINGS

5. CONCLUSION

5.1 SUMMARY

5.2 CRITICAL ACCLAIM

5.3 OUTLOOK

Objectives and Topics

This thesis examines the relevance of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as a viable fuel alternative for the shipping industry to meet the requirements of the global 0.5% sulphur cap enforced by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 2020. The research aims to evaluate opportunities and barriers for LNG adoption by comparing the strategic decision-making processes of a small and a large shipping company.

• Regulatory impact of the IMO MARPOL Annex VI and the global sulphur cap.
• Technical and economic evaluation of LNG versus traditional fuel oil and scrubbers.
• Infrastructure challenges and the "chicken-and-egg" problem in global bunkering.
• Comparative case study analysis of fleet management and compliance strategies.
• Future perspectives on sustainable maritime propulsion and multi-fuel scenarios.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1 INTRODUCTION: Defines the research problem regarding the 2020 global sulphur cap and sets the scope of the qualitative study involving two shipping companies.

2 THE SULPHUR OXIDES LIMITS: Reviews the IMO regulations, specifically MARPOL Annex VI, and discusses the implications for the shipping industry regarding fuel compliance.

3 LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS: Provides a technical definition of LNG, analyzes global trade patterns, assesses bunkering methods, and evaluates the pros and cons for ship-owners.

4 CASE STUDIES: Presents and compares the individual compliance strategies, challenges, and perspectives of a small and a large shipping company.

5. CONCLUSION: Summarizes the findings, highlighting the lack of infrastructure as the primary barrier and discussing the future long-term potential of LNG.

Keywords

LNG, shipping industry, fuel, bunker, global sulphur cap, compliance, challenges, maritime emissions, MARPOL, ship-owners, infrastructure, bunkering, dual-fuel, sustainability, environmental impact

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research?

This thesis focuses on the relevance of LNG as a compliant fuel alternative for the shipping industry in the context of the global 0.5% sulphur cap effective from 2020.

What are the primary themes discussed in the work?

The work covers regulatory compliance (MARPOL Annex VI), fuel technology, LNG infrastructure, operational economic impacts, and the strategic perspectives of different shipping company sizes.

What is the main objective of this study?

The aim is to evaluate whether LNG can gain sufficient ground as a compliant energy source by analyzing the specific fuel planning and decision-making processes of two distinct shipping companies.

Which research methodology is employed?

The study utilizes a qualitative constructivist research paradigm, focusing on a collective case study approach based on audio-recorded interviews with industry participants.

What does the main body of the text cover?

It provides an overview of existing regulatory frameworks, a detailed review of LNG as a maritime fuel, and a comparative analysis of two case studies concerning both small and large shipping entities.

Which keywords characterize this paper?

Key terms include LNG, shipping industry, global sulphur cap, compliance, bunkering, maritime emissions, and industry challenges.

How does the "chicken-and-egg" problem affect LNG adoption?

The problem refers to the deadlock where shipping companies hesitate to order LNG-fuelled vessels due to missing infrastructure, while port developers refrain from investing in bunkering facilities due to lack of demand.

Do small and large shipping companies perceive LNG risks differently?

While both acknowledge high investment costs and infrastructure gaps, smaller companies see more agility in short-scale projects, whereas larger companies view LNG as a long-term "fuel of the future" but currently deem it logistically and financially unfeasible for their large-scale, intercontinental operations.