A Systems-Level Study of Ammonia and Hydrogen for Maritime Transport

IF 3.9 Q2 TRANSPORTATION Maritime Transport Research Pub Date : 2023-09-06 DOI:10.1016/j.martra.2023.100099
Jessie R. Smith , Epaminondas Mastorakos
{"title":"A Systems-Level Study of Ammonia and Hydrogen for Maritime Transport","authors":"Jessie R. Smith ,&nbsp;Epaminondas Mastorakos","doi":"10.1016/j.martra.2023.100099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>An energy systems comparison of grid-electricity derived liquid hydrogen (LH2) and liquid ammonia (LNH3) is conducted to assess their relative potential in a low-carbon future. Under various voyage weather conditions, their performance is analysed for use in cargo transport, energy vectors for low-carbon electricity transport, and fuel supply. The analysis relies on literature projections for technological development and grid decarbonisation towards 2050. Various voyages are investigated from regions such as North America (NA), Europe (E), and Latin America (LA), to regions projected to have a higher electricity and fuel grid carbon intensity (CI) (i.e., Asia Pacific, Africa, the Middle-East, and the CIS). In terms of reducing the CI of electricity and fuel at the destination port, use of LH2 is predicted to be favourable relative to LNH3, whereas LNH3 is favourable for low-carbon transport of cargo. As targeted by the International Maritime Organisation, journeys of LNH3 cargo ships originating in NA, E, and LA achieve a reduction in volumetric energy efficiency design index (kg-CO<sub>2</sub>/m<sup>3</sup>-km) of at least 70% relative to 2008 levels. The same targets can be met globally if LH2 is supplied to high CI regions for production of LNH3 for cargo transport. A future shipping system thus benefits from the use of both LH2 and LNH3 for different functions. However, there are additional challenges associated with the use of LH2. Relative to LNH3, 1.6 to 1.7 times the number of LH2 ships are required to deliver the same energy. Even when reliquefaction is employed, their success is reliant on the avoidance of rough sea states (i.e., Beaufort Numbers &gt;= 6) where fuel depletion rates during a voyage are impractical.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100885,"journal":{"name":"Maritime Transport Research","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100099"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maritime Transport Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666822X23000187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An energy systems comparison of grid-electricity derived liquid hydrogen (LH2) and liquid ammonia (LNH3) is conducted to assess their relative potential in a low-carbon future. Under various voyage weather conditions, their performance is analysed for use in cargo transport, energy vectors for low-carbon electricity transport, and fuel supply. The analysis relies on literature projections for technological development and grid decarbonisation towards 2050. Various voyages are investigated from regions such as North America (NA), Europe (E), and Latin America (LA), to regions projected to have a higher electricity and fuel grid carbon intensity (CI) (i.e., Asia Pacific, Africa, the Middle-East, and the CIS). In terms of reducing the CI of electricity and fuel at the destination port, use of LH2 is predicted to be favourable relative to LNH3, whereas LNH3 is favourable for low-carbon transport of cargo. As targeted by the International Maritime Organisation, journeys of LNH3 cargo ships originating in NA, E, and LA achieve a reduction in volumetric energy efficiency design index (kg-CO2/m3-km) of at least 70% relative to 2008 levels. The same targets can be met globally if LH2 is supplied to high CI regions for production of LNH3 for cargo transport. A future shipping system thus benefits from the use of both LH2 and LNH3 for different functions. However, there are additional challenges associated with the use of LH2. Relative to LNH3, 1.6 to 1.7 times the number of LH2 ships are required to deliver the same energy. Even when reliquefaction is employed, their success is reliant on the avoidance of rough sea states (i.e., Beaufort Numbers >= 6) where fuel depletion rates during a voyage are impractical.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
海洋运输用氨和氢的系统级研究
对电网电力衍生的液态氢(LH2)和液态氨(LNH3)的能源系统进行了比较,以评估它们在低碳未来的相对潜力。在各种航行天气条件下,分析了它们在货物运输、低碳电力运输的能源载体和燃料供应方面的性能。该分析依赖于对2050年前技术发展和电网脱碳的文献预测。从北美(NA)、欧洲(E)和拉丁美洲(LA)等地区到预计具有更高电力和燃料电网碳强度(CI)的地区(即亚太、非洲、中东和独联体),对各种航行进行了调查。在降低目的港电力和燃料CI方面,预计使用LH2相对于使用LNH3更有利,而使用LNH3则有利于货物的低碳运输。根据国际海事组织的目标,从北美、欧洲和洛杉矶出发的LNH3货船的航程相对于2008年的水平至少降低了70%的体积能效设计指数(kg-CO2/m3-km)。如果向高CI地区供应LH2以生产用于货物运输的LNH3,则可以在全球范围内实现相同的目标。因此,未来的运输系统将受益于LH2和LNH3的不同功能。然而,使用LH2还存在其他挑战。相对于LNH3,需要1.6到1.7倍的LH2船来提供相同的能量。即使采用再液化,它们的成功也依赖于避免恶劣的海况(即波弗特数字>= 6),在这种情况下,航行中的燃料消耗率是不切实际的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ports as business eco-systems in transition Big data and artificial intelligence in maritime transport research Multi-objective vessel routing problems with safety considerations: A review Sustainable maritime shipping Operations Research in Maritime Logistics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1