甲醇燃料成船东首选

Core Viewpoint - Despite significant emission reduction potential, shipowners prefer methanol over ammonia as a marine fuel alternative due to unresolved safety issues related to ammonia [2] Group 1: Safety Concerns - Ammonia does not produce carbon dioxide emissions during combustion, but its high toxicity and specialized handling requirements pose major obstacles for its adoption in the shipping industry [2] - Ammonia can be lethal at concentrations as low as 300 ppm, necessitating additional safety systems and specialized training for crew members [2] - Ammonia fuel requires special compression, refrigeration, and other safety measures [2] Group 2: Market Demand Projections - According to S&P Global Commodity Insights, methanol is expected to be the preferred marine alternative fuel by 2030, with a demand of approximately 310,000 barrels per day, while ammonia demand is projected at 60,000 barrels per day [2] - By 2050, the demand landscape is expected to reverse, with ammonia demand projected to reach 2.4 million barrels per day and methanol at about 900,000 barrels per day [2] Group 3: Pricing Information - As of February, the price of 100% sustainable methanol in Singapore was $1,954.65 per ton, while the price of green ammonia in the Far East was $1,954.97 per ton [2] - In comparison, the average price of low-sulfur fuel oil delivered in Singapore during the same period was $560.25 per ton [2] Group 4: Infrastructure and Feasibility - Methanol fuel can be handled at ambient temperatures and requires only minor modifications to existing infrastructure, with over 120 ports globally already utilizing methanol fuel [3] - Recent trials have demonstrated the feasibility of methanol as a transitional fuel, achieving a 31% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions using a blend of 20% green methanol and 80% traditional methanol [3]