Page 115 - ΝΑΥΤΙΚΑ ΧΡΟΝΙΚΑ - ΟΚΤΩΒΡΙΟΣ 2024

Sponsored by

between the various solutions, with every one of them All related industries should do their part towards decar-
having pros and cons, the financial burden being high, bonisation, and despite the overall efficiency of trans-
and other operational and technical issues still being porting goods by sea, shipping has to make a bold effort
unresolved, one cannot be too optimistic on the out- in this direction.
come of the decarbonisation effort within the speci- At present, the use of biofuels is an attractive way to
fied time frame. reduce financial penalties – i.e. compliance costs – when
trading in Europe. It is clear, however, that biofuels do
According to the participants’ responses, implementing mul- not constitute a long-term solution for shipping, as they
tiple technological solutions is viewed as the most effective are available in limited quantities.
way to reduce a ship’s carbon footprint. Is the shipping industry The participation of charterers, cargo interests, and
nearing a tipping point where substantial benefits from the ports is essential in the industry’s plans to minimise its
implementation of technological solutions will be witnessed? carbon footprint. Up to now, all these stakeholders have
Apart from the financial considerations, all techno- not taken an active role in decarbonisation efforts, pre-
logical solutions come with crucial parameters that ferring to shift the burden onto shipowners. However,
must be carefully considered, including the handling for the regulations to become truly effective, all stake-
risk, availability, reliability, ability of the crew to operate holders must be involved aligning their efforts towards
and maintain machinery, volume and size of tanks and decarbonisation.
machinery, ability to consume conventional bunkers
(specific to dual fuel engines), as well as methane slip The reduction of sailing speeds is often highlighted as essen-
and leakage. tial for achieving shipping’s decarbonisation goals. How-
All stakeholders must be aware of the “well-to-wake” ever, wouldn’t energy efficiency assume a subsidiary role in
concept before embarking on any decisions. Anyone instances of limited vessel supply?
who does not recognise its significance could be at risk Reducing vessel speeds is the most effective and imme-
of taking erroneous and financially damaging paths. diate way to reduce shipping’s carbon footprint. As far as
Finally, I strongly believe that, in our industry, no envi- propulsive efficiency is concerned, speed reduction-re-
ronmental benefit can be considered more valuable lated gains are very significant and would have an imme-
than the safety of life at sea. diate impact with little financial burden. In addition to
that, better port planning and the use of information
The availability of alternative fuels is considered the most technology and AI would prevent delays or unavailability
significant challenge in achieving the goal of green shipping. of goods, even at reduced speeds. Finally, streamlining
What do you consider a realistic timetable for the widespread port operations or canal transits would greatly reduce
production of alternative fuels and the development of the fuel consumption by allowing ships to reduce their
necessary supply chains? speeds, thus arriving just-in-time, without requiring only
That is the industry’s “chicken-and-egg” situation. but few more additional vessels to meet the demand.
Suppose methanol becomes the predominant new
alternative fuel; only when supply points are numerous
and with plentiful quantities can the replacement of
the conventional tonnage commence. It is important
to note here that, the environmental footprint for the
production of each alternative supplied fuel is known
and preferably of limited level.
As conventional fuel grades will continue to be supplied
to vessels, additional storage and facilities will need to
be constructed for the new alternative fuels, which may
have a negative impact on the fuels’ bunker availability.

The EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and CII have all been criticised
as regional or inefficiently designed regulations. How can a
regulation focusing on a vessel’s energy efficiency ensure
fairness, transparency, accountability, and competitiveness?
There is no doubt that all of the above regulations
have some serious flaws, and the criticism they have
received is valid. In my opinion, these regulations
should be revisited at once. On the other hand, despite
their flaws they are a bold start in the attempt to con-
trol and minimise emissions.

115