It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Pembina nears investment decision for US$4 billion LNG project
Ruth Liao and Chunzi Xu, Bloomberg News Jun 12, 2024
Pembina Pipeline Corp. plans to make its final investment decision for the proposed Cedar LNG floating gas-export project in British Columbia within two weeks, according to people familiar with the matter.
The US$4 billion project is expected to be financed 60 per cent from debt and 40 per cent from equity, with partners Haisla Nation and Pembina each contributing 20 per cent of equity, Cedar LNG said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg News.
The financing will also include a $1.5 billion (US$1.09 billion) five-year term loan for a pipeline connecting the Cedar terminal with the nearby Shell-led Kitimat project, according to the people.
Cedar LNG would be the second Canadian fuel-export project to be financially sanctioned after the Shell-led backers of the $40 billion LNG Canada made their investment decision in 2018.
At least 15 banks will likely participate in financing the project, the people said. Cedar LNG did not comment on the number of banks involved or the timing of a final investment in response to questions from Bloomberg News.
The developers of the project, which also includes the Haisla First Nation, had previously said they were aiming for a final investment decision by mid-2024. Future liquefied natural gas offtake from the proposed 3-million-metric-ton-a-year facility is split between Pembina and Canadian exploration firm ARC Resources Ltd.
The most recent LNG export facility to reach a final investment decision was Abu Dhabi National Oil Co.’s Ruwais LNG project, announced Wednesday.
Saturday, June 15, 2024
‘Brazen corruption’: Donald Trump is selling policies for a second term to the highest bidders
Richard Hall and Andrew Feinberg Thu, June 13, 2024 Donald Trump is increasingly shaping and reversing his policies to match the desires of donors (The Independent/Getty)
Donald Trump is no stranger to a quid pro quo — he was impeached for one, after all. But while campaigning for a second term in the White House, he has gone further than perhaps any other candidate in recent history to shape his policies in return for cash.
Trump is not making these bargains behind closed doors or in smoky back rooms, but at fundraisers and events attended by dozens of influential and extremely wealthy people.
On several occasions he has made explicit offers to reward donors by enacting or dismantling policy on their behalf should he win in November, often reversing his own previously held positions.
Democrat Jamie Raskin, ranking member of the House committee on oversight and accountability, accused Trump of treating the presidency “as a for-profit business enterprise and money-making venture”.
He told The Independent that the former president was “brazenly offering to sell out US policy to any corporate and billionaire campaign donors ready to make a deal, including telling Big Oil he will sign their executive orders in exchange for a cool one billion dollars”.
“Donald Trump will literally sell out the future of humanity for another billion dollars,” he added. Donald and Melania Trump arrive at the Florida home of billionaire investor John Paulson (Getty)
The Campaign Legal Center, a non-profit watchdog that focuses on campaign finance laws, called Trump’s actions “brazen, quid pro quo corruption”.
"It is deeply concerning and problematic to see a presidential candidate solicit millions of dollars from wealthy donors in exchange for promised policies or actions that cater to the donors’ wishes,” said Saurav Ghosh, the group’s director of federal campaign finance reform.
Ghosh told The Independent that “years of deregulatory court decisions” have fostered a culture of big money in US elections that allows Trump “to act with impunity, pushing legal boundaries or even breaking them outright”.
Trump’s bargaining began almost the moment he left office, and has continued to this day.
Here are the policies he is selling to donors. $1bn from oil companies
At a lavish dinner at Mar-a-Lago in April, the former president gathered with around two dozen executives from the biggest oil companies in the country. His campaign was facing a sizeable cash shortfall against his opponent, President Joe Biden, and he was desperate to make up the difference.
As the executives complained about how the Biden administration’s environmental regulations were hurting their business, Trump made a starkly transactional pitch: raise $1bn to send me back to the White House.
If he won, he said he would immediately reverse dozens of Biden’s environmental rules and policies. The $1bn would be a “deal” for the companies, he added, because of the money they would save from deregulation.
The account of the meeting, first reported by the Washington Post, came from several people who attended. Among them were 20 executives from ExxonMobil, EQT Corporation and the American Petroleum Institute, which lobbies for the oil industry. It was reportedly organized by oil billionaire Harold Hamm. Trump speaks to city officials and employees of Double Eagle Energy on the site of an oil rig in Midland, Texas (Getty)
Specifically, Trump vowed to undo a Biden administration freeze on permits for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports “on the first day” of entering office, one attendee told the Post.
The meeting prompted a furious response from Democrats in the House and Senate.
Representative Raskin wrote to the CEOs of nine of the oil companies that attended the meeting to demand answers, calling it an “unvarnished quid pro quo”.
He said that reports that oil companies are working on potential executive orders for Trump “suggest that certain oil and gas companies, which have a track record of using deceitful tactics to undermine effective climate policy, may have already accepted or facilitated Mr Trump’s explicit corrupt bargain”. The crypto president
Trump once called Bitcoin “a scam" and argued that it threatened the supremacy of the US dollar. A few years later, in desperate need of campaign cash, he is pitching himself to Silicon Valley as “the crypto president”.
Trump used the term to describe himself at a fundraiser hosted by tech investors David Sacks and Chamath Palihapitiya at the former’s home in San Francisco this month.
Both Sacks and Palihapitiya have spoken publicly about their investments in crypto, and the event was attended by a number of other notable crypto investors, including executives from Coinbase and twins Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, who own the crypto company Gemini.
Trump has not always been popular in Silicon Valley. In 2020, the tech industry spent big to make him a one-term president. But this time around, there has been a slight yet notable shift among a certain set of crypto-loving tech billionaires. Trump once called Bitcoin a scam but is pitching himself to Silicon Valley as a crypto champion (Associated Press)
The crypto industry has spent tens of millions of dollars in an effort to influence the 2024 elections, funneling money to help elect lawmakers who will undo regulatory moves by the Biden administration. The industry hopes that deregulation will lead to huge profits for crypto investors.
Trump’s message appeared to land: He came away with $12m in donations from that fundraiser in San Francisco, and the promise of much more. TikTok flip-flop
As president, Trump spearheaded efforts to ban TikTok.
“As far as TikTok is concerned, we’re banning them from the United States,” the then-president declared to reporters aboard Air Force One in July 2020.
Indeed, he signed an executive order in his last year in office that would have effectively prohibited the video app, which is majority-owned by a Chinese company. But just this month he joined TikTok himself. And more recently he has spoken out against efforts from both the Biden administration and his own party to regulate it.
On March 7, a House committee advanced a bill that would ban the app if it didn’t divest, even as TikTok users flooded congressional lines with thousands of calls urging lawmakers to back off.
That same day, Trump wrote on Truth Social that “if you get rid of TikTok, (then) Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business,” referring to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. TikTok supporters protest at the hush-money trial of Donald Trump in New York in April (Associated Press)
“I don’t want Facebook, who cheated in the last election, doing better,” wrote Trump, echoing a baseless conspiracy theory that social media platforms rigged elections against him. “They are a true Enemy of the People!”
Some clues may be derived from the fact that his words came swiftly after a very public rapprochement with Republican mega-donor Jeff Yass. Yass has a $20bn stake in TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, and is the largest donor in this election campaign cycle.
At the request of Yass, Trump spoke at a conference of the influential right-wing Club for Growth, which the former president previously blasted as “Club for No Growth”.
Yass has given $61m to the group since 2010 but it backed Florida’s Ron DeSantis in the Republican primary against Trump.
At the conference, Trump told donors that he and the organization’s president, David McIntosh, are now “back in love”. West Bank-rolling
Perhaps the most brazen quid pro quo of Trump’s first term came with a giant donation from casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, the Republican Party’s biggest funder over the past decade.
According to New York Times writer Maggie Haberman in her book ‘Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America,’ Adelson made a $20m donation to a political action committee to pressure then-president Trump to adopt the highly controversial decision to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
For his second term, Trump may be poised to sell another controversial policy to the Adelson family.
Sheldon died in 2021, but his wife Miriam has continued his cause and may even surpass Yass to become Trump’s biggest patron in this election cycle.
A New York Magazine profile of Miriam, published last month, suggested that Trump’s support for the Israeli annexation of the West Bank was top of her wish list for a second term. Miriam Adelson listens as Trump addresses an Israeli American Council summit in Hollywood in 2019 (Associated Press)
The West Bank is considered Palestinian territory and would form the basis of a future Palestinian state. Annexing it would be against international law.
By March, Mrs Adelson had not yet opened her checkbook to fund Trump’s campaign. That month, after he won the Republican primary, he invited her to a Shabbat dinner at Mar-a-Lago, according to the magazine, during which his courting of the donor appears to have begun in earnest. He gave an interview to the Adelson-owned newspaper Israel Hayom in which he described himself as “a very loyal person”.
“I’ve been the best president in history to Israel by a factor of ten because of all the things I do. The embassy, Jerusalem being the capital. Then you have Golan Heights … Nobody even thought that was going to be possible. I did that,” he said.
Ten days after the publication of the New York Magazine profile, Politico reported that Adelson would fund a massive political action committee for Trump’s re-election. Trickle-up tax cuts
During his presidency, Trump implemented sweeping tax cuts for the top 1 per cent of earners and cut the maximum corporation tax rate from 35 per cent to 21 per cent. His cuts were “one factor helping the fortunes of US billionaires grow by a collective $1 trillion during the pandemic, from March 18 to December 7, 2020,” according to the non-partisan group, Americans for Tax Fairness.
The group said that an analysis of donations to Trump found that he was “enabled with a total of almost a quarter billion dollars in campaign contributions from 134 of America’s billionaires during his short, violent political career”.
Trump is looking to replicate that windfall by promising even more tax cuts for the wealthy, should he win a second term. Several billionaire donors backed off following the riot on January 6, 2021 — they are now finding their way back to Trump, largely thanks to that promise.
Speaking at a donor event at the luxury Pierre Hotel in New York last month, Trump warned the wealthy attendees that taxes would go up unless he wins in November because Biden has vowed to let his tax cuts expire at the end of 2025.
“You’re going to have the biggest tax increase in history,” he said. “So whatever you guys can do, I appreciate it.”
The comments are part of a pattern of offers to wealthy donors from Trump. Donate to me, he says, and I’ll make you richer.
Speaking at Mar-a-Lago in December last year, Trump drew laughs as he described the audience as “rich as hell” before declaring: “We’re gonna give you tax cuts!”
Money has always played a role in presidential campaigns, but the scale and brazenness of Trump’s policy firesale could have a dramatic impact on future elections. If it works, the US government could become even more in thrall to the billionaire class.
Tuesday, June 11, 2024
IRONY
South Africa Commisions Solar Array for Continent's Largest Coal Port
Port of Richards Bay coal and petroleum terminals (Transnet file image)
In a bid to decarbonize South Africa’s major ports, Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) has appointed Amulet Group Consortium to construct and operate its first 20 MW solar photovoltaic plant at the Port of Richards Bay. This project is part of the agency’s plans to install about 100 MW of renewable energy across South Africa’s eight commercial seaports.
The appointment of Amulet Group follows an RFP process that TNPA launched in May 2023. The consortium will be responsible for building and operating the 20 MW solar power and battery energy system at the Port of Richards Bay for seven years. TNPA expects that the design and construction of the plant will begin this month and will be operational by May 2026.
“The introduction of a renewable energy solution in the port system will enable the reduction of carbon emissions and greenhouse gas emissions from coal-generated electricity,” said Moshe Motlohi, TNPA Managing Executive for the Eastern Region ports.
Besides renewable energy, TNPA’s energy mix plans include the use of LNG, micro grids and battery energy storage systems (BESS). The operator is also exploring future use of green fuels such as ammonia or hydrogen in its marine fleet.
Last year, TNPA issued a Request for Information (RFI) for the development of a hydrogen fuel terminal and other related facilities at South African ports. The RFI is intended to assess the feasibility of operating and maintaining an import and export terminal for hydrogen at major South African ports.
Joint declaration by ecosocialist, anarchist, feminist, environmental organisations, and groups in solidarity with the Ukrainian resistance and for a self-determined social and ecological reconstruction of Ukraine
The Swiss government will hold an international conference for a peace process in Ukraine on 15 and 16 June 2024 on the mountain Bürgenstock, close to Lucerne. The Ukrainian government supports this conference.
This conference is taking place in a decisive phase of the war. For months, the Russian invasion forces have been hitting gaps in the Ukrainian defences and pushing them back, with heavy losses of their own. The Russian leadership has announced a major offensive and is attacking the people in Kharkiv, a city of millions.
We support all steps towards a peace that enables the Ukrainian people to rebuild the country in a self-determined manner. Peace requires the complete withdrawal of the Russian occupying forces from the entire territory of Ukraine. With this in mind, we hope that the peace conference in Switzerland will contribute to the restoration of Ukraine’s sovereignty.
The conditions for this are extremely difficult. The representatives of the Putin regime regularly declare that they do not recognise an independent Ukraine and deny the existence of the Ukrainian people. The Putin regime purses a Great Russian project, subjugates the people in the occupied territories with terror and aims to eradicate the Ukrainian culture. The ruling regime in Russia regularly commits war crimes against the Ukraine population.
The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, launched on 24 February 2022, not only calls Ukraine’s independence into question. It also encourages other authoritarian regimes to threaten neighbouring populations, occupy territories and massively expel people. In order to avoid resistance at home, the Russian army is now also recruiting people from neighbouring countries and the Global South to serve as cannon fodder.
Due to the massive – and surprising – resistance of the Ukrainian population, the governments of Europe and North America began to support the Ukrainian army in its defence against the Russian occupying forces. However, they are backing Ukraine to assert their own interests in the global imperialist rivalry. The US aim to weaken its Russian counter part while showing strength against rising China and setting the pace for the European powers which are both partners and rivals. But despite the US Congress finally approving a comprehensive aid package for Ukraine on 20 April 2024, which had been blocked by the Republican Party for nine months, the support for Ukraine has always remained selective and insufficient.
Similarly, the economic sanctions that have been imposed by the EU and US governments against Russia and the exponents of the Putin regime are selective, inadequately targeted, and insufficient. They do not prevent Russia from continuing to export oil and gas, along with other strategically important raw materials, to fill its war chest. Some European countries have even significantly increased their imports of LNG from Russia since the start of the war. Others, such as Austria, obtain over 90% of their natural gas imports from Russia. The governments of these countries are forcing gas consumers to finance Putin’s war against the Ukrainian population.
The Swiss government, the host of the peace conference, has not only been giving tax breaks to Russian oligarchs for decades, it has also refused to confiscate the assets of these oligarchs since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion. As a major hub of international commodities trading, Switzerland has offered Russian capital excellent opportunities to acquire wealth for many years. Many bourgeois politicians have gladly welcomed these businesses in Switzerland. Through the sale of dual-use products, Switzerland contributes to equipping the Russian war machine. And finally, the Swiss financial sector facilitates the trade of Russian oil.
Both in the US and in Europe, there is a growing number of voices in the political and economic establishment who want to tie their support for Ukraine to certain conditions. They aim to pressure Ukraine to cede large territories and several million people to the Putin regime. Such a peace, enforced by major imperial powers, would strengthen the Putin regime and fail to provide a basis for a lasting democratic reconstruction of Ukraine.
We need a peace that is based on, as well as supported by, the interests of the people and of workers in Ukraine and Russia. Such a perspective can only succeed if trade unions, women’s organisations, environmental initiatives and various civil society organisations from both Ukraine and Russia play a leading role in the peace talks.
Occupation is a crime! We are guided by the principles of self-liberation, emancipation, and self-determination of working-class and all oppressed peoples beyond geopolitical considerations. In this sense, we also stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people, who have been fighting for their self determination for decades. Likewise, we support the Kurdish and Armenian peoples and all other peoples threatened by occupation, national and cultural oppression.
Based on our positioning, supporting the Ukrainian resistance against the Russian occupation, we want to contribute to developing a common European perspective for radical socioecological reforms and ultimately for an ecosocialist transformation of the entire European continent in global solidarity.
By submitting this declaration for discussion, we want to contribute to a transnational process of understanding and political clarification among those left-wing forces throughout Europe and beyond that share these important convictions. 12 principles for a just peace in Ukraine within a Europe based on solidarity and ecology
We, the undersigned organisations and initiatives, want to promote a peace process that adheres to the following 12 principles.Achieving a socially just and ecologically sustainable peace requires the unconditional and complete withdrawal of Russian occupying forces from Ukraine, returning the entire territory to its internationally recognized borders. Russia is systematically destroying cities, infrastructure, and the environment to demoralise the population and trigger a large wave of refugees. Against this daily terror, we demand that the “Western” governments support Ukraine in protecting its population and infrastructure against the bombing and missile attacks of the Russian occupying power. We are in favour of massive humanitarian, economic and military support for Ukraine from the rich states in Europe. The Ukrainian population urgently needs protection from Russian bombs and rockets. We oppose attempts by “Western” governments, NATO and EU exponents to pressure Ukraine into making massive concessions to the Russian occupying power. We oppose the idea that Ukraine must cede several million people to the Putin regime. It is only up to the Ukrainian people to decide how to confront this atrocious situation of ongoing and possibly in creasing occupation. We support the armed and unarmed resistance of Ukrainians against the Russian occupying power. We demand that all Russians who refuse military service be granted secure residence status in the countries of Europe and North America. Mass desertion is important to weaken the Russian war machine. We support the political struggle of Ukrainian trade unions, women’s organisations, and environmental initiatives against the neoliberal anti-labour policies of the government under President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. These policies undermine Ukraine’s socially broad-based defence against Russian occupation and render a socially just and ecologically sustainable reconstruction impossible. We stand in solidarity with the anti-war movement, democratic opposition, and independent labour struggles in Russia. We also stand in solidarity with the oppressed nationalities in Russia who suffer particularly badly from the war and fight for their self-determination. It is their youth that is being exploited as cannon fodder by the Putin regime. These movements are a key factor for achieving a just peace and a democratic Russia. Russia has imprisoned numerous people from Ukraine as political prisoners. Many have been sentenced to decades in prison and penal camps. We demand their unconditional release. We demand that the International Red Cross be allowed to maintain regular contact with all prisoners of war. The exchange and release of prisoners of war is a prerequisite for any just peace. Russia must pay reparations to the Ukrainian people. The oligarchs of Russia and Ukraine must be expropriated. Their assets must be made available to the reconstruction of Ukraine and, once the Putin regime falls to the democratic development of Russia. We demand that the “Western” governments immediately cancel Ukraine’s debts. This is a crucial condition for the sovereign reconstruction of the country. The rich states of Europe and North America must set up comprehensive and broad based support programmes for the Ukrainian people and the reconstruction of the country. This reconstruction must take place under the democratic control of the population, trade unions, environmental initiatives, feminist organisations and organized neighbourhoods in the cities and villages. We oppose all projects of the European and Northern American governments, as well as international organisations, to impose a neoliberal economic agenda on the Ukrainian people. This would prolong and deepen poverty and suffering. We also denounce all efforts to sell off the property and assets of the Ukrainian population to foreign corporations. The recovery and reorganisation of agriculture, industry, energy systems and the entire social infrastructure must serve the socio ecological transformation of Ukraine, not the supply of cheap labour, grain and hydrogen to Western European countries. An effective military support of Ukraine does not require a new wave of armaments. We oppose NATO’s rearmament programmes and weapon exports to third countries. Instead, the countries of Europe and North America must provide the weapons from their existing, huge arsenals that will help Ukraine to defend itself effectively. In this sense, we demand that the arms industry should not serve the profit interests of capital – to the contrary, we want to work towards the social appropriation of the arms industry. This industry should serve the immediate interests of Ukraine. At the same time, for social and urgent ecological reasons, we underline the imperative of democratically converting the arms industry into socially useful production on a global scale. We want to initiate a debate on a radical reorganisation of Europe. We want to contribute to developing a common European perspective for radical socio-ecological reforms, and ultimately for a fundamental ecosocialist transformation of the entire European continent in global solidarity. Within this framework, we support the will of the Ukrainian people to join the EU, even though we reject the EU’s neoliberal foundations that impoverish millions of people and promote unequal development in Europe. We take the perspective of an accession of several countries in Eastern Europe and South East Europe as an opportunity to reflect together on how such a radical socio-ecological change can be initiated throughout Europe, including a common energy strategy, ecological industrial conversion, pay-as-you-go pension systems, social labour regulation, solidarity-based migration policy, interregional transfer payments, and military security along with the conversion of the armaments industry. Trade union, feminist, ecological, anti-authoritarian left and socialist forces in Eastern Europe should play an important role in this debate.
This declaration has been launched jointly by Sotsialnyi Rukh (Social Movement) in Ukraine, Posle Media Collective in Russia, Bewegung für den Sozialismus / Mouvement pour le Socialisme and solidaritéS – mouvement anticapitaliste, féministe, écosocialiste in Switzerland, emanzipation – Zeitschrift für ökosozialistische Strategie (DE, AT, CH). All interested organisations, groups, initiatives, and media collectives are invited to spread and sign this declaration by 14 June. Please send confirmations of your signing to: Joao_Woyzeck@proton.me and redaktion@emanzipation.org
Saturday, June 08, 2024
ECOCIDE
South Korea Opens New Frontier Region to Offshore Drilling
South Korea's government has opened the door to drilling for oil and gas E&P off the country's eastern coastline, launching what could be a strategic new source of energy for Asia's fourth-largest economy.
The prospect off the coast of Pohang could contain up to 14 billion barrels equivalent of oil and gas, according to President Yoon Suk Yeol. This is enough to supply four years of national oil consumption and 29 years of gas demand. It will be explored by American consultancy Act-GEO for Korea's Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, with a budget of about $360 million.
The objective of the campaign is to prove out the frontier region's potential by mid-2025. With leasing, permitting and the FEED process, any production could take up to a decade to bring online.
South Korea imports about 90 percent of its carbon-based energy, including 98 percent of its natural gas; it ranks in the top five importing nations for both LNG and crude. New domestic production would allow it to reduce its dependence on foreign suppliers. It would also potentially reduce a key source of demand for globally-sourced LNG, freeing up volumes that could supply other top consumers like the EU and Japan.
While the prospects of the new offshore region are far from certain, Yoon's announcement sent the stock prices of Korean gas companies soaring as investors scrambled to capitalize on the new opportunity. Shares in Korea Gas Corp. rose 30 percent in a day, the maximum allowed by exchange rules. SK Gas briefly jumped by 29 percent, then closed the day at a still-healthy increase of seven percent.
Wärtsilä Solutions to Minimize Emissions of Two New CMA CGM Ferries
Technology group Wärtsilä will supply the engines, fuel gas supply system and thrusters for two new Ropax ferries being built for French operator La Méridionale, a subsidiary of CMA CGM. The vessels, which have been specifically designed to minimise emissions, are to be built at the China Merchants Jinling Shipyard (Weihai) Co., Ltd., and will operate between Marseille and Corsica. The order with Wärtsilä was booked in April 2024.
Ferries are on the front line of the energy transition and are among the first sectors to target net zero-carbon operations. However, ferry operators face increasing pressure from customers who continue to expect a fast and cost-efficient service, which runs to a timetable, and is increasingly sustainable. Ferry operators, such as La Méridionale, are looking to leverage technologies which offer minimal service disruption and to maximise return on investment, all while reducing carbon footprint.
“The design of these two Ropax vessels reflects our commitment to reducing the carbon footprint within our own fleet. These will be among the most energy-efficient, low-emission ships in operation globally, and we value the support from Wärtsilä, whose technology and solutions help make this ambition possible,” says Xavier Leclercq, Vice-President, CMA Ships, CMA CGM.
The company will continue its efforts to reduce the environmental impact by adopting LNG as the primary fuel for the new ships as well as preparing them to operate on alternative fuels such as biogas and synthetic methane, as these become available at scale.
For each ship, Wärtsilä will supply two 12-cylinder, one 10-cylinder and one 8-cylinder Wärtsilä 31DF engines. The two ferries will benefit from Wärtsilä’s groundbreaking NextDF technology, which will be implemented in the Wärtsilä 31DF engines. Whilst operating on LNG, the NextDF version of the Wärtsilä 31DF further reduces methane emissions and nitrogen oxide (NOx) significantly (compared to the already emission-efficient standard Wärtsilä 31DF). The scope of Wärtsilä’s supply for this contract also includes the Wärtsilä LNGPac, a fuel gas supply system for LNG-fuelled ships, as well as Wärtsilä’s thrusters.
“The drive towards net zero emissions is one of the most important challenges facing the industry today,” comments Stefan Nysjö, Vice President of Power Supply, Wärtsilä Marine. “That’s why we are pleased to support our long-standing partners, CMA CGM and China Merchants Jinling Shipyard (Weihai) Co., Ltd., with our integrated solutions – ensuring these ferries are able to benefit from outstanding fuel efficiency, operational reliability and a significant reduction in GHG emissions.”
The 180-metre-long ships will be able to accommodate 1,000 passengers as well as cargo freight. The Wärtsilä equipment for these ferries is scheduled to be delivered in mid- 2025, with the ferries expected to enter service during the first half of 2027, operating between Marseille and Corsica.
The products and services herein described in this press release are not endorsed by The Maritime Executive.
Study: Tanker Sector's Profits Could Fall by a Third Due to Climate Action
In a new report, researchers at University College London and the Kuhne Foundation predict that the tanker and gas carrier segments will see their profits drop by as much as $200 billion over the next 25 years if the global economy achieves the Paris climate targets - even if all newbuild orders end. This amounts to a third of the profits that tanker companies could earn over the same period under a business-as-usual climate action scenario.
The research team set out to look at the ownership structure, asset value and transport capacity of the global tanker fleet, and how well utilized it would be under future climate scenarios. In particular, they sought to determine how much overcapacity there might be if the global economy reduces fossil fuel consumption, and the resulting impact on tanker owners' profits and asset values.
The team found that LNG, LPG and crude tankers may be oversupplied in decades ahead if the global economy cuts fuel consumption enough to meet the Paris Agreement's 1.5 degree Celcius warming trajectory. The cumulative lost profits (compared to a scenario in which the global economy does not decarbonize) could amount to up to $214 billion by 2050, even if there are no more newbuild orders. If more tankers and gas carriers continue to be ordered and built, lost profits could rise to as much as $286 billion by 2050.
"The results are quite chilling for oil and gas tankers," explains Marie Fricaudet, who led the research at UCL. "In a scenario where newbuilding of ships continues until 2030, about 37 percent of their expected profits would fail to materialize."
If demand and day rates drop, the book loss from falling vessel asset values could amount to as much as $108 billion by 2030, or as much as $147 billion if the orderbook continues to grow.
Simultaneously, this decline in tanker activity would cut the cumulative CO2 emissions of the maritime industry by 1.3-2.0 billion tonnes by 2050. This would help keep shipping within the 12 billion tonne carbon budget the industry would need to meet if it wants to achieve a 1.5 degree Celcius trajectory.
Other demand-side factors in the changing energy market - like regionalized production and reduced shipping distances - could further reduce tanker activity. On the other hand, there is also the possibility that more these vessels will keep sailing if they find a way to switch cargoes. Coal-carrying bulkers could readily switch to other dry bulk commodities, the authors noted. Tankers may also be convertible to new liquid fuels, subject to technical limitations, and these adaptations to a new green-fuel landscape might offset the lost profits of a decline in the traditional wet bulk trades.
"Our forecast, even if only indicative, should prompt investors and shipping actors to evaluate their climate risks and redirect investments. The transport sector must play a role in transitioning to a low-carbon society, with capital shifting to sectors aiding this transformation," said Stefanie Sohm of the Kuhn Climate Center.
Friday, June 07, 2024
Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs urge banks to snub TC Energy bonds
The Canadian Press
The terminus for the Coastal GasLink natural gas pipeline is seen at the LNG Canada export terminal under construction in Kitimat, B.C., Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2022. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck
An Indigenous group that opposed the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline is urging banks and investors against financing a proposed second phase of the project.
Hereditary chiefs of the Wet'suwet'en First Nation of B.C. have written an open letter to Canada's biggest banks and investors urging them to make a public commitment not to buy any new bonds issued by Calgary-based TC Energy Corp., the company behind Coastal GasLink.
The Coastal GasLink pipeline, which was designed to transport natural gas from Western Canada to the Shell-led LNG Canada export facility currently nearing completion in Kitimat, B.C., was completed last fall.
TC Energy has not yet made a final investment decision on a potential Phase 2 of the project, which could see the construction of six additional compressor stations in order to double the capacity of Coastal GasLink without requiring additional pipeline.
The company confirmed Tuesday it is engaged in discussions to refinance a portion of its existing construction loan through private bond sales, though a spokesperson declined to disclose the size of the bond offering. The company said the proceeding is part of the "normal course" of post-construction project financing.
In the winter of 2020, protesters blockaded freight and passenger rail services across the country to show solidarity with the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs, whose traditional territory is crossed by Coastal GasLink and who opposed the project.
All 20 of the elected Indigenous groups along the 670-km pipeline route supported the Coastal GasLink project, and 17 out of 20 signed agreements with TC Energy to acquire a 10 per cent equity stake in the pipeline.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 4, 2024.
TC Energy shareholders approve spinoff, creation of South Bow pipelines business
Amanda Stephenson, The Canadian Press
TC Energy Corp. shareholders have voted in favour of spinning off the company's crude oil pipelines business.
Shareholders at the Calgary-based company's annual meeting Tuesday endorsed the company's plan, announced last July, to split into two separate publicly traded companies.
The plan will see TC Energy look more like a utility company, with a focus on natural gas infrastructure as well as nuclear, pumped hydro energy storage and new low-carbon energy opportunities.
The company's crude oil pipelines, including the critical Keystone pipeline system, will become part of a new liquids pipeline business called South Bow.
South Bow will be headquartered in Calgary with an office in Houston. It will be led by Bevin Wirzba, the current executive vice-president for TC Energy's natural gas and liquids pipelines business.
At Tuesday's annual meeting, TC Energy CEO François Poirier said separating the company's lines of business will allow for faster growth.
"As two separate entities, each company will have the ability to focus on their distinct strategies and opportunity sets, delivering essential energy that the world relies upon," Poirier said.
The spinoff plan is the result of a two-year strategic review by TC Energy, in which the company considered other options including the potential sale of the oil pipelines business.
The company has been under scrutiny by analysts and credit rating services for its significant debt load as well as for cost overruns on the Coastal GasLink pipeline project, which was completed in the fall of 2023.
Spinning off the oil pipelines business, which has long-term committed contracts with oil shippers, will give South Bow the chance to use its robust cash flows to pay down debt and enhance shareholder returns, while TC Energy will become a growth-oriented company focused on natural gas.
TC Energy — which has natural gas transportation infrastructure in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico — is bullish on the future of the commodity, in particular the potential for growth spurred by demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG).
"Make no mistake, natural gas will be central to the world's energy future," Poirier said.
In addition, by offering a pure-play natural gas and low-carbon investment opportunity, TC Energy believes it can attract a wider set of investors than it could before the spinoff.
In a note to clients Tuesday, TD Cowen analyst Linda Ezergailis said the new South Bow is expected to work towards enhancing the value of its pipeline network by increasing capacity on under-utilized portions of the system, as well as increasing pipeline connectivity to additional receipt and delivery points.
She said she believes the new TC Energy will be well-positioned to play a key role in enabling energy transition and reducing global emissions, while ensuring reliability for growing energy demand.
"We view the successful spinoff vote as a significant milestone on executing strategic priorities, including improving leverage metrics," she said.
As part of the spinoff arrangement, TC Energy shareholders will receive, in exchange for each share, a new TC Energy common share along with 0.2 of a South Bow common share.
The spinoff is expected to close in the second half of this year.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 4, 2024.
Thursday, June 06, 2024
In desperate need for more Arctic tankers, Novatek sends 200 of its engineers to shipyard
According to newspaper Kommersant, Russia's biggest producer of LNG has decided to move 200 workers from its natural gas field in far northern Gydan Peninsula to the Zvezda Yard outside Vladivostok.
Novatek’s grand pIans for liquified natural gas (LNG) production in the Arctic are crumbling under the weight of international sanctions.
The company appears paralysed in its Arctic LNG 2 project, and the construction of a new fleet of ice-class LNG carriers has almost come to a halt.
The company that is headed by Putin’s companion Leonid Mikhelson has now reportedly decided to move up to 200 of its engineers and workers to the Zvezda Yard. The work force is to help speed up the building of two LNG carriers currently under construction at the yard.
The workers will be moved from Novatek’s major natural gas field at Utrenneye in the Gydan Peninsula. At the Zvezda Yard, they are believed to engage mostly in electric installation works and test and commissioning, Kommersant reports.
Russian industry is currently experiencing a rapidly growing work force deficit triggered by the departure of men to the frontline and the Kremlin’s introduction of war economy.
The additional 200 workers at Zvezda could cover a labor shortage at the yard.
Novatek might also have decided to move the workers away from Gydan following the standstill at the Arctic LNG 2. The project that is built to be able to produce almost 20 million tons of LNG per year is today paralysed by sanctions.
The first of Novatek’s projected three Arctic LNG 2 production units in August 2023 arrived in Utrenneye, Gydan Peninsula. Photo: Belokamenka51 at VK
Sources affiliated with the plans argue that the 200 workers from Novatek will allow Zvezda to complete one tanker before the end of 2024 and another in 2025.
When in operation, the two carriers are believed to enable Novatek to ship up to 2 million tons of LNG per year to the market.
It remains a open question what will happen with the additional 13 tankers projected built by Zvezda. Novatek also ordered six tankers from Hanwha Ocean, the South Korean yard formerly known as Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering.
The Sergei Vitte is one of the Arc7 LNG carriers under construction at Zvezda Yard. Photo: sskzvezda.ru
Wednesday, May 29, 2024
First LNG Tugboat with Hybrid System Goes Into Operation in Singapore
A new technological highlight has been in regular operation in the port of Singapore since mid-May 2024: JMS Sunshine, the world's first LNG tug powered by a hybrid system with mtu gas engines from Rolls-Royce. Seatrium Limited, a leading engineering solutions provider to the global offshore and marine industry is the designer, builder and operator of the new 29-metre, 65-tonne bollard pull tug. The Port of Singapore has committed to the Maritime R&D Roadmap 2030 with the aim of making it environmentally friendly and reducing energy consumption.
Rolls-Royce has supplied two 16-cylinder mtu Series 4000M55RN gas engines and the gas regulating unit (GRU) for the harbour tug. Chiam Toon Chong, Technical Superintendent, Seatrium Marine Services, acknowledged: “The handling of mtu engines is straight-forward, and user-friendly. Additionally, spare part availability and service support is excellent for the operation of tugs.”
"We are proud that we were able to contribute to Seatrium's innovative project with our gas engines. The workboat market is one of our strategic business areas. The mtu engines were selected because they meet the demanding requirements of harbour tug operations - in terms of reliability, ease of operation, dynamic engine behaviour and low emissions," said Chew Xiang Yu, Head of Rolls-Royce Power Systems' civil marine business in Asia.
The mtu gas engines are already well below the limit values of current emission guidelines (such as IMO III) without exhaust gas aftertreatment. The particulate mass is below the detection limit and they emit only small quantities of nitrogen oxides.
The hybrid system is particularly suitable for the load profile of the harbour tug: it enables very precise manoeuvring and a strong bollard pull when the full power is used. To achieve maximum thrust, the total power of the two azimuth stern thrusters is 4000 kilowatts. This is achieved by adding to the 1492 kilowatts each supplied by the mtu gas engines and 500 kilowatts of electric motor power on each shaft. The tug is equipped with a battery capacity of 904 kilowatt hours. The battery power is used to absorb peak loads, for example during acceleration, to manoeuvre purely electrically in port and to supply the ship on board with electricity.
11 ships worldwide sailing with mtu gas engines Rolls-Royce's Power Systems division has already received orders for mtu gas engines as propulsion systems and on-board gensets for a total of eleven ships worldwide. These include ferries, tugs and government vessels. Two catamarans belonging to the Doeksen shipping company have been operating reliably with mtu gas engines on the North Sea in the Wadden Sea nature reserve since 2021. The Richmond ferry has been operating a commuter service on the Lake Constance drinking water reservoir in southern Germany since 2023. Operators and passengers are delighted: the engines are particularly quiet, produce no vibrations, no unpleasant odours and no black smoke.
The products and services herein described in this press release are not endorsed by The Maritime Executive.
Monday, May 27, 2024
Eight Ports in the British Isles Get Electric Ship Charging Stations
Port of Heysham is one of eight seaports that will receive the upgrades (Peel Ports file image)
The UK’s second largest port operator, Peel Ports Group, has announced plans to establish the first green shipping corridor between the UK and Ireland. This is part of a artnership between the port operator and the marine tech company NatPower Marine. The collaboration will see NatPower Marine develop the UK’s first commercial electric charging network to support electric propulsion and cold ironing (shore power).
The charging infrastructure will require an estimated investment of $127 million and will be delivered across all eight UK and Ireland ports operated by Peel Ports Group. The masterplan of the infrastructure also includes electric car, van and truck chargers for commercial electric vehicles passing through the ports.
This investment in the UK is part of a $3.8 billion global charging network, planed by NatPower Marine for 120 port locations worldwide by 2030.
“NatPower Marine is investing to deploy the largest global network of charging ports to help resolve the ‘chicken and egg conundrum’ facing this industry: shipping lines cannot electrify vessels if port charging infrastructure is not available, and ports are unable to raise capital for charging infrastructure without certainty of demand from shipping lines,” said Stefano Sommadossi, CEO NatPower Marine.
With over 3,000 vessels crossing the Irish Sea every year, emitting 230,000 tons of CO2 and 20,000 tons of nitrous oxide, this partnership may drastically reduce emissions.
The first Irish Sea routes identified in the project proposals include Belfast-Heysham and Dublin-Birkenhead. The small Port of Heysham in Lancashire is on track to become the UK’s first net zero port, according to Peel Ports, and the charging infrastructure will support this goal. Currently, the port is leading in reduction of carbon emissions of its landside plant, equipment and vehicles by up to 90 percent. The port claims that all its vehicles, plant equipment, forklift trucks and ancillary equipment are now operating on either electricity or biofuels.
“The proposals presented as part of this partnership are potentially game-changing, and fully support our ambitions to become a net-zero port operator by 2040,” said Claudio Veritiero, CEO of Peel Ports Group.
In the past two years, the UK government has significantly invested in green shipping corridors, an initiative the UK led as part of the Clydebank Declaration during COP 26 in November 2021. Last month, the UK government launched the fifth round of Clean Maritime Demonstration Competition (CMDC 5), with funding of over $900,000 available for start-ups looking to establish green shipping routes to and from the UK.
Putting Methanol Through its "Paces," With a Focus on Safety
With more than 90% of global GDP now covered by a net zero target, the growing consensus to tackle climate change is matched only by a deepening understanding of the immensity of the challenge. For the shipping industry, there’s a real urgency to reverse the 20% emissions growth of the last decade and begin the essential but expensive task of decarbonizing the global fleet, 98.8% of which, according to a 2023 report from UNCTAD, still runs on fossil fuels.
The first challenge is to overcome the huge inertia of an aging fleet, with an average ship age of 22.2 years. With over half the global fleet older than 15 years, many ships are either too old to retrofit or too young to scrap. Over time, the replacement cycle will change the fleet’s emissions profile, as shipowners place orders for newbuilds that can run on cleaner fuels such as LNG, ammonia and methanol.
The clock is now ticking to accelerate that pace of change, particularly as the IMO’s enhanced GHG strategy for 2030 includes stricter targets to cut the carbon intensity of international shipping by 40%. Shipowners must act soon to transition their fleets because without clear investment signals the availability of candidate fuels will lag demand, creating further hesitancy and potentially derailing the transition.
Any new fuel, however, must be put through its PACES to meet the industry’s expectations on Performance, Availability, Cost, Emissions and Safety. Here, methanol has a head start because in terms of performance it’s already a proven fuel, with methanol storage available in over 100 ports around the world. Its key advantage is that it’s an easy substitute for diesel because it is a liquid fuel under ambient conditions making it easy to transport, store and bunker using familiar procedures. The cost of converting diesel engines to methanol dual-fuel vessels and installing the land-based infrastructure is significantly lower than other alternative fuels that require pressurization or cryogenics.
Fossil-based methanol (known as grey or brown methanol, depending on whether derived from gas or coal) burns cleaner and delivers a tank-to-wake CO2 reduction of about 7% compared to diesel but performs worse on a well-to-wake basis. However, blue or green methanol (made from renewable biomass or via an electrolysis process), while expensive and still only available in limited quantities, are chemically identical to conventional methanol, which means there are no future compatibility issues or further engine investment required by shipping companies, allowing a seamless, gradual transition to meet future well-to-wake emissions rules.
A safe transition
As a low flashpoint fuel, methanol does impose additional safety considerations in some instances e.g., during bunkering operation, which is the primary reason ABS decided to publish the first Technical Advisory on methanol bunkering providing guidance on the technical and operational challenges that must be overcome.
The main methods of methanol bunkering are truck tanker-to-ship, barge/ ship-to-ship and land storage tank-to-ship. For smaller vessels that may run on methanol fuel cells, it’s possible to provide the fuel in portable tanks.
Because of the low flashpoint and toxic properties, hoses and connections must be approved for methanol use and inspected periodically in compliance with the latest version of MSC.1-Circ. 1621. The fittings and connections should be cleaned, tight fitted, quick release and a self-sealing type. Seals are to be in good condition, pressure-tested and hoses are to be recertified according to the above IMO circular. Any mobile facilities such as tank trucks, rail cars and portable tanks should conform to meet ISO and other standards for handling methanol fuel.
For port operations, it’s important to verify compatibility, transfer rate, vapor return arrangements, communications, Emergency Shut Down (ESD), and emergency procedures. The responsibilities and procedures are to be agreed upon and confirmed in writing prior to starting bunkering – a checklist is a good way to confirm compatibility and capture this information and ABS Technical Advisory includes sample checklists to help with this work.
It’s important the receiving and supply barge if applicable are safely moored and adequately fendered, with all due attention to tidal and weather conditions not to mention surges from passing ships. Hoses should have sufficient slack to allow for any expected relative motion and the manifold arrangements, spill containment systems, and hose connections for the supply source and the receiving ship should be confirmed including emergency release (hose breakaway) arrangements.
Spark aware
Because of the low flash point, it’s important to be particularly careful about potential sources of ignition. Road truck/ISO tanks and ship should be earthed with a bonding wire to protect from static electricity. Materials should be non-sparking, the risks of electrical arcing addressed, and careful consideration needs to be given to make sure both the supply source and receiving ship don’t introduce any source of ignition into any hazardous area.
Vapor return needs to be carefully managed to ensure systems are compatible and have sufficient space, given that the estimated volume of vapor is 1: 1.4 times more than the cargo space volume it replaces. And both the supply source and receiving ship need to have inerting and purging capabilities. It’s obviously vital to have firefighting and emergency procedures in place.
Safety is rooted in good communication. There needs to be compatible communications between the supply source and the ship so both parties can monitor the bunkering operation, and, if necessary, initiate an emergency shutdown.
A ship-to-shore link is to be provided to enable automatic and manual ESD of bunkering operations. The ESD should be capable of activation from both the bunker receiving ship and the bunker supplier, and the signal should simultaneously activate the ESD on both sides of the transfer operation with no release of liquid or vapor during this procedure. An ESD might be activated for a wide range of reasons, including an overflow in receiving tank, high tank pressure, a leak, vapor or fire detection, loss of ventilation in double wall piping, excessive ship movement, abnormal pressures in the transfer system or power failure.
At the manifold connection a manually operated stop valve and a remotely operated shutdown valve are to be provided. This remote valve is to be of the fail-close type, which closes on loss of actuating power, and be capable of manual closure and to have indication of the valve position. There are multiple industry standards and regulations that apply to emergency shutdown and related safety systems, and these are listed in our Advisory, along with additional ABS recommendations. These include that systems are designed to accommodate surge pressures and that manual operation of the ESD system is possible by a single control on the bridge, safe control station and at least two strategic positions around the bunker manifold area.
The human factor
Crew training and certification are essential for safe methanol bunkering, with the minimum requirements outlined in the IGF Code and the Interim Guidelines for the Safety of Ships Using Methyl/Ethyl Alcohol as Fuel or the Seafarers’ Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) Code for IBC Code Vessels. Formal training should include basic handling, including scenarios for leakage, spillage and fire. Personnel should understand methanol’s properties, its operational risks and hazards, fire prevention and firefighting protocols, and importantly, clearly understand their roles and responsibilities, particularly in the event of an emergency. Only those with the proper training should be allowed into the designated safety zone for the bunkering operation, which is an ignition-free area with clearly defined boundaries, typically set by a risk assessment and determined by regulations.
For shipowners considering the fuel mix of their fleet, methanol passes the PACES test. It’s a proven fuel, with existing bunkering infrastructure in some ports and more being built. Making sure this bridging fuel is handled safely, particularly during bunkering, is going to be key to the ongoing displacement of fossil fuels in the global fleet. This Technical Advisory should help with this effort as the maritime industry steams towards IMO2030 and beyond.
Quaim Choudhury is Senior Managing Principal Engineer at ABS.
MOL to Expand Wind-Assisted Propulsion After Validation on First Vessel
Shofu Maru was the first vessel fitted with MOL's rigid sail and validation results were released (MOL)
Mitsui O.S.K. Lines (MOL) is moving forward expanding its use of wind-assisted propulsion as part of its overall decarbonization efforts. They have test results after approximately 18 months of operation of the first vessel fitting with their rigid sail and now report they are also considering other technologies. In addition to new constructions, they are also pursuing their first retrofit of the Wind Challenger rigid sail to a bulker.
The move to expand the use of wild-assisted propulsion comes as the technology continues to draw strong interest from shipowners and operators. The International Windship Association recently said that there are a total of 37 vessels with wind-propulsion installed and in service. This represents a doubling over the past 12 months with a total of 22 installations and wind-ready ships delivered. With the emergence of the EU Fit for 55 effort and the IMO set to adopt its GHG strategies mapped out in 2023, the association expects wind propulsion installations will continue to grow.
MOL says it has accumulated extensive operational technology to pursue wind propulsion technology. The group plans to launch 25 vessels equipped with the Wind Challenger by 2030, increasing to 80 by 2035. MOL is scheduled to deploy its second vessel, a 64,000 dwt bulker, with the Wind Challenger in June and today reported a total of six additional newbuilding bulk carriers, 42,000 dwt and 58,000 dwt, and one multipurpose vessel.
The Wind Challenger is a rigid sail made of fiberglass with a width of about 50 feet and a maximum height of about 175 feet. Its sections are nested so that it can retract to a fraction of its operating height to reduce air draft. The mounting point is forward, on the bow, and well clear of the cargo hatches. MOL working with Oshima Shipbuilding has been perfecting the design and preparing it for commercialization since 2018.
MOL will retrofit the sail for the first time in 2025 to an in-service bulker (MOL)
MOL reports three bulkers have been ordered from Oshima Shipbuilding Co. with preparations underway for three additional contracts. The first three bulkers, due in the second half of 2026 and the first half of 2027, will each be fitted with the Wind Challenger rigid sail and it is considering also adding up to three wind rotors per vessel manufactured by Anemoi Marine Technologies on some of these vessels. MOL expects the combined use of both technologies to reduce fuel and GHG emissions by an average of about 15-28 percent per year. The other three bulkers, so far, are planned to have just the Wind Challenger. MOL previously also agreed to install two Norse rotors on a 200,000 dwt bulker operated for Vale with that installation expected to be completed this year.
MOL Drybulk has also decided to install two Ventfoils, a foldable and autonomous unit for wind-assisted ship propulsion, manufactured by EconoWind. The technology will be installed on one of its new multipurpose vessels (17,500 dwt) slated for delivery in 2025 and operation under a time charter.
Next year, MOL also plans the first retrofit of a Wind Challenger to an in-service bulker. The first of its third-generation bulkers, the Kurotakisan Maru III (89,999 dwt), which entered service in December 2021 and carries coal for J-Power will add the rigid sail. The retrofitting of the Wind Challenger aboard this second vessel is expected to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by about five percent on a Japan-Australia voyage and about eight percent on a Japan-North America West Coast voyage, compared to a conventional vessel of the same type.
Recently, MOL also released data from its first vessel using the Wind Challenger, the Shofu Maru (100,000 dwt), which entered service in October 2022. The vessel has completed seven round-trip voyages to Japan mainly from Australia, Indonesia, and North America operating as a dedicated coal carrier for Tohoku Electric.
Daily fuel consumption over the 18 months since the vessel entered service was reduced by up to 17 percent. On average the fuel saving has been between five and eight percent per voyage. MOL notes that the data was calculated using a method verified by Lloyd’s Register of Shipping and that the fuel saving during operation depends largely on wind conditions. The Wind Challenger does not produce thrust when the vessel encounters a headwind.
With more than 90% of global GDP now covered by a net zero target, the growing consensus to tackle climate change is matched only by a deepening understanding of the immensity of the challenge. For the shipping industry, there’s a real urgency to reverse the 20% emissions growth of the last decade and begin the essential but expensive task of decarbonizing the global fleet, 98.8% of which, according to a 
