An evaluation of the cost-competitiveness of maritime fuels - a comparison of heavy fuel oil and methanol (renewable and natural gas) in Iceland

被引:47
作者
Helgason, Rafn [1 ]
Cook, David [2 ]
Davidsdottir, Brynhildur [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Iceland, Fac Econ, Saemundargotu 2, IS-102 Reykjavik, Iceland
[2] Univ Iceland, Sch Engn & Nat Sci, Environm & Nat Resources, Saemundargotu 2, IS-102 Reykjavik, Iceland
关键词
Cost-competitiveness; Maritime fuel; Methanol; Heavy fuel oil; Externalities; Iceland; EMISSIONS; VALUATION; CAPTURE; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.007
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Alternative fuels have been proposed to ensure compliance with the increasingly more stringent emission standards proposed by the International Maritime Organization. In addition, the Icelandic government aims to introduce 10% renewable energy into the maritime sector before 2030, as well as eventually phasing out the use of heavy fuel oil (HFO). This paper conducts an extended cost-competitiveness comparison concerning three fuels: conventional methanol (NG), renewable methanol (RN) and HFO in the context of the Icelandic maritime sector. NG, RN and HFO are compared and evaluated under three scenarios (low, medium and high) for fuel prices between 2018 and 2050, and three scenarios (low, medium and high) for the external costs of fuel consumption. The methodology for estimating external costs involved Impact Pathway Analysis for emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxide, particulate matter and non-methane volatile organic compounds, and increasing shadow prices for the costs of greenhouse gas emissions. The application of this methodology provides new information about the economic and environmental trade-offs between the three fuel types. In our findings, excluding external costs, HFO emerges as the most cost-competitive option. However, when the externalities of fuel consumption are monetised and added to the fuel price, NG is the most cost-competitive option when high values are assumed for external costs. RN is the most expensive option according to all trajectories for fuel prices and external costs, not becoming more cost-competitive than HFO under any scenario until the 2040s. Therefore, on cost criteria alone, it is improbable that the fuel will contribute to Iceland's 10% renewable energy goal in the maritime sector before 2030 without subsidies or renewable marine fuel quotas. (C) 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:236 / 248
页数:13
相关论文
共 60 条
[1]   Costs and benefits of low-sulphur fuel standard for Baltic Sea shipping [J].
Antturi, Jim ;
Hanninen, Otto ;
Jalkanen, Jukka-Pekka ;
Johansson, Lasse ;
Prank, Marje ;
Sofiev, Mikhail ;
Ollikainen, Markku .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2016, 184 :431-440
[2]  
Askja Energy, 2016, WISH LIST IC EN IND
[3]  
Baldursson E. T., 2017, SULPHUR CONTENT MARI
[4]  
Bengtsson S., 2011, LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMEN
[5]  
Brandt J., 2011, Assessment of Health-Cost Externalities of Air Pollution at the National Level using the EVA Model System
[6]  
Bromber L., 2010, Methanol as an Alternative Transportation Fuel in the US: Options for Sustainable and/or Energy-Secure Transportation
[7]   Environmental assessment of marine fuels: liquefied natural gas, liquefied biogas, methanol and bio-methanol [J].
Brynolf, Selma ;
Fridell, Erik ;
Andersson, Karin .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2014, 74 :86-95
[8]  
Carbon Market Watch, 2020, HIGH TIM MAR SECT SA
[9]  
Cook D., 2020, RENEW ENERGY
[10]   An ecosystem services perspective for classifying and valuing the environmental impacts of geothermal power projects [J].
Cook, David ;
Daviosdottir, Brynhildur ;
Kristofersson, Daoi Mar .
ENERGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2017, 40 :126-138