An environmental lobby group is to call for LNG to be struck from a list of alternative low-carbon fuels at an upcoming IMO meeting about reducing shipping’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The proposal will likely spook a rapidly growing number of shipowners that have ordered LNG-fuelled newbuildings to meet the regulator’s environmental targets on ship emissions.

The Clean Shipping Coalition (CSC) has submitted a technical paper to the IMO stating that LNG’s methane content will accelerate total GHG emissions, despite it having a lower carbon content than heavy fuel oil.

Potent greenhouse gas

In its submission, the CSC said: “LNG, as a temporarily liquefied but naturally gaseous fossil fuel, is mostly made of methane. Methane is not only a fuel, but also a potent greenhouse gas in its own right.

“Despite a shorter lifespan (about 10 to 12 years), the direct climate impact of fossil methane is 30 times greater per gram emitted than that of CO2 in a one-hundred-year perspective. In other words, in 10 to 12 years methane warms the planet 30 times more than the equivalent amount of CO2 would warm it in 100 years.”

The group said LNG had “no long-term future” in helping shipping to reach global warming targets set out under the 2016 Paris Agreement on climate change.

It added that the IMO’s GHG strategy should instead focus on “genuine” low-carbon fuels.

The direct climate impact of fossil methane is 30 times greater per gram emitted than that of CO2 in a one-hundred-year perspective. In other words, in 10 to 12 years methane warms the planet 30 times more than the equivalent amount of CO2 would warm it in 100 years.

Clean Shipping Coalition

Its submission was backed by a study from Norwegian research and technology company SINTEF Ocean.

However, using LNG as a fuel has been shown to cut SOx and particulate emissions to negligible amounts, slash NOx by around 85% and reduce CO2 emissions by between 20% and 30%.

How much weight the CSC's view will carry at the IMO is questionable.

As an NGO, it can contribute to the IMO’s GHG debate but only holds observer status and has no decision-making power.

In addition, it has not persuaded a single IMO member state to back its call.

The submission will be considered in mid-November at a week-long Intersessional Working Group on Reducing Greenhouse Gasses to be held in London.

The working group will review a series of potential measures to achieve the IMO's goal of making a 40% reduction in shipping’s carbon footprint by 2030.

In a separate submission, flag states and industry associations have backed an approach under which each ship would seek to reduce emissions by developing enhanced operational measuresas part of their Marpol Ship Energy Efficiency Plan (SEEMP).

Its supporters include the world’s second-largest ship register, Liberia, leading flag state the Bahamas, and the global shipowners’ association, the International Chamber of Shipping.

The idea is that a ship’s SEEMP would contain a series of CO2 emission reduction measures unique to a vessel. The ship’s performance would then be checked under a mandatory external audit by flag administrations or classification societies against the vessel's carbon reduction goals.

It works in a similar way to how shipmanagement safety systems are currently audited for compliance with the International Ship Safety Management Code.

Ships could also rate their carbon output through an energy efficiency index, or EEXI.

In each instance, it would be up to the IMO and flag administrations to set the broad emissions goals for each ship.

Idea would encourage innovation

Backers of the SEEMP proposal said it would encourage innovation and allow owners to improve efficiency without being disadvantaged in the market or creating market distortions.

The scheme is in line with a separate submission from Japan, which is proposing that EEXI targets for individual ships would allow carbon-efficient ships to operate at faster speeds than low-efficiency ships.

Its idea is that low-efficiency ships would be forced to slow down to meet their EEXI rating. That would make them less attractive in the charter market and encourage their replacement with more efficient ships.

As reported by TradeWinds, Greece is proposing that tankers and bulkers should reduce their power by a half and containerships by two thirds.

“Greece’s proposal is simple, transparent, easily enforceable and accommodates sectoral specificities without distorting competition,” Union of Greek Shipowners president Theodore Veniamis said.