Connect with us

Published

on

The global industry is responsible for about 3.1% of global CO2 emissions, and that number goes up when you consider black carbon emissions, as the soot and unburned hydrocarbons have a 20-year global warming potential (GWP) of 4,470, and a 100-year GWP of 1,055–2,240. Yes, our Amazon purchases and salads come with a carbon debt.

So what is Maersk doing? It has ordered 8 post-Panamax container ships able to carry 15,000 containers each from South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries, with delivery scheduled for 2024. The ships will be able to burn methanol or bunker fuel in their engines. The methanol is supposed to be carbon-neutral.

However, Maersk runs over 700 ships, so the 8 ships powered by methanol drive trains represent about 1% of its fleet. Not exactly getting rid of bunker fuel rapidly.

Methanol is interesting as a fuel choice. It’s made from natural gas via one of the steam reformation processes, similar to hydrogen in that regard. About a ton of CO2 is produced for every ton of methanol that’s produced, and right now 0% of that is captured. When a ton of methanol is burned, another 0.6 tons of CO2 is emitted. Maersk’s press release talks about carbon-neutral methanol, which suggests using flue carbon capture and follow-on sequestration of the CO2 produced in the steam reformation process.

Bubble diagram of scale of CO2 problem versus capture and use

Bubble diagram of scale of CO2 problem versus capture and use by author

As I’ve published extensively on global carbon capture and sequestration schemes, I’m confident in saying that approaching 0% of CO2 from methanol manufacturing from natural gas and burning as a fuel will be captured, used, and sequestered in the future.

The energy density of methanol is interesting too. The energy density of bunker fuels is about the same as the diesel cited in the linked source. Methanol requires a lot more space and weight on a ship for the same kilometers traveled than traditional fuels.

Running at the cruising speed of 20–25 knots, a Panamax container ship will use about 63,000 gallons of marine fuel every single day. Assuming US gallons (they are smaller, so this is the conservative choice), that’s about 240 tons of fuel a day with diesel or bunker oil. Freighter ships average 40–50 days of travel, although some of that is at lower speeds where fuel consumption drops dramatically. Assuming 40 days, that’s close to 10,000 tons of fuel.

For methanol, basically double that to 20,000 tons of fuel, and comparably less cargo space. Methanol from natural gas with no carbon capture costs over double what bunker fuel does too, over $1 per gallon compared to around $0.50 per gallon.

That means that the same journey will cost 4 times as much in fuel costs, and emit a bunch of CO2 as well.

What methanol does provide is a cleaner-burning fuel. Bunker fuel is nasty stuff, and ships typically get the cheapest, lowest grade, barely refined crap that they can buy. Black carbon — soot and unburned hydrocarbons — is a major pollutant and has an enormous global warming potential as noted above. Vastly less black carbon from methanol than bunker fuel. Ditto sulfur, which is another noxious substance from ships with acid rain implications. Finally, there is high global warming potential nitrous oxide, which is much lower than with bunker fuel.

Right now ships have scrubbers that capture a bunch of the sulfur, particulates, and nitrous oxide, at least when they are operating. Having spoken to an engineer who designs, builds, and installs them on ships, a big focus is on getting the smokestack emissions to look white, like water vapor. The appearance of cleanliness, if not actual cleanliness.

CO2 still gets emitted, however. The CO2 per unit of methanol burned is about 40% of bunker fuel, however, since you need to burn twice as much of it to get the same energy, it’s about 80% of emissions. This isn’t a CO2 saving that’s worth writing home about if the methanol is made from natural gas. It’s more of a value proposition if the CO2 is captured from flue gas or the air or vegetation, but that leads to the very high cost of “green,” synthetic methanol.

It’s possible to manufacture methanol that’s green-ish. You could capture CO2 from somewhere, crack water with electricity to create the hydrogen, and then merge them into methanol. I went deep on this a couple of years ago when looking at Carbon Engineering, a direct air capture fig leaf for various fossil fuel companies.

Table of green methanol manufacturing

Table of green methanol manufacturing by author

That turns out to be close to $3 per gallon solely for manufacturing cost in the best case scenario, compared to the just over $1 for natural gas-sourced methanol. Instead of 4x costs for a journey for fuel, it would be 12x costs.

Let’s put this in perspective. Today with the cheapest bunker fuel that you can get, fuel costs represent 50% to 60% of operational costs. Methanol from natural gas without carbon capture makes that about 80%. Methanol from natural gas with carbon capture would make it approach 90%. Green methanol makes it well over 90%.

So will the shipping world sit up and take notice of Maersk buying 8 methanol powered ships? Yes, they will. They know the math and economics much better than I do, as they live it every day. They know that the 8 ships represent a fig leaf for Maersk. They will note that the ships are dual fuel, able to run on methanol or on bunker fuel, and will know that outside of demonstration runs, Maersk will operate them entirely on bunker fuel for the vast majority of their service life.

They will likely be glad that Maersk is doing PR for the global shipping industry. And there won’t be a big lineup for South Korea’s Hyundai Heavy Industries services to build more of them at 10–15% markups on normal ship construction costs.

Long-haul shipping remains a hard problem for decarbonization. Maersk’s purchase isn’t going to address it. The roughly $150 million extra that it paid for the 8 ships is about 0.4% of Maersk’s annual revenues, or about 1.5% of its expected 2021 profits. This is in the range of expenditures by fossil fuel majors on carbon capture, which is to say PR fig leaf territory, and the ships will undoubtedly run on bunker fuel, not methanol, for the vast majority of their freight miles.

Featured image credit: Maersk

 

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.

 

 


Advertisement



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla offers free supercharging to clear out Foundation Cybertruck inventory

Published

on

By

Tesla offers free supercharging to clear out Foundation Cybertruck inventory

Tesla is now offering free lifetime supercharging for Foundation-series Cybertrucks purchased as inventory vehicles, suggesting that it’s having a tough time getting rid of the highly-priced limited edition vehicles.

Tesla has often introduced vehicles with a limited-edition early series, such as the Founders’ and Signature series for early Roadsters, Model S and Model X. It didn’t do the same for the more everyman-focused Model 3 and Y, but brought back the practice for the Cybertruck with the Foundation series.

The Foundation series was a fully-loaded early model, with a $20k markup from base prices and including several options by default. It started delivery at the end of November, 2023.

The vehicle was selling well enough, and while Tesla’s limited editions usually only last perhaps a couple months and a few thousand vehicles, the Foundation series was extended for almost a year, with Tesla only starting to take non-Foundation configurations this October. As a result, Tesla sold somewhere on the order of 30,000+ Foundation series Cybertrucks, far more than its previous limited editions.

But eventually the well of customers willing to pay over $100k for a truck that was originally announced at a $40k base price seems to have ran dry, and Tesla is now having to figure out creative ways to get those vehicles out of inventory.

Recently, Electrek reported that Tesla is even going to the lengths of buffing Foundation series badges off of trucks and then sending them to Canada to sell them as non-Foundation trucks.

Even that, however, seems not to have been enough, as Tesla is now taking the limited amount of Cybertrucks left in inventory and offering free lifetime supercharging for those who purchase them – a perk that original Foundation series trucks did not get.

Lifetime supercharging is an old perk, which Tesla originally offered in its early days, both as an incentive to encourage purchase and because it was easier than building a payment system around a network that they were just building out. The perk went through various iterations, but it eventually became too much, and Tesla ended the free lifetime supercharging era in 2018.

However, it recently brought the perk back to clear out Model S inventory among a steep decline in Model S sales, showing that Tesla is willing to reopen the Pandora’s Box of free supercharging if circumstances call for it. And now two weeks after doing that for Model S vehicles, it’s also doing it for Cybertrucks.

You can find these vehicles on Tesla’s inventory website, and search for vehicles near you. Currently, there are 7 available here in Southern California – not that many, but it is just one region of the country.

To qualify, you must purchase a new Foundation Series Cybertruck after December 27, 2024 – which means original Foundation series owners who were first in line to spend $120k on this truck will not retroactively gain this benefit. The free supercharging perk is tied to your Tesla account and is not transferable to another person or vehicle.

You still have to pay idle and congestion fees at Superchargers, and you can’t use the car to run a taxi service (as the original Tesloop shuttle service did – which was one of the reasons the original perk went away).

Finally, a Cybertruck purchased this way is not eligible for the Powershare voucher included with other Foundation Series trucks. So, it looks like you’re swapping one perk for another (though Powershare can end up costing a lot more than that, for certain installations).

Electrek’s Take

This is another sign that Tesla isn’t seeing quite as much demand as once expected for the polarizing vehicle.

After it was first unveiled in 2019, the Cybertruck managed to tally over 250k pre-orders in less than a week, later reaching a peak of potentially 2 million reservations according to crowdsourced data.

But when the truck hit the road, things didn’t go exactly as planned. The vehicle came out late and over budget, also missing some of the specs that were originally promised. The first available “Foundation Series” models started at $100k – a far cry from the promised entry-level $40k. It’s now available at a base price of $79k – but a promised future $61k base RWD model was recently removed that from Tesla’s website.

Despite all that, it’s still the best-selling electric pickup in the US and the third best-selling EV with a very high average transaction price, bringing in a good chunk of change for the company.

But nevertheless, demand seems much lower than the sky-high expectations for the vehicle. That ~2 million vehicle backlog only lasted for about 30,000 vehicles, when Tesla started allowing orders without a reservation in October.

Tesla also recently shut down its Cybertruck line for 3 days, and didn’t make any public comment as to why. Various theories were advanced as to why, but during a time where Cybertruck sales don’t seem to be going as planned despite it being a critical time for the company in terms of deliveries, a sudden shutdown is in suspect.

But given the Cybertruck’s polarizing design, high price, and its clear association with Elon Musk who is becoming more and more distasteful by the day, it’s not a big surprise that there are fewer customers for the vehicle than projections might have suggested 5 years ago.


Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Dodge Charger EV will officially launch overseas as the ‘World’s First’ electric muscle car

Published

on

By

Dodge Charger EV will officially launch overseas as the 'World's First' electric muscle car

The Dodge Charger Daytona EV will live up to its name as the “World’s first and only electric muscle car” as it hits new markets outside North America. Dodge’s new electric Charger is officially headed overseas as the brand eyes a bigger share of the global market.

When will Dodge launch the new Charger EV overseas?

In March, Dodge finally took the sheets off the all-electric Charger Daytona EV, claiming it retains the title of “World’s quickest and most powerful muscle car.” Well, the electric Charger will now get its chance to prove it.

Muscle car fans in markets outside North America will soon be able to buy the new Dodge Charger EV. Dodge maker Stellantis confirmed to CarScoops that the Charger Electric will launch in overseas markets starting next year.

“The Dodge Charger will also be sold in the Middle East beginning in the second half of 2025,” a spokesperson said. They added, “It will be available through importers in Europe,” which will also start later next year.

Dodge will introduce its full Charger lineup overseas, including EV and gas-powered models. The vehicle will also be available in two- and four-door versions. However, we still don’t know which powertrain will arrive first.

Dodge-Charger-EV-overseas
2024 Dodge Charger Daytona EV (Source: Stellantis)

In the US, the 2024 Dodge Charger Daytona EV is available in two options. Dodge opened orders for the base R/T model in August, starting at $59,995.

2024 Dodge Charger Daytona EV trim Horsepower 0 to 60 mph time Starting price*
Dodge Charger Daytona R/T 496 hp 4.7 seconds $59,995
Dodge Charger Daytona Scat Pack 670 hp 3.3 seconds $73,190
2024 Dodge Charger Daytona prices and specs in the US (*excluding a $1,995 destination fee)

Meanwhile, the high-performance Scat Pack trim costs $73,190. The 2024 Dodge Charger Daytona EV Scat Pack includes a Direct Connection Stage 2 upgrade straight from the factory, delivering up to 670 hp and 627 lb-ft of torque for “SRT-like performance.” It can accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.3 seconds.

Dodge-Charger-EV-overseas
2024 Dodge Charger Daytona EV Scat Pack (Source: Stellantis)

Dodge will follow up the EV model with two gas-powered models, a coupe and a sedan, set to arrive at dealerships next year.

The news comes after Stellantis confirmed in October that Ram’s first electric pickup, the Ram 1500 REV, will also launch overseas.

What do you think of the Dodge Charger Daytona EV? Can the electric muscle car make an impression in overseas markets? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Chinese solar giant Trina sells its Texas factory a week after it opens [update]

Published

on

By

Chinese solar giant Trina sells its Texas factory a week after it opens [update]

Trina Solar has sold its Texas solar panel factory as the US scrutinizes Chinese companies cashing in on Inflation Reduction Act tax breaks.

December 30, 2024: FREYR announced on December 24 that it had closed its acquisition of Trina Solar’s 5-gigawatt (GW), 1.35 million-square-foot solar panel factory in Wilmer, Texas. The purchase finalizes FREYR’s transformation from a European battery company into a US solar company.


November 8, 2024: FREYR, which was founded in Norway and moved its headquarters to Georgia, paid $340 million for Trina’s factory. Trina will retain a minority ownership stake in FREYR, reports Bloomberg. The factory is set to reach full production by 2025, with firm contracts already locking in 30% of its estimated output for US customers.

The two companies announced the acquisition on November 6, the same day that Kamala Harris conceded the US election to Donald Trump – and a mere week after Trina opened the factory. On July 31, senators introduced S.4873, a bipartisan bill aimed at stopping Chinese companies from cashing in on US tax credits meant to boost American solar manufacturing. Chinese companies are expected to face even tighter trade restrictions under the Trump administration.

As Electrek reported in August 2023, Changzhou-headquartered Trina Solar was one of five Chinese solar panel manufacturers that received a US Department of Commerce (DOC) tariff slap because the DOC ruled that the companies were dodging US tariffs on China-made goods by processing components in Southeast Asian countries before shipping their solar products to the US.

Daniel Barcelo, FREYR’s newly appointed CEO, said, “We are proud to be partnered with Trina Solar, a global manufacturing and solar technology leader. Domestic manufacturing capacity for solar and batteries is essential for energy transition and job creation.” Barcelo said in an interview, according to Bloomberg, that he feels confident that the newly acquired factory will qualify for the IRA manufacturing tax credit.

As Politico reported earlier this week about the Inflation Reduction Act’s 45X tax credit:

The 45X tax credit pays factory owners based on each component that’s produced. A solar module, for instance, can receive 7 cents a watt, or $70,000 per megawatt, though the payment will get smaller beginning in 2029.

Trina’s 5,000-megawatt Texas factory stands to receive $1.775 billion from 2025 through 2032 if it operates at a 78% utilization rate, according to Antoine Vagneur-Jones, head of trade and supply chains at BloombergNEF. At a 60% utilization rate, Trina would net more than $1 billion, he said.

FREYR says its next step is to build a 5 GW solar cell factory in the US, and site selection is already underway. The company plans to break ground in the second quarter of 2025, aiming for initial production in the second half of 2026. The new US-owned and operated solar cell factory will help solve a key bottleneck for developers, create up to 1,800 direct jobs, and meet local content requirements for US solar projects.


To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and you share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending