Maersk Delivers $150 Million PR Win For Shipping Industry With Methanol Ships Purchase
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 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 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.
We’ve heard it before, that Elon Musk doesn’t want Tesla to ever make an electric motorcycle. But the polarizing CEO has taken to social media to explain why he still says it will never happen.
As Musk confirmed, the issue isn’t that he doesn’t think Tesla could build an electric motorcycle, but rather that he doesn’t think they are safe to begin with.
He replied, “Never happening, as we can’t make motorcycles safe,” in response to an AI video about a fake Tesla motorcycle uploaded to his X platform (formerly Twitter).
Musk then referenced a previous story he has told several times about how he was nearly killed by a truck while riding a motorcycle in his youth.
Though he seemed to direct his feelings more towards street motorcycles. “Dirt bikes are safe if you ride carefully,” continued Musk, “as you can’t be smashed by a truck.”
Tesla’s own Autopilot features have long been criticized for their danger to motorcyclists, with several high-profile deaths caused by Tesla vehicles striking motorcycles while operating under Autopilot. Many have suggested that the company’s vision-focused self-driving setup confuses the more narrowly spaced paired tail lights on the back of cruiser motorcycles for a car farther in the distance, potentially explaining why Teslas have repeatedly rear-ended motorcyclists, with fatal results.
The electric motorcycle industry may not get a Tesla halo anytime soon, but it’s hardly standing still. Legacy brands like Honda, BMW, and Kawasaki are finally rolling out real production models, while companies such as Zero and LiveWire continue pushing the segment forward with higher performance and growing dealer support. Smaller companies like Ryvid have jumped to meet the demand for affordable commuter-focused motorcycles, while Asia’s giants such as Yadea and NIU are flooding the market with affordable scooters, driving global adoption far faster than in the US.
It appears that even without Tesla, electric motorcycling is expanding rapidly, innovating quickly, and attracting more riders every year.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Climate XChange’s Annual EV Raffle is back for the 10th year running – and for the first time ever, Climate XChange has two raffle options on the table! The nonprofit has helped lucky winners custom-order their ideal EVs for the past decade. Now you have the chance to kick off your holiday season with a brand new EV for as little as $100.
About half of the raffle tickets have been sold so far for each of the raffles – you can see the live ticket count on Climate XChange’s homepage – so your odds of winning are better than ever.
But don’t wait – raffle ticket sales end on December 8!
Climate XChange is working hard to help states transition to a zero-emissions economy. Every ticket you buy supports this mission while giving you a chance to drive home your dream EV.
Here’s how Climate XChange’s 10th Annual Raffle works:
The Luxury Raffle
- Grand Prize: The winner can choose any EV on the market, fully customized up to $120,000. This year, you can split the prize between two EVs if the total is $120,000 or less.
- Taxes covered: This raffle comes with no strings – Climate XChange also pays all of the taxes.
- Runner-up prizes: Even if you don’t win the Grand Prize, you still have a chance at the 2nd prize of $12,500 and the 3rd prize of $7,500.
- Ticket price: $250.
- Grand Prize Drawing: December 12, 2025.
- Only 5,000 tickets will be sold for the Luxury Raffle.
The Mini Raffle (New for 2025)
- Grand Prize: Choose any EV on the market, fully customized, up to $45,000. This is the perfect raffle if you’re ready to make the switch to an EV but aren’t in the market for a luxury model.
- Taxes covered: Climate XChange pays all the taxes on the Mini Raffle, too.
- Ticket price: $100.
- Only 3,500 tickets will be sold for the Mini Raffle.
Why it’s worth entering
For a decade, Climate XChange has run a raffle that’s fair, transparent, and exciting. Every ticket stub is printed, and the entire drawing is live-streamed, including the loading of the raffle drum. Independent auditors also oversee the process.
Plus, your odds on the Luxury and Mini Raffles are far better than most car raffles, and they’re even better if you enter both.
Remember that only 5,000 tickets will be sold for the Luxury Raffle and only 3,500 for the Mini Raffle, and around half of the available tickets have been sold so far, so don’t miss your shot at your dream EV!
Climate XChange personally works with the winners to help them build and order their dream EVs. The winner of the Ninth Annual EV Raffle built a gorgeous storm blue Rivian R1T.
How to enter
Go to CarbonRaffle.org/Electrek before December 8 to buy your ticket. Start dreaming up your perfect EV – and know that no matter what, you’re helping accelerate the shift to clean energy.
Who is Climate XChange?
Climate XChange (CXC) is a nonpartisan nonprofit working to help states pass effective, equitable climate policies because they’re critical in accelerating the transition to a zero-emissions economy. CXC advances state climate policy through its State Climate Policy Network (SCPN) – a community of more than 15,000 advocates and policymakers – and its State Climate Policy Dashboard, a leading data platform for tracking climate action across the US.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The CSC Monterey – one of the most charming little electric scooters on the US market – has dropped to a shockingly low $1,699, down from its original $2,899 MSRP. That’s nearly half off for a full-size, street-legal electric scooter that channels major Honda Super Cub energy, but without the gas, noise, or maintenance of the original.
CSC Motorcycles, based in Azusa, California, has a long history of importing and supporting small-format electric and gas bikes, but the Monterey has always stood out as the brand’s “fun vibes first” model. With its step-through frame, big retro headlight, slim bodywork, and upright seating position, it looks like something from a 1960s postcard – just brought into the modern era with lithium batteries and a brushless hub motor.
I had my first experience on one of these scooters back in 2021, when I reviewed the then-new model here on Electrek. I instantly fell in love with it and even got one for my dad. It now lives at his place and I think he gets just as much joy from looking at it in his garage as riding it.
You can see my review video below.
The performance is solidly moped-class, which is exactly what it’s designed for. A 2,400W rear hub motor pushes the Monterey up to a claimed 30 mph or 48 km/h (I found it really topped out at closer to 32 mph or 51 km/h), making it perfect for city streets, beach towns, and lower-speed suburban routes.
A 60V, roughly 1.6 kWh removable battery offers around 30–40 miles (48-64 km) of real-world range, depending on how aggressively you twist the throttle. It’s commuter-ready, grocery-run-ready, and campus-ready right out of the crate.
It’s also remarkably approachable. At around 181 pounds (82 kg), the Monterey is light for a sit-down scooter, making it easy to maneuver and park. There’s a small storage cubby, LED lighting, and the usual simple twist-and-go operation. And it comes with full support from CSC, a company that keeps a massive warehouse stocked with components and spare parts.
My sister has a CSC SG250 (I’m still trying to convert her to electric) and has gotten great support from them in the past, including from their mechanics walking her through carburetor questions over the phone. So I know from personal experience that CSC is a great company that stands behind its bikes.
But the real story here is the price. Scooters in this class typically hover between $2,500 and $4,500, and electric retro-style models often jump well above that.
At $1,699, the Monterey is one of the least expensive street-legal electric scooters available from a reputable US distributor, especially one that actually stocks parts and provides phone support.
If you’ve been curious about swapping a few car errands for something electric – or you just want a fun, vintage-styled runabout for getting around town – this is one of the best deals of the year.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024