Earlier this year industry organisations promoting liquefied natural gas as a maritime fuel commissioned and published a study on the climate benefits of LNG for ships. The study claims up to 21% GHG savings on a well-to-wake basis if ships use LNG over alternative fossil fuels.
The research was undertaken by the consultancy Thinkstep. Following its publication, Dr Elizabeth Lindstad, chief scientist at the SINTEF Ocean research organisation in Norway, reached out to T&E with her commentary on the Thinkstep study.
In her commentary, Dr Lindstad raises several issues with the methodology of the Thinkstep analysis and, based on the Sintef engine measurements, argues that in most cases LNG’s GHG footprint will actually be worse than that of MGO. T&E decided to publish this commentary in order to raise public and industry awareness of the dangers of a large scale shift to LNG in the maritime sector.
T&E's assessment of the impact of the IMO's draft Net-Zero Framework
Negotiators in London agreed for the first time on a framework that will require ships to switch away from fossil fuels, but the rules as they stand w...
Constance Dijkstra explains what needs to happen at the ongoing IMO negotiations