Container giant "tackles" emissions (pt 2)

A different container shipping giant - Maersk this time.

Their future big ships are dual fueled with Methanol as the second fuel
They claim Big Oil is not helping–


[It would seem the market is giving some signals to Maersk’s Christiansen.]

"Today, we buy our fuel from the oil companies. But they have not offered us any green methanol at a price point we can accept,” he told the Financial Times…

“Christiansen admitted to FT that the toxicity of e-methanol poses a safety risk and he does not expect green ammonia to be scalable until the end of the decade.”


That is totally unbelievable that big oil would not help.

Just a data-point - the newbuild orders of ULCVs (Ultra Large Container Vessels) being built by both Maersk and by CMA CGM are all dual-fueled. In addition, International Seaways (INSW) ordered three VLCCs with a dual-fuel option. Seems like, at least for the larger sizes, a second and cleaner fuel, is being factored in

What does ‘dual-fueled’ mean?


Means the vessel operates with two different fuels

  • in Maersk’s case, 1. Methanol and 2. Likely bunker fuel
  • in INSW’s case 1. LNG and 2. Bunker fuel
1 Like

“VLCC” is very large crude carrier. Interesting that ships carrying crude oil will adopt green energy fuels. I suppose they think its required. But ironic.

1 Like

The major risk of methanol is flammability. It’s a red label flammable liquid. Toxicity is a concern if you drink it; not a major problem to routine handling.

Ammonia is far more toxic if inhaled.


Here’s the International Seaways (INSW) announcement regarding the VLCCs –

Announced about 20 months ago. Ironically, each vessel’s initial customer is … an oil major, Shell.

1 Like