Prospective life cycle assessment of cost-effective pathways for achieving the FuelEU Maritime Regulation targets

To reduce environmental impacts from the shipping industry, the FuelEU Maritime Regulation has set a binding 80 % reduction target for well-to-wake (WTW) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. This article presents a prospective life cycle assessment (LCA) comparing the environmental impacts of e-ammonia, e-methanol, e-Fischer Tropsch (FT) diesel, and e-liquefied natural gas (LNG)—for maritime applications in Europe. In addition to e-fuels, traditional propulsion technologies using very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) and LNG are assessed, both with and without integrating ship-based carbon capture (SBCC) systems. Key factors considered include the impact of different production locations in Europe, electrolysis technology choices, and global climate policies. Beyond analysing the environmental footprints, the study examines the economic and externality costs associated with each fuel option, contextualizing these findings within the GHG mitigation targets set by the FuelEU Maritime regulation.The results indicate that e-ammonia, e-FT diesel, and e-methanol could meet the 2050 FuelEU Maritime target, but e-LNG and SBCCS could not. Although it is the most immature technology, e-ammonia could be the cheapest option with the lowest overall environmental impacts. E-LNG shows higher life cycle climate change impacts due to ship-level methane slip but has lower impacts across other environmental categories because of low NOx emissions. E-methanol has higher toxicity risks over the life cycle and higher costs.

January 1, 2025

Decentralized ammonia production via electric Haber–Bosch (Haber–Bosch 2.0) could support shipping, chemical manufacturing, and local fertilizer supply chains. Unlike conventional Haber–Bosch systems, Haber–Bosch 2.0 technologies operate at lower pressures (∼30–60 bar) and temperatures (∼400 °C), enabling smaller, modular ammonia systems powered by low-carbon electricity. However, its economic viability and environmental performance under diverse conditions remain unclear. Here, we apply techno-economic and environmental life cycle assessment using a novel, open-source framework to optimally design ∼13 000 grid-connected, hybrid, and off-grid electric Haber–Bosch configurations worldwide. Our results demonstrate that decentralized ammonia production costs are between €740–4100 tNH3−1, which is substantially higher compared to centralized ammonia production (∼300 tNH3−1 historically with recent spikes up to ∼€800 tNH3−1). Hybrid configurations exhibit the lowest costs (€740–2090 tNH3−1), particularly in regions with low grid electricity prices, low capital costs, and/or abundant renewables. However, their GHG emissions vary widely depending on the GHG intensity of the local grid. Off-grid systems exhibit the lowest life cycle GHG emissions (on average 0.70 tCO2-eq. tNH3−1), but demonstrate high costs (more than €1100 tNH3−1), driven by oversized renewables and energy storage media to enable continuous Haber–Bosch operation. Cost parity may be achieved by 2050 through technology learning, especially for hybrid systems (€325 tNH3−1). To realize this potential and secure low-carbon fertilizer supply, policymakers should; (1) accelerate the decarbonization of national power grids, (2) provide early-stage deployment support for flexible, electric Haber–Bosch technologies, and (3) establish clear certification standards for low-carbon ammonia.

Prospective life cycle assessment of cost-effective pathways for achieving the FuelEU Maritime Regulation targets

Latest findings from research

3rd Annual Conference of the SWEET Consortium reFuel.ch Highlights Implementation Pathways for Sustainable Fuels

Haber–Bosch 2.0 for low-carbon ammonia production: a global techno-economic and environmental assessment

Strong interest in FOCA Aviation and Climate Funding Programme