What is your research about – and what exactly is a life-cycle assessment?
Imagine you want to find out whether a ship powered by ammonia is really more climate-friendly than one running on conventional heavy fuel oil. In that case, it’s not enough just to measure the exhaust emissions. You have to look at the entire process: how is the fuel produced? How much energy goes into manufacturing the engine? What happens to the ship in the end at the scrapyard? That is exactly what a life-cycle assessment does – it looks at everything from the first raw material to the very last screw.
We have evaluated 70 scientific studies that have attempted to do just that for the shipping industry. The result is sobering: barely half of these studies properly meet international quality standards. Many focus only on a small aspect – usually fuel consumption during operation – and simply ignore the rest. This can lead to completely incorrect conclusions.
Why should this matter to companies in Hamburg?
Hamburg is one of the world’s most important shipping hubs. Shipping companies, shipbrokers, shipyards, suppliers – the maritime industry is deeply rooted here. And they are all currently facing the same questions: Which fuel should we invest in? LNG? Methanol? Hydrogen? Ammonia?
These decisions cost hundreds of millions of euros and commit companies for decades. At the same time, regulatory requirements have increased massively: from 2024, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme will apply to shipping – those who emit more will pay more. From 2026, the rules will become even stricter. The IMO aims to reduce the CO₂ intensity of global shipping by 40 per cent by 2030.
Anyone who now opts for a technology that looked promising in a study but is based on a methodologically flawed analysis risks making a costly misinvestment. Our research shows that many of the available studies are not robust enough to underpin important decisions. Companies need to be aware of this.
What advice would you give to companies – what specifically should they be doing differently?
Firstly: Take a critical look at simplistic climate pledges. If a supplier claims their fuel is ‘green’, ask to see the full life-cycle analysis – from production to combustion. And check whether the electricity used to produce green hydrogen or ammonia really does come from renewable sources. That makes a huge difference.
Secondly: Incorporate environmental assessments into the planning stage at an early stage. Many decisions regarding emissions are made as early as the ship design phase – materials, propulsion, construction methods. Those who start doing the calculations at that stage have much more leeway than those who only optimise things retrospectively.
Thirdly: Combine environmental and economic analyses. A green ship that isn’t cost-effective won’t be built. And a cheap ship that generates high CO₂ costs ends up being expensive. The two go hand in hand – and science needs to improve in this area so that companies have a better basis for decision-making.
