This review paper examines the key barriers to using green ammonia as an alternative fuel in maritime industry. A literature survey is performed based on research articles and grey literature, with the aim of discussing the technoeconomic problems with and benefits of ammonia and the relevant technologies. The limitations of ammonia as a maritime fuel and its supply chain, the expected percentage demand by 2030 and 2050, its economic performance compared to other shipping fuels such as hydrogen, and the current regulations that may impact ammonia as a maritime fuel are discussed. There are several key barriers to ammonia’s wide adoption: (1) High production costs, due to the high capital costs associated with ammonia’s supply chain; (2) availability, specifically the limited geographical locations available for ammonia bunkering; (3) the challenge of ramping up current ammonia production; and (4) the development of ammonia-specific regulations addressing issues such as toxicity, safety, and storage. The general challenges involved with blue ammonia are the large energy penalty and associated operational costs, and a lack of technical expertise on its use. Regardless of the origin, for ammonia to be truly zero-carbon its whole lifecycle must be considered—a key challenge that will aid in the debate about whether ammonia holds promise as a zero-carbon maritime fuel.

The recent inclusion of shipping in the Fit for 55 legislation package will have large knock-on effects on the industry and consequently on end consumers. The present paper presents an innovative top-down methodology, the MSF455 model, which estimates the new vessel Operational Expenditure (OPEX) as per the provisions of the Fit for 55 package and various scenarios based on carbon tax, penalty allowances, maritime fuel tax and effect. The methodology is presented and tested against six scenarios that are based on Det Norske Veritas’s (DNV) fuel maritime projections. The model illustrates that the distinction between intra-EU and extra-EU penalty allowance creates a large disparity and thus reduction in the competitiveness of goods (produced and transported).

This review paper examines the applicability of biogas and biomethane as potential maritime fuels and examines issues of these fuels from a supply chain perspective (from production to end use). The objectives are to identify: (1) the latest research, development, and innovation activities; (2) issues and key barriers related to the technology readiness to bring biogas/biomethane to market; and (3) commercialisation issues, including cost parity with natural gas (the main competitor). A survey of the literature was carried out based on research articles and grey literature. The PESTEL and SWOT analyses identified opportunities for these fuels due to the relevant regulations (e.g., Fit for 55; the recent inclusion of the Mediterranean Sea as a SECA and PM control area; MPEC 79), market-based measures, and environmental, social, and governance strategies. The potential of biomass feedstock is estimated to have a substantial value that can satisfy the energy needs of the maritime industry. However, production costs of biomethane are high; estimated to be 2–4 times higher compared to natural gas. The market is moving in the direction of alternative drop-in fuels, including liquefied and compressed biomethane (LBM and CBM) and biogas. In terms of potential market penetration, LBM can be used as a marine drop-in fuel for the existing fleet that already combust LNG and LPG due to similar handling. Currently, these vessels are LNG and LPG tankers. However, in newly built vessels, LBM can be also supplied to container ships, vehicle carriers, and bulk carriers (about 20% of newly built vessels). Provided that compressed natural gas infrastructure exists, CBM can be exploited in vessels with low energy needs and low space requirements and shore-side electrification, because investments in retrofits are lower compared to constructing new infrastructure.