Comparative Well-to-Wake Life Cycle Assessment of Alternative Marine Fuels for Decarbonization in Maritime Transport Across Vessel Archetypes
船舶類型別の代替燃料のWell-to-Wakeライフサイクルアセスメント比較：海事輸送脱炭素化に向けて (AI 翻訳)
Kadir Aydın
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本稿は、ISO 14040/14044およびIMO MEPC.391(81)ガイドラインに基づき、9種類の代替燃料を8つの船舶類型で比較評価したWell-to-Wake LCA研究である。技術経済モデリング、多基準決定分析、15年間の総保有コスト・限界削減費用の枠組み、モンテカルロ感度分析を統合。化石LNGはメタンスリップによりベースラインと同等以上になる可能性がある一方、e-メタノール、グリーンアンモニア、グリーン水素で88～94%の削減を示した。EU ETSとFuelEU Maritimeの複合コストが経済的主要因であり、単一の最適燃料は存在しない。
English
This study presents a comparative well-to-wake life cycle assessment of nine alternative marine fuels across eight vessel archetypes, following ISO 14040/14044 and IMO guidelines. It integrates techno-economic modeling, multi-criteria decision analysis, a 15-year total cost of ownership and marginal abatement cost framework, and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. Results show that fossil LNG may equal or exceed the baseline due to methane slip, while e-methanol, green ammonia, and green hydrogen achieve 88–94% reductions. The combined EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime cost is the dominant economic driver, and no single fuel is optimal across all ship types.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本は世界有数の海運国であり、EU-ETSやFuelEU Maritimeの域外適用が日本船主にも影響を与える。本稿のLCA比較は、日本の外航海運業界が代替燃料選択や技術投資判断を行う際の基盤情報として有用。特に、メタンスリップやN2O排出が実運航でどの程度影響するかは、日本が推進するLNG燃料船やアンモニア燃料船の実用化において重要である。
In the global GX context
This paper provides a rigorous comparative LCA of alternative marine fuels under IMO and EU regulatory frameworks, offering critical insights for global shipping decarbonization. The integration of techno-economic analysis and multi-criteria decision-making makes it directly relevant for stakeholders evaluating fuel pathways under tightening EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime regulations. The finding that no single fuel is optimal across all vessel types underscores the need for portfolio approaches in maritime decarbonization strategies.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:The methodology combining LCA, techno-economic modeling, and sensitivity analysis provides a replicable framework for evaluating marine fuel pathways under regulatory uncertainty.
🏢実務担当者:Ship operators and owners can use the comparative cost and emissions data to inform fuel procurement and investment decisions, particularly regarding EU ETS exposure and FuelEU compliance.
🏛政策担当者:The results highlight that policy design must account for fuel-specific trade-offs (e.g., methane slip, N2O) and vessel archetype diversity, suggesting that uniform mandates may be suboptimal.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Marine fuel selection delivers a genuine climate benefit only when assessed on a well-to-wake (WtW) life-cycle basis. This study reports a comparative WtW life cycle assessment (LCA) of alternative marine fuels, conducted under ISO 14040/14044 and the IMO MEPC.391(81) guidelines within the INNSEA R&D project, and extended with techno-economic modelling and a beyond-greenhouse-gas (GHG) impact analysis. Up to nine fuel pathways were evaluated across eight vessel archetypes using a Python-based LCA engine, a weighted multi-criteria decision matrix, a 15-year total-cost-of-ownership and marginal-abatement-cost framework, and a 10,000-run Monte-Carlo sensitivity analysis. Relative to a heavy-fuel-oil/marine-gas-oil baseline of about 91 gCO₂e/MJ, the project's preliminary computation indicates WtW reductions of 16% for fossil LNG, 73% for bio-LNG, and 88–94% for e-methanol, green ammonia and green hydrogen, consistent with the literature. Fossil LNG can equal or exceed the fossil baseline at the 6.4% real-world 4-stroke methane-slip level. With selective catalytic reduction, two-stroke ammonia engines reportedly suppress N₂O to near zero. The combined EU Emissions Trading System and FuelEU Maritime cost is the dominant economic driver for EU-trading vessels. No single fuel is optimal across all ship types; the choice differs by vessel size, route and delivery date. The analysis is preliminary and literature anchored.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- crossref https://doi.org/10.36348/merjet.2026.v06i03.004first seen 2026-07-02 07:46:03
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。