Vessel redirects – in the name of profit rather than the planet
The Cape of Good Hope dilemma
LNG-fuelled containerships could offer operators considerable cost savings when the price of traditional fuel rises again, according to one leading German shipowner.
Speaking at last week’s JOC Container Trade Europe event in Hamburg, Keno Eden, project manager at shipowner Nordic Hamburg, which has six LNG-fuelled feeder ships on order with a Chinese shipyard, claimed an operator could enjoy a reduced fuel bill of $55,000 on a 12.5-day North European feeder loop within the region’s Sulphur Emissions Control Areas (SECAs).
The six 1,400 teu vessels on order by Nordic Hamburg have been placed on long-term charter with Finland’s Containerships Group and are expected to be deployed on a loop that runs from the Baltic ports of St Petersburg and Riga down to Rotterdam and up to the UK’s Teesport.
The current average fuel price of heavy fuel oil (sulphur oxide-heavy shipping fuel that has been banned in the Channel, North and Baltic seas since the beginning of this year) is $230 per tonne. This compares with $440 per tonne for SECA-compliant marine gas oil (MGO). But the price of LNG is currently $250 per tonne.
“Compared with vessels burning MGO, the new LNG vessels will offer cost savings of $55,000 per trip,” Mr Eden said.
“The development of SECAs in Europe is a real game-changer because it leads to a significant cost increases, but it’s also an opportunity in the push for LNG fuel. The technology is ready; emissions are down; it means reduced costs in ports; and there are no residual costs such as waste disposal of water used in scrubber systems,” he added.
In addition, the design of the vessels will mean they are better suited at combining feeder and shortsea cargo flows, as they will boast the highest number of 45ft container slots (639) and, according to vesselsvalue.com, some 329 reefer slots.
The first vessel is expected to begin sea trials next year and enter service in the first quarter of 2017, with the remaining five due to follow over the remainder of that year, said Mr Eden, adding that the owner was talking to other container operators and the market “is becoming more receptive”.
However, he added, in contrast to much of the current container market – which operates on six-month to one-year charter terms – the new vessels have to be fixed for much longer.
“The capital cost of the LNG vessels is about 25% higher than for a traditional vessel, so as a shipowner we need a long-term charter. Many won’t do it for more than 12 months, but having the long-term charter made the financing possible.
“With box ships that operate on fixed rotations, the demand will pick up quicker than with bulkers chartered on tramp voyages,” he added.
One potential obstacle to be overcome before the first ship is deployed is the current lack of LNG bunkering facilities in the region – although Shell’s decision to install a facility in Rotterdam will mean the first Containership vessels have one refuelling station on their intended deployment.
“A challenge is the infrastructure. We need more LNG bunkering facilities in the region,” he said. “Initially, it won’t be a problem because of the specific port rotation, but most ports also have no LNG bunkering regulations and procedures, so we will also need more political support.”
Expeditors sues long-term client for unpaid $20m in row over invoices
Rate erosion may be easing, but rock-bottom prices are 'not good for anybody'
2M axes Asia-North Europe loop, as carriers shop for more tonnage
West coast ports suffering as US container imports plunge by 37%
Taiwan carriers pay record staff bonuses after year of bumper profits
Billund sees launch of Maersk Air China link – 'a start-up on steroids'
Shippers put more pressure on ocean carriers for carbon-free services
Cost-cutting FedEx Express to retire MD-11s for B767s and 777s
Dachser's M&A in air and ocean freight – how serious is that?
Asia services expanding as logistics players opt for a 'China+1' strategy
Atlas Air merger with Apollo group finally set to close on Friday
End-of-year cargo surge adds to operational challenges at JNPT
Comment on this article
B WilliamsOctober 01, 2015 at 8:37 pm
Thank you very much for another great story.
I am very interested in LNG for bunkering in the US.
I am interested in the LNG price quoted of $250/MT,
seems low for even Euro spot bulk deliver of LNG.
that would be a delivered price of $5/mmbtu? seems low.
can you help me with the math, that price also doe not
include any cost for storage, LNG logistics, loading,
or a bunker vessel or trucking. Just trying to understand
the math if you can help. I would expect this to
be closer to $9/mmbtu all-in, what do you think?