Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment
To address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the maritime sector, the European Union (EU) has introduced the FuelEU Maritime regulation to incentivize ships to adopt diversified compliance pathways and energy solutions. This study aims to determine the optimal alternative fuel configurations for d...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Marine Science and Engineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/6/1105 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849431900726231040 |
|---|---|
| author | Cong Wang Zhongxiu Peng Jianming Yang Niyu Zhang Ke Li Xuesong Li |
| author_facet | Cong Wang Zhongxiu Peng Jianming Yang Niyu Zhang Ke Li Xuesong Li |
| author_sort | Cong Wang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | To address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the maritime sector, the European Union (EU) has introduced the FuelEU Maritime regulation to incentivize ships to adopt diversified compliance pathways and energy solutions. This study aims to determine the optimal alternative fuel configurations for dual-fuel ships of different types under environmental, economic, and regulatory constraints. An integrated environmental and cost assessment model from a well-to-wake (WtW) perspective to systematically evaluate the environmental benefits and economic feasibility of fossil-based, bio-based, and renewable electricity-based alternative fuels applied in dual-fuel ships. By incorporating the PROMETHEE II method within a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework, together with the CRITIC objective weighting method, the study enables a robust ranking of alternative fuel configurations across three key dimensions: environmental performance, cost feasibility, and regulatory compliance. The results indicate that, regardless of ship type, the very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) + marine gas oil (MGO) and VLSFO + methanol (MEOH) combinations fail to meet the GHG intensity targets for 2025–2050. Only the VLSFO + electrolytic liquid hydrogen (E-LH<sub>2</sub>) and VLSFO + electrolytic ammonia (E-NH<sub>3</sub>) configurations are compliant. Although e-fuels incur the highest annual costs, the EU compliance penalty associated with fossil fuels increases exponentially. In contrast, e-fuels retain long-term cost advantages, ultimately driving a sector-wide transition toward e-fuel-dominated energy structures by 2050. Their superior environmental performance and regulatory compatibility emerge as the core drivers of the maritime energy transition. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-299501d30db1402dbf77440a2cb27357 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2077-1312 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Marine Science and Engineering |
| spelling | doaj-art-299501d30db1402dbf77440a2cb273572025-08-20T03:27:29ZengMDPI AGJournal of Marine Science and Engineering2077-13122025-05-01136110510.3390/jmse13061105Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic AssessmentCong Wang0Zhongxiu Peng1Jianming Yang2Niyu Zhang3Ke Li4Xuesong Li5School of Maritime Economics and Management, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, ChinaSchool of Maritime Economics and Management, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, ChinaSchool of Maritime Economics and Management, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, ChinaCAS Key Laboratory of Low-Carbon Conversion Science and Engineering, Shanghai Advanced Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201210, ChinaShanghai Marine Diesel Engine Research Institute, Shanghai 201108, ChinaCAS Key Laboratory of Low-Carbon Conversion Science and Engineering, Shanghai Advanced Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201210, ChinaTo address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the maritime sector, the European Union (EU) has introduced the FuelEU Maritime regulation to incentivize ships to adopt diversified compliance pathways and energy solutions. This study aims to determine the optimal alternative fuel configurations for dual-fuel ships of different types under environmental, economic, and regulatory constraints. An integrated environmental and cost assessment model from a well-to-wake (WtW) perspective to systematically evaluate the environmental benefits and economic feasibility of fossil-based, bio-based, and renewable electricity-based alternative fuels applied in dual-fuel ships. By incorporating the PROMETHEE II method within a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework, together with the CRITIC objective weighting method, the study enables a robust ranking of alternative fuel configurations across three key dimensions: environmental performance, cost feasibility, and regulatory compliance. The results indicate that, regardless of ship type, the very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) + marine gas oil (MGO) and VLSFO + methanol (MEOH) combinations fail to meet the GHG intensity targets for 2025–2050. Only the VLSFO + electrolytic liquid hydrogen (E-LH<sub>2</sub>) and VLSFO + electrolytic ammonia (E-NH<sub>3</sub>) configurations are compliant. Although e-fuels incur the highest annual costs, the EU compliance penalty associated with fossil fuels increases exponentially. In contrast, e-fuels retain long-term cost advantages, ultimately driving a sector-wide transition toward e-fuel-dominated energy structures by 2050. Their superior environmental performance and regulatory compatibility emerge as the core drivers of the maritime energy transition.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/6/1105FuelEU Maritimedual-fuel shipsalternative fuel selectionenvironmental assessmenteconomic assessment |
| spellingShingle | Cong Wang Zhongxiu Peng Jianming Yang Niyu Zhang Ke Li Xuesong Li Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment Journal of Marine Science and Engineering FuelEU Maritime dual-fuel ships alternative fuel selection environmental assessment economic assessment |
| title | Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment |
| title_full | Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment |
| title_fullStr | Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment |
| title_full_unstemmed | Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment |
| title_short | Optimal Alternative Fuel Selection for Dual-Fuel Ships Under FuelEU Maritime Regulations: Environmental and Economic Assessment |
| title_sort | optimal alternative fuel selection for dual fuel ships under fueleu maritime regulations environmental and economic assessment |
| topic | FuelEU Maritime dual-fuel ships alternative fuel selection environmental assessment economic assessment |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/6/1105 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT congwang optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment AT zhongxiupeng optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment AT jianmingyang optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment AT niyuzhang optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment AT keli optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment AT xuesongli optimalalternativefuelselectionfordualfuelshipsunderfueleumaritimeregulationsenvironmentalandeconomicassessment |