Published 25 April 2026 · last updated 28 April 2026

Onboard Carbon Capture

Onboard carbon capture (OCC) is the post-combustion capture of carbon dioxide (CO2) from a marine engine exhaust stream, typically followed by liquefaction and storage in pressurised or cryogenic tanks aboard the vessel for later off-take in port. The dominant capture chemistry is chemical absorption using a monoethanolamine (MEA) or proprietary amine solvent, although membrane-based, cryogenic and adsorbent technologies are under development. OCC is one of the few decarbonisation pathways that can be applied to existing vessels without a fuel change; it can capture 40 to 90% of exhaust CO2 depending on the system size, with a typical energy penalty (parasitic load on the main engine and auxiliary engines for the capture process) of 8 to 18% of fuel consumption and a capital cost of approximately USD 4 to USD 12 million for a retrofit on a typical Capesize bulker or large container ship. The technology is at pilot and demonstration scale in 2024 with approximately 5 to 10 vessels operating commercial pilots (MOL CC-Ocean, Stena Impero, Solvang Clipper Eos, Value Maritime installations on chemical tankers, Wartsila CCS demonstrator) and a similar number of full-scale newbuild orders announced for 2025 to 2027 delivery. OCC is the focus of intensive industry development in the run-up to the IMO Net-Zero Framework GHG Fuel Intensity (GFI) standard from 2027 and the FuelEU Maritime penalty escalation, which together are projected to make OCC economically attractive at scale by approximately 2030. ShipCalculators.com hosts the principal computational tools: the OCC capture rate calculator, the OCC energy penalty calculator, the OCC payback calculator, the SEEMP Measures Combined calculator, the EEXI Required calculator and CII Attained calculator. A full listing is available in the calculator catalogue.

Contents

Background

Why OCC matters

Marine fuel combustion produces approximately 3.114 t CO2 per t HFO, 3.206 t CO2 per t MGO and 2.75 t CO2 per t LNG (the IPCC default emission factors used in IMO DCS and EU MRV reporting). The world fleet emits approximately 1,050 million t CO2 per year (IMO Fourth GHG Study, 2020), or approximately 2.9% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

The principal decarbonisation pathways available to the maritime sector are:

Switch to lower-carbon fuels: LNG, methanol, ammonia, biofuels, hydrogen, and the renewable and low-carbon fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBO) under the EU framework.
Reduce energy demand: slow steaming, trim optimisation, weather routing, just-in-time arrival, hull cleaning, air lubrication, wind-assisted propulsion, bulbous bow retrofits, energy-saving devices, battery-hybrid propulsion.
Capture and store the CO2 from continued fossil-fuel combustion: this is the OCC pathway.

OCC is unique among the three pathways in that it allows continued use of existing fuels and existing engines, with the captured CO2 either stored in a CCS facility (geological sequestration) or utilised (CCUS, in carbonated drinks, building materials, synthetic fuels, etc.) after off-take from the vessel. This makes OCC particularly attractive for existing vessels with significant residual life that would otherwise be stranded by the IMO Net-Zero Framework or by FuelEU Maritime compliance costs.

Land-based CCS as the technological foundation

Onboard carbon capture builds on a substantial body of land-based CCS technology, principally developed for coal-fired power stations and natural gas processing plants since the 1970s. The largest land-based CCS facility (Boundary Dam, Saskatchewan, Canada, in operation since 2014) captures approximately 1 million t CO2 per year using the Cansolv amine solvent process; the Petra Nova facility in Texas (2017 to 2020) captured approximately 1.4 million t CO2 per year using a similar process. Petra Nova was idled in 2020 due to falling oil prices that made the captured CO2 uneconomic for enhanced oil recovery, then restarted in 2023.

Marinising land-based CCS technology requires solving several distinct challenges:

Spatial constraint: a typical land-based CCS installation occupies approximately 1 to 2 ha of plot area for a 1 million t/y capture rate; the equivalent footprint must be condensed onto a few hundred square metres of deck or void space on a ship.
Motion: the absorber column must function despite ship roll, pitch and heave; conventional column packing is sensitive to inclination beyond approximately 5 degrees.
Continuous operation: there is no shore-side regeneration steam; the steam for solvent regeneration must be raised onboard, typically by waste-heat recovery from the engine exhaust.
CO2 storage and off-take: the captured CO2 must be liquefied, stored in pressurised tanks, and off-loaded in a port equipped to receive it (initially very few ports, expanding through the 2030s).
Class and IMO regulatory framework: as of 2024, no formal IMO instrument explicitly regulates marine CCS; classification societies have issued guidance notes.

Capture chemistries

Amine absorption (chemical absorption)

The dominant capture chemistry in marine pilots is amine absorption, in which the exhaust stream is contacted with a monoethanolamine (MEA) or proprietary amine solvent in an absorber column. The MEA chemically reacts with CO2 to form a carbamate compound; the rich solvent is then heated in a stripper column to release the CO2 (now in pure form) and regenerate the lean MEA, which is recycled back to the absorber. The released CO2 is dehydrated, compressed and liquefied for storage.

The MEA process:

Absorber temperature: typically 40 to 60 °C; the exhaust must be cooled from approximately 250 to 350 °C (after the exhaust gas cleaning system) to the absorber temperature, typically by direct-contact cooler or finned heat exchanger.
Stripper temperature: typically 110 to 130 °C; the regeneration heat must be supplied by steam (typically waste-heat steam recovered from the engine exhaust upstream of the absorber, or supplementary steam from an auxiliary boiler).
Solvent loading: typically 0.4 to 0.5 mol CO2 per mol MEA in the rich solvent, dropping to approximately 0.2 mol CO2 per mol MEA in the lean solvent after stripping.
Energy penalty: approximately 3.0 to 4.5 GJ per t CO2 captured (regeneration energy), translating to approximately 8 to 14% of the engine fuel input for a 70% capture rate.
Solvent loss: approximately 0.3 to 1.5 kg MEA per t CO2 captured through volatilisation, oxidative degradation and thermal degradation; the loss requires periodic top-up of the solvent inventory.

The principal proprietary amine solvents in marine pilots are:

Mitsubishi KS-21 (used in the MOL CC-Ocean pilot): a sterically hindered amine with lower regeneration energy (approximately 2.5 GJ/t CO2) and lower oxidative degradation than generic MEA.
Aker ACC (used in the Wartsila / Aker Carbon Capture marine pilots): a proprietary mixed amine.
Cansolv DC-103 (Shell/SLB): the dominant land-based solvent, adapted for marine.
Generic 30% MEA: used in laboratory studies and in some early marine pilots.

Membrane separation

Membrane-based CO2 separation uses selective polymeric membranes to separate CO2 from the exhaust gas. The principal advantage is lower energy penalty (no regeneration steam required); the principal disadvantage is lower capture rate (typically 30 to 60% for a single-stage system) and larger footprint (the membrane area scales with capture rate). Marine membrane systems are at laboratory and pilot scale; the Carbon Ridge (US) and MTR (Membrane Technology and Research, US) approaches are the most commonly cited.

Cryogenic separation

Cryogenic CO2 separation cools the exhaust to approximately -70 °C, at which point the CO2 condenses out as solid (dry ice) or liquid for separation from the residual gases. The energy penalty is high (approximately 4 to 6 GJ/t CO2) but the captured CO2 is automatically delivered in liquid form, eliminating the downstream liquefaction step. Cryocap (Air Liquide) is the principal land-based commercial offering; marine adaptations are at laboratory scale.

Solid sorbent (adsorbent)

Solid sorbent CO2 capture uses regenerable solid materials (typically zeolites, metal-organic frameworks, supported amines) that adsorb CO2 from the exhaust and release it on heating. The principal advantage is no liquid solvent (no solvent loss, no degradation); the principal disadvantage is the engineering challenge of cycling the solid bed. Marine deployment is at laboratory scale.

Calcium looping

Calcium looping uses calcium oxide (CaO) to absorb CO2, forming calcium carbonate (CaCO3); the CaCO3 is calcined at high temperature (approximately 900 °C) to release pure CO2 and regenerate CaO. Marine adaptation is at concept stage only.

CO2 storage and off-take

Onboard storage

The captured CO2 must be stored onboard in a form suitable for tank storage. The three principal storage modes are:

Liquid CO2 at low temperature and moderate pressure (LP): typically -50 to -30 °C, 6 to 18 bar. The lowest tank weight per t CO2; requires cryogenic insulation and (for long voyages) a small refrigeration unit to handle boil-off.
Liquid CO2 at medium pressure (MP): typically -20 to 0 °C, 18 to 35 bar. Compromise between insulation and pressure rating.
Compressed CO2 gas (CG) or supercritical CO2: typically 70 to 150 bar at ambient temperature. Smallest insulation requirement but largest tank weight; rare in marine applications.

The dominant choice for marine CCS pilots is LP liquid CO2 at approximately -50 °C and 8 to 12 bar, in cryogenic Type C tanks similar to those used for LNG bunkering and small-scale LNG transport.

Port off-take

The CO2 must be off-loaded to a shore facility (a CO2 receiving terminal) for transport to a CCS storage site or to a CCUS utilisation site. As of 2024, only a small number of ports have CO2 off-take capability:

Northern Lights project (Norway, in operation 2024): CO2 receiving terminal at Oygarden near Bergen, with capacity for approximately 1.5 million t/y in phase 1; CO2 piped to a sub-seabed storage site in the North Sea (Aurora field). The Northern Lights terminal is operated by a joint venture of Equinor, Shell and TotalEnergies.
Porthos project (Netherlands, in operation 2026): CO2 receiving and storage facility at the Port of Rotterdam, with capacity for approximately 2.5 million t/y; CO2 piped to depleted offshore gas fields in the North Sea.
Aramis project (Netherlands, in operation 2026): expansion of Porthos with additional capacity.
L10A project (Netherlands, in operation 2027): additional CO2 storage in the L10A gas field.
HyNet (UK, in operation 2027): CO2 receiving and storage facility at the Port of Liverpool/Stanlow, with capacity for approximately 4.5 million t/y; CO2 stored in depleted gas fields in Liverpool Bay.
East Coast Cluster (UK, in operation 2028): CO2 receiving and storage facility at Teesside, with capacity for approximately 4 million t/y; CO2 stored in the Endurance saline aquifer in the southern North Sea.
Greensand project (Denmark, in operation 2025): CO2 storage in the Nini West depleted gas field; receiving infrastructure at Esbjerg.
Salzburg-Vorderachsee (Austria) and similar inland projects: smaller-scale CO2 utilisation with off-take from inland waterway vessels.

The DNV CO2 receiving infrastructure projection (2024) is for approximately 30 to 50 commercial CO2 receiving ports worldwide by 2030, principally in Europe, Australia, Japan, Korea, US Gulf Coast and US west coast. The development of this infrastructure is a critical path constraint on the scale-up of marine OCC.

CO2 utilisation pathways (CCUS)

The captured CO2 can also be utilised rather than stored:

Synthetic fuels: combined with green hydrogen to produce e-methanol or e-LNG, in turn used as a marine fuel. The methanol pathway is particularly interesting because the CO2 from combustion can be re-captured and re-used in a closed loop.
Building materials: incorporated into concrete (mineralisation) or into other carbonate-based building products.
Greenhouse CO2 enrichment: supplied to commercial greenhouses for plant growth enhancement.
Carbonated beverages: supplied to drinks manufacturers.
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR): injected into oil reservoirs to extract additional oil; carbon-neutral only if combined with permanent sequestration of an equivalent quantity.

The CCUS market in 2024 is substantially smaller than the CCS market and is concentrated on EOR in the United States. CCUS pricing is highly variable and is principally driven by local demand.

Performance and economics

Capture rate

The capture rate is the fraction of exhaust CO2 that is captured by the system. Higher capture rates require larger absorber columns, more solvent inventory, and proportionally more steam for regeneration. Typical design points are:

40 to 50% capture: the most common design point for first-generation marine pilots; balances footprint, energy penalty and CapEx against CII / FuelEU benefit.
60 to 70% capture: the typical design point for second-generation systems (2025 onwards); requires larger absorber columns and more solvent.
85 to 95% capture: the design point for third-generation systems and for newbuild integrated designs; requires very large absorber columns, often spanning the full deck height.

Energy penalty

The energy penalty (parasitic load on the main and auxiliary engines for the capture process) scales approximately linearly with capture rate. For amine absorption with proprietary low-energy solvents, the penalty is approximately 0.10 to 0.18 GJ per t CO2 captured per percentage point of capture, equivalent to approximately 8 to 14% of the engine fuel input for a 70% capture rate.

The principal energy components are:

Steam for solvent regeneration: approximately 60 to 75% of the total energy penalty; can be largely supplied by waste-heat recovery from the exhaust stream (downstream of the exhaust gas cleaning system and upstream of the absorber).
CO2 compression and liquefaction: approximately 15 to 25% of the total energy penalty; requires electrical power supplied by the auxiliary engines.
Solvent pumps and exhaust fans: approximately 5 to 10% of the total energy penalty.
Refrigeration and ventilation: approximately 2 to 5% of the total energy penalty.

Capital cost

The capital cost of an OCC retrofit installation is approximately:

USD 2 to USD 4 million for a small to medium chemical tanker or bulk carrier (40% capture rate).
USD 4 to USD 8 million for a typical Panamax bulk carrier or container ship (60% capture rate).
USD 8 to USD 12 million for a typical Capesize bulk carrier, VLCC or 14,000+ TEU container ship (70% capture rate).
USD 12 to USD 20 million for a Q-Max LNG carrier or 24,000 TEU container ship (85% capture rate).

The newbuild integrated design typically reduces the capital cost by approximately 20 to 30% relative to the equivalent retrofit, principally through space efficiency.

Operating cost

The operating cost includes:

Solvent top-up: approximately USD 2 to USD 5 per t CO2 captured.
Solvent disposal: approximately USD 1 to USD 2 per t CO2 captured.
Maintenance: approximately USD 3 to USD 8 per t CO2 captured.
Crew time: approximately USD 1 to USD 3 per t CO2 captured.
Fuel premium for the energy penalty: approximately USD 30 to USD 60 per t CO2 captured (variable with fuel price).
CO2 off-take fee at port: approximately USD 30 to USD 80 per t CO2 captured (highly variable; some early projects offer free off-take to seed the market).

The total abated cost per t CO2 is therefore approximately USD 70 to USD 160 per t CO2 at the OCC system boundary, plus the capital amortisation (typically USD 30 to USD 80 per t CO2 over a 15-year life). The all-in abated cost is approximately USD 100 to USD 240 per t CO2 in 2024, projected to fall to USD 70 to USD 150 per t CO2 by 2030 as the technology and supply chain mature.

Payback under different policy scenarios

The payback for an OCC retrofit depends critically on the value of the avoided CO2, which is a function of the regulatory framework:

Status quo (no OCC credit): payback indefinite; OCC has no commercial value beyond reputational.
EU ETS only (EUR 70 to EUR 100 per t CO2): payback approximately 8 to 15 years, marginal economic case.
EU ETS + FuelEU Maritime (effective marginal abatement cost up to approximately EUR 200 per t CO2 by 2030): payback approximately 4 to 8 years, attractive economic case.
EU ETS + FuelEU Maritime + IMO Net-Zero Framework GFI standard with full Tier 1 and Tier 2 remedial unit pricing: payback approximately 2 to 5 years, very attractive economic case.

The OCC payback calculator implements the full payback calculation across these policy scenarios.

Regulatory credit

Under the IMO Net-Zero Framework, captured CO2 is excluded from the GHG Fuel Intensity (GFI) calculation, provided the CO2 is permanently stored or utilised in a way that does not subsequently re-release the CO2 to the atmosphere. The capture must be verified by an IMO-recognised verifier and the off-take must be to a certified storage or utilisation facility.

Under EU MRV and EU ETS, captured and stored CO2 is similarly excluded from the EU ETS surrender obligation, provided the storage is in an EU ETS-compliant geological storage facility (governed by the EU CCS Directive 2009/31/EC).

Under FuelEU Maritime, captured and stored CO2 is excluded from the GHG intensity calculation, with the same verification requirements.

The capture rate must be conservatively measured (typically continuous emission monitoring at the OCC outlet) to be eligible for the regulatory credit. The IMO and EU verification frameworks for marine CCS are under active development through 2025.

Notable deployments

MOL CC-Ocean (2021 onwards)

The MOL CC-Ocean project is a joint demonstration by Mitsui O.S.K. Lines (MOL), Mitsubishi Shipbuilding, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Class NK, with the Japanese Maritime Public Body (Nippon Kaiji Kyokai) certification. A small-scale CO2 capture pilot (capturing approximately 0.1 to 1 t CO2/day, representing approximately 5% of exhaust CO2) was installed on the MOL-operated coal carrier Corona Utility in 2021. The pilot validates the marinisation of the Mitsubishi KS-21 amine solvent process. A larger-scale demonstration (approximately 100 t CO2/day, 40% capture rate) is planned for delivery on a coal carrier newbuild in 2025.

Stena Bulk and Stena Impero (2022 onwards)

Stena Bulk has installed an OCC pilot system on the chemical tanker Stena Impero in partnership with Wartsila and Aker Carbon Capture. The pilot captures approximately 4 t CO2/day, representing approximately 20% of exhaust CO2.

Solvang Clipper Eos (2023 onwards)

Solvang ASA has installed an OCC system on the LPG carrier Clipper Eos in partnership with Wartsila. The system captures approximately 70% of exhaust CO2, the largest capture rate yet achieved on a commercial vessel.

Value Maritime CCS (2023 onwards)

Value Maritime (Netherlands) has commercialised a containerised CCS unit (the “Filtree” system) that combines exhaust gas cleaning (sulphur scrubbing) with carbon capture, achieving approximately 40% capture rate. By end-2024 approximately 6 vessels (predominantly small chemical tankers and inland waterway barges) have the Value Maritime system installed.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries marine CCS (2024 onwards)

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has announced approximately 8 newbuild OCC orders for delivery 2025 to 2027, principally on coal carriers and LNG carriers operated by Japanese shipping lines (NYK, MOL, K Line). Each system is sized for 60 to 85% capture rate.

Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd evaluations

A.P. Moller-Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd have undertaken concept studies on retrofitting OCC to their methanol and LNG dual-fuel container fleets but have not yet announced firm orders. Both lines have stated that they view OCC as a complement to alternative fuels, principally for the residual fossil-fuel content of dual-fuel operation.

Wartsila and Aker Carbon Capture (technology vendors)

Wartsila (in joint development with Hycamite and Aker Carbon Capture) has commercialised a marine OCC system based on the Aker ACC amine solvent. Aker Carbon Capture has signed a memorandum of understanding with several owners for further pilot deployments through 2025 and 2026.

Safety and operational considerations

Solvent toxicity and handling

Monoethanolamine and similar amine solvents are toxic and corrosive. Direct skin contact causes burns; ingestion is fatal. The shipboard inventory is typically 50 to 200 t for a working OCC system. The solvent must be stored in dedicated tanks with appropriate ventilation, fire detection and spill containment. Crew handling requires specialised PPE and training.

Solvent degradation and emissions

Amine solvents undergo oxidative degradation (reaction with oxygen in the exhaust) and thermal degradation (at the stripper temperature), forming degradation products that include nitrosamines (some carcinogenic) and other organics. The degradation products must be removed from the recirculating solvent (typically by a thermal reclaimer or by an ion-exchange unit) and disposed of as hazardous waste. Trace emission of amine vapour from the absorber to the atmosphere is a regulatory concern; modern designs include water-wash sections to capture amine vapour before atmospheric discharge.

CO2 storage hazards

Liquid CO2 storage at -50 °C and 8 to 12 bar has hazards distinct from those of conventional bunker fuel storage. The principal hazards are:

Asphyxiation: a sudden release of liquid CO2 produces a dense cold gas cloud that displaces oxygen; the cloud may flow along the deck and into accommodation spaces.
Cold burns and structural cold-shock: liquid CO2 contact causes immediate frostbite; uncontrolled release onto carbon-steel structures can cause embrittlement and cracking.
Pressure release: a runaway pressure increase (from refrigeration failure or fire heat input) requires safe pressure relief to atmosphere.

The IMO IGF Code provides the regulatory framework for low-flashpoint fuel handling; analogous provisions for CO2 cargo and storage are under development at the IMO Sub-Committee on Carriage of Cargoes and Containers (CCC). Class society guidance notes (DNV, Lloyd’s Register, ABS, BV, NK, KR, RINA, CCS) are the principal interim references.

Stability impact

The OCC system adds approximately 100 to 500 t of dry weight (absorber, stripper, heat exchangers, pumps, piping) plus the CO2 storage tanks (additional 200 to 1,500 t dry, plus up to 5,000 t of liquid CO2 inventory at full storage). The added weight and volume must be accommodated in the intact stability and damage stability calculations, in the hydrostatics and in the trim and list booklet. Newbuild integrated designs accommodate the OCC weight in the basic design phase; retrofits typically require a re-stability submission to Class.

Crew training

OCC operation requires specialised crew training, typically:

Officers in charge of the engineering watch: a dedicated OCC operations course (typically 5 to 10 days) covering chemistry, safety, emergency response, off-take procedure.
Engine crew: an OCC awareness course (typically 3 to 5 days).
Bridge crew: a familiarisation course (typically 1 day) covering OCC alarm interpretation and emergency interaction.

The principal training providers are the equipment manufacturers (Mitsubishi, Wartsila, Aker), Class societies and maritime universities.

Limitations and risks

Technology readiness

OCC is at technology readiness level 7 to 8 (system prototype demonstrated in operational environment, system complete and qualified) in 2024. Full commercial deployment at scale is expected from approximately 2027 to 2030, contingent on:

Maturation of the marine systems (no further design iteration required at scale).
Build-out of port-side CO2 receiving infrastructure.
Establishment of reliable CO2 off-take pricing.
Resolution of the IMO and EU regulatory frameworks for marine CCS verification.

Port off-take constraint

The most binding near-term constraint is the very limited port-side CO2 off-take infrastructure. As of 2024, only a small number of ports can receive CO2; the marine OCC market cannot expand significantly until the CO2 receiving infrastructure expands in parallel. Several joint owner / port / CCS storage operator initiatives (Northern Lights, Porthos, HyNet, East Coast Cluster) are addressing this constraint.

Energy penalty trade-off

The 8 to 14% energy penalty for a 70% capture rate is significant. For owners with access to alternative low-carbon fuels (methanol, ammonia, biofuels), the energy penalty makes OCC a less attractive option than fuel switching. For owners with limited access to alternative fuels (for example because of vessel-specific engine constraints, or because of bunker market structure), OCC may be the most economic decarbonisation pathway.

Solvent supply chain

Marine OCC at scale would require approximately 100,000 to 500,000 t/y of MEA-equivalent solvent (based on a fleet-wide capture penetration of 5 to 25% of the world fleet). The current global MEA production capacity is approximately 1 million t/y, principally for non-marine applications. Significant supply-chain expansion would be required for fleet-wide deployment.

Scope 3 emissions of the captured CO2

The captured CO2 must be tracked through the off-take, transport, storage and (if utilised) end-use chain to demonstrate that the CO2 is not subsequently released. The accounting framework for this scope 3 emission is under development and represents a non-trivial regulatory burden on the owner / charterer.

Future outlook

Scale-up to 2030

DNV’s Maritime Forecast to 2050 (2023) projects that approximately 200 to 800 vessels will be equipped with OCC by 2030, representing approximately 0.5 to 2% of the world fleet by number. The penetration is expected to be highest among:

Larger vessels (Capesize bulkers, VLCCs, 14,000+ TEU container ships) where the unit economics are most favourable.
Vessels on regular routes calling at ports with CO2 off-take (predominantly Europe to Asia and Europe to Americas).
Vessels operating dual-fuel methanol or LNG engines where the captured CO2 can be used to make synthetic fuel in a closed loop.

Closed-loop CCUS with synthetic fuel production

The most promising long-term application of OCC is in a closed-loop CCUS configuration in which captured CO2 is supplied to green hydrogen + CO2 synthesis plants to produce e-methanol or e-LNG, which is then re-bunkered as marine fuel. The closed loop is approximately carbon-neutral (subject to the CO2 capture rate and the electricity source for hydrogen production) and avoids the geological storage requirement.

Cost reduction trajectory

The cost of marine OCC is expected to follow a learning curve similar to that of land-based CCS, with approximately 12 to 18% cost reduction per doubling of installed capacity. Starting from approximately USD 100 to USD 240 per t CO2 in 2024, the cost is projected to fall to approximately USD 70 to USD 150 per t CO2 by 2030 and to approximately USD 50 to USD 100 per t CO2 by 2040.

Combination with alternative fuels

Combination of OCC with LNG (which has approximately 25% lower CO2 emission intensity than HFO) or methanol (approximately equivalent CO2 emission intensity but produced renewably) can deliver near-zero net emissions when combined with high capture rates. The combination of LNG dual-fuel + OCC at 70% capture rate is approximately equivalent in net emissions to ammonia or hydrogen propulsion, at potentially lower total system cost.

References

IMO Resolution MEPC.328(76): 2021 Revised MARPOL Annex VI. International Maritime Organization, 2021.
IMO Resolution MEPC.244(66): 2014 Guidelines on the Method of Calculation of the Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for New Ships. International Maritime Organization, 2014.
IMO Fourth GHG Study, 2020. International Maritime Organization, 2021.
DNV. Maritime Forecast to 2050. DNV Energy Transition Outlook, 2023.
IEA. CCUS in Shipping: Tracking Clean Energy Progress. International Energy Agency, 2023.
IPCC. Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2005.
Mitsubishi Shipbuilding. CC-Ocean Demonstration Final Report. MOL Group / Mitsubishi Shipbuilding, 2022.
Stena Bulk. Stena Impero CCS Pilot Performance Report. Stena Bulk AB, 2023.
Solvang ASA. Clipper Eos OCC System: First Year Performance. Solvang ASA, 2024.
Wartsila and Aker Carbon Capture. Marine Carbon Capture: A Joint White Paper. Wartsila and Aker Carbon Capture, 2023.
Northern Lights JV. Northern Lights CO2 Receiving Terminal Technical Brief. Northern Lights JV, 2023.
Value Maritime. Filtree CCS Performance Update. Value Maritime BV, 2024.