ZERO EMISSION CONTAINERSHIPS: WHO DARES WINS

But still this question may matter, for ports, as they need to make decisions on providing zero emission fuels, for shippers, as they make (green) purchasing choices, and a range of other stakeholders in the shipping industry.

It seems a pretty safe bet that zero emission ships (ZES, most likely fuelled with electricity, ammonia, methanol, hydrogen or even wind) will be introduced first in shortsea routes. In fact, some ZES are already operating shortsea services, especially in the segment of ferry transport. The Baltic area is the hottest zone in a global ZES initiatives heatmap (see ‘Mapping of Zero Emission Pilots and Demonstration Projects’) and is likely to be first in terms of ZES uptake in shortsea.

For deepsea, and especially in the container segment, there is no clear favourite, and arguably competition may emerge between various ‘corridors’ or routes, to attract the first generation of deepsea container ZES. The notion of a green ‘corridor’ (as for instance assessed in the report, The Next Wave; Green Corridors by the Getting to Zero Coalition, and as advocated by a coalition including the Port of Los Angeles, Port of Shanghai, and C40 Cities) may be intuitive but the specifics are complicated. An open question remains, what will be the key driver of the establishment of zero emission routes: will this be driven by the demand for zero emission maritime transport, from shippers with ambitious sustainability goals (and willing to pay a premium for zero emission shipping), or will it be driven by regulatory requirements (that either prohibit the use of ships with emissions, or make cost levels of ZES comparable to ships with emissions)?

If ‘ZES driven by a premium segment’ mechanism prevails, the Pacific trade lane seems to have the best characteristics for getting to ZES first, if the regulatory driver is dominant, the Atlantic may see ZES first.