We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
'Copy and paste' not 'copy and past'.
Interim results at the end of the month so not long now.I am expecting :
Morocco - trial completed and results imminent
Utah - copy and past of business update in Jan
MSC -- copy and past of business update in Jan
Americas - copy and past of business update in Jan
Time to get my questions prepared for the IMC
The problem with methanol, like Hydrogen, is that it can really best be thought of as a liquid battery and like a battery, it depends how it's charged as to how green it is.
And with methanol is a similar question, if you have a low energy density, you have to have a bigger volume of tanks for the same trip. So the question is, does it make sense to build a bigger ship for les capacity?
The hazard’s are smaller, but still if such ship starts to burn, you have a big problem.
When you ask me, I would say a synthetic fuel what is made like diesel from e hydrogen make sense. So better properties as now (like diesel), known technology, same or les dangers, all the ships do not need to be new…. And after all you still can make blends like MSAR or BioMSAR to use waste byproducts from other industry’s…. And make the fuel cheaper….
Ammonia is a solution until someone makes a hazard analysis for usage on a ship.
1. No one can make a ship so safe that ammonia can not come out of pipes, reservoirs….
2. Ammonia is a high corrosive medium… I’m not sure how the motor, tanks, pipings and pumps needed to be build for usage of ammonia.
So the question is how much money and material you have to put on a ship to make ammonia usage safe and how much material you still can transport with such a ship. If you make a mistake in design, you loose the whole crew and you just can hope that the accident is not happening in a port.
The only sensible way to use Methanol is to buy certified green Methanol (zero carbon) and put it through Fuel Cells so that the efficiency is way higher, making up a lot of the difference in fuel volume.
Ammonia is the better option over Methanol and will win out between the two.
Maersk is big on green methanol as well. The company has bought several dual-fuel ships which could burn green methanol if they could source it in sufficient volumes, and signed several sourcing agreements with firms promising to build green methanol capacity. When I assessed their initial announcements in 2021, I put the increased fuel costs at four times that of diesel. At the time, they’d committed to purchase green methanol sufficient for half of one journey for one of the eight ships once a year, well under 1% of the annual fuel requirement.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/cleantechnica.com/2023/03/06/atlantic-crossing-by-methanol-powered-ship-is-neither-viable-nor-carbon-neutral/amp/
A very eye opening article on Methanol
The methanol industry likes to assert that manufacturing methanol is relatively low carbon, at 20 grams CO2e per MJ or 400 grams CO2e per kg, but independent modern assessments put it at 110 grams CO2e per MJ and about 1.4 kg CO2e per kg methanol. So that’s problem one with methanol as a shipping fuel,
The energy density by mass is lower as well, with about 45% of the energy density of diesel. So when you burn it, you have to burn over twice as much to get the same energy. And that means that burning it results in virtually the same CO2 as diesel, about 97%. Doesn’t seem so good after all, does it?
Yeah we're all absolutely f*#ked
Sulphur from ships is the least the ocean has to worry about ....
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ocean-pollution-plastic-particles-microplastic-unprecedented-level-scientists-warn/
Yeah yeah nobody died from baked beans either but it may not be the best to sail around the world dumping thousands of tons of it into the deep blue. That said, he's correct, sulfur in these concentrations is a natural part of marine biosystems and is not a pollutant.
** nobody dies from it **
I take it his point is that people drink Pellegrino and nobody does from it, and Scrubber Sulphur discharge is just a very tiny drop in the ocean in comparison.
https://nautiluslive.org/blog/2020/12/04/how-much-water-ocean
Yeah, not sure we should be measuring millions of gallons of discharge by Pellegrino bottles but we all know that and it's the clever turn of phrase that is why people like that make the big bucks.
The only important speaker there really is the guy from MAN. If JM has spoken about the test results with Wartsilla then it might be of interest to him at a later point.
But again its just a lot of bluster and greenwashing until we have evidence that the chicken and egg problem has been solved ( and it will only do so with an announcement of a fuel supplier) then its buisness as usual.
Its down to MSC to show really it is committed. The Leandra needs to get into dry Dock and and get sorted and ultimately they have to pressure the likes of Shell to say we really want this as part of our solution mix.
The fact that negotiations have been taking place since last July says a lot.
"JachG.Who were the panelists ?"
HF,
it was Dear Leader plus a few other B-Grade actors.
Aussie.
Jackg....thanks for the link.
JachG.Who were the panelists ?
Haggus...When do you expect the MSC trial to start ?
From the conference Vince, sounds like they've cracked it
Shipowners and operators at the forefront of alternative fuelling were keen to make the investments necessary to help fuel providers make their next moves.
With many future fueling options — and their associated pros and cons — panellists at TradeWinds' Green Seas Fuel Forum in New York on Thursday said they wanted to put the “chicken and egg” problem to rest.
https://www.tradewindsnews.com/technology/putting-the-chicken-and-egg-problem-to-rest-early-adopters-talk-alternative-fuels/2-1-1416998
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/bloomberg/the-world-s-top-container-carrier-sees-hurdles--costs-in-green-energy-shift/48332722
It’s a chicken-and-the-egg situation, because the people that are going to make multi-billion dollar investments into the future fuels, they want certainty that there’s demand, and the ones that are contracting ships, they want to make sure they have fuel available for the ships to sail,” Mediterranean Shipping Co. Chief Executive Office Soren Toft said.
Yes the same old circular argument, round and round in circles.
No doubt the same is being said at the conference JM is attending.
There's P/E and Forward P/E.
What the market will do IMVHO is give QFI a P/E ratio that reflects the potential sales of fuel to others, such as MSC as their trials will be running this year, but other power users too. 30x is fine when you consider the potential ahead, and quite normal for a growing small cap.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/050115/what-difference-between-forward-pe-and-trailing-pe.asp
30x earnings.