DST - Assessment of technologies in view of zero-emission inland waterway transport (2020)

This assessment by Development Centre for Ship Technology and Transport Systems (DST) and Expertise- en Innovatie Centrum Binnenvaart (EICB) is part of the overarching “Study on financing the energy transition towards a zero-emission European IWT sector”. It concludes the outcomes of five tasks of the work package, namely the identification of transition pathways, technologies for said pathways, upstream chain and fuel availability, TCO for transition pathways in comparison to business-as-usual, financial gap between the BAU and transition paths, as well as “no-regret” investments.

Modelling of the BAU scenario resulted in a 22 % GHG reduction, 76 % NOx and 83 % PM reduction from 2015 to 2050 due to the scrapping of outdated engines and their replacement with newer Stage V diesel engines within the fleet. Furthermore, an increase in biodiesel from 0 % in 2015 to 7 % in 2050 was assumed (limited by current EN590 specifications). Apart from GHG emissions, it is shown that PM and NOx emissions are already close to the 90 % reduction target within the sector. It is therefore concluded that GHG emission reduction requires most efforts.

The analysis continues comparing two scenarios to the BAU: the “conservative” pathway which is based on the use of internal combustion engines with renewable fuels, and the “innovative” pathway which employs battery- and fuel cell electric vehicles. The penetration of each investigated technology per fleet family (e.g. push boats, ferries, convoys, etc.) is analysed per scenario. Both scenarios achieve a 91 % GHG reduction by 2050 compared to 2015. The combustion-based scenario achieves a 90% NOx reduction and a 96 % PM reduction, whereas the battery- and fuel cell scenario achieves 4 percentage points more NOx reduction and 2 percentage points more PM reduction. The conservative pathway requires about 7 times more sustainable diesel than the innovative scenario and about 80 % more LBM. However, it only requires a third of the renewable electricity and renewable hydrogen as well as only 43 % of renewable methanol in comparison to the innovative scenario by 2050.

Compared to the business-as-usual scenario, the TCO over the whole EU fleet is about 150 million €/a more expensive in the combustion engine scenario by 2050. The electric scenario, on the other hand, is about 500 million €/a more expensive by 2050. Total accumulated TCO over 30 years range between 2.4 and 6.4 bln € for the combustion scenario and between 5.3 and 10.2 bln € in the electric scenario. This shows that the tank-to-wake efficiency gains of batteries and fuel cells are counterbalanced by the drastic increase in capital costs and depreciation compared to the combustion-based scenario.

Nevertheless, certain commonalities were identified between the two scenarios that the authors call “No-regret investments”. These are for instance investments in electrified small passenger ferries or in Stage V or Euro VI diesel large push-boats which are particularly hard to electrify. It is, however, also mentioned that today “the initial investment costs are too high in combination with the expected lifetime of batteries to allow a return on investment” for electric vessels. This may change in the future. Hybridisation (e.g electric drivetrains based on combustion engines) are mentioned as a compromise between the two scenarios that can reduce noise and energy demands at berth. Finally, it should be noted that the study’s outcomes are highly sensitive to the price assumptions for alternative fuels and technologies and their projections.

‍