The recent U.S. election might appear bad for climate tech, but the energy transition has enough financial momentum that experts aren’t expecting investment trends to change anytime soon.
© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.
Seagrass punches above its weight. The marine plant only occupies 0.1% of the ocean floor but can be credited with supporting marine ecosystems of plants and fish, filtering ocean water, and capturing quite a bit of carbon. Seagrass is also being destroyed, due to climate change and other factors, with meadows reducing 7% globally each […]
© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.
EPICS in IEEE, a service learning program for university students supported by IEEE Educational Activities, offers students opportunities to engage with engineering professionals and mentors, local organizations, and technological innovation to address community-based issues.
The following two environmentally focused projects demonstrate the value of teamwork and direct involvement with project stakeholders. One uses smart biodigesters to better manage waste in Colombia’s rural areas. The other is focused on helping Turkish olive farmers protect their trees from climate change effects by providing them with a warning system that can identify growing problems.
Proper waste management is critical to a community’s living conditions. In rural La Vega, Colombia, the lack of an effective system has led to contaminated soil and water, an especially concerning issue because the town’s economy relies heavily on agriculture.
The Smart Biodigesters for a Better Environment in Rural Areas project brought students together to devise a solution.
Vivian Estefanía Beltrán, a Ph.D. student at the Universidad del Rosario in Bogotá, addressed the problem by building a low-cost anaerobic digester that uses an instrumentation system to break down microorganisms into biodegradable material. It reduces the amount of solid waste, and the digesters can produce biogas, which can be used to generate electricity.
“Anaerobic digestion is a natural biological process that converts organic matter into two valuable products: biogas and nutrient-rich soil amendments in the form of digestate,” Beltrán says. “As a by-product of our digester’s operation, digestate is organic matter that can’t be transferred into biogas but can be used as a soil amendment for our farmers’ crops, such as coffee.
“While it may sound easy, the process is influenced by a lot of variables. The support we’ve received from EPICS in IEEE is important because it enables us to measure these variables, such as pH levels, temperature of the reactor, and biogas composition [methane and hydrogen sulfide]. The system allows us to make informed decisions that enhance the safety, quality, and efficiency of the process for the benefit of the community.”
The project was a collaborative effort among Universidad del Rosario students, a team of engineering students from Escuela Tecnológica Instituto Técnico Central, Professor Carlos Felipe Vergara, and members of Junta de Acción Comunal (Vereda La Granja), which aims to help residents improve their community.
“It’s been a great experience to see how individuals pursuing different fields of study—from engineering to electronics and computer science—can all work and learn together on a project that will have a direct positive impact on a community.” —Vivian Estefanía Beltrán
Beltrán worked closely with eight undergraduate students and three instructors—Maria Fernanda Gómez, Andrés Pérez Gordillo (the instrumentation group leader), and Carlos Felipe Vergara-Ramirez—as well as IEEE Graduate Student Member Nicolás Castiblanco (the instrumentation group coordinator).
The team constructed and installed their anaerobic digester system in an experimental station in La Vega, a town located roughly 53 kilometers northwest of Bogotá.
“This digester is an important innovation for the residents of La Vega, as it will hopefully offer a productive way to utilize the residual biomass they produce to improve quality of life and boost the economy,” Beltrán says. Soon, she adds, the system will be expanded to incorporate high-tech sensors that automatically monitor biogas production and the digestion process.
“For our students and team members, it’s been a great experience to see how individuals pursuing different fields of study—from engineering to electronics and computer science—can all work and learn together on a project that will have a direct positive impact on a community. It enables all of us to apply our classroom skills to reality,” she says. “The funding we’ve received from EPICS in IEEE has been crucial to designing, proving, and installing the system.”
The project also aims to support the development of a circular economy, which reuses materials to enhance the community’s sustainability and self-sufficiency.
Türkiye is one of the world’s leading producers of olives, but the industry has been challenged in recent years by unprecedented floods, droughts, and other destructive forces of nature resulting from climate change. To help farmers in the western part of the country monitor the health of their olive trees, a team of students from Istanbul Technical University developed an early-warning system to identify irregularities including abnormal growth.
“Almost no olives were produced last year using traditional methods, due to climate conditions and unusual weather patterns,” says Tayfun Akgül, project leader of the Smart Monitoring of Fruit Trees in Western Türkiye initiative.
“Our system will give farmers feedback from each tree so that actions can be taken in advance to improve the yield,” says Akgül, an IEEE senior member and a professor in the university’s electronics and communication engineering department.
“We’re developing deep-learning techniques to detect changes in olive trees and their fruit so that farmers and landowners can take all necessary measures to avoid a low or damaged harvest,” says project coordinator Melike Girgin, a Ph.D. student at the university and an IEEE graduate student member.
Using drones outfitted with 360-degree optical and thermal cameras, the team collects optical, thermal, and hyperspectral imaging data through aerial methods. The information is fed into a cloud-based, open-source database system.
Akgül leads the project and teaches the team skills including signal and image processing and data collection. He says regular communication with community-based stakeholders has been critical to the project’s success.
“There are several farmers in the village who have helped us direct our drone activities to the right locations,” he says. “Their involvement in the project has been instrumental in helping us refine our process for greater effectiveness.
“For students, classroom instruction is straightforward, then they take an exam at the end. But through our EPICS project, students are continuously interacting with farmers in a hands-on, practical way and can see the results of their efforts in real time.”
Looking ahead, the team is excited about expanding the project to encompass other fruits besides olives. The team also intends to apply for a travel grant from IEEE in hopes of presenting its work at a conference.
“We’re so grateful to EPICS in IEEE for this opportunity,” Girgin says. “Our project and some of the technology we required wouldn’t have been possible without the funding we received.”
The IEEE Standards Association sponsored both of the proactive environmental projects.
“Technical projects play a crucial role in advancing innovation and ensuring interoperability across various industries,” says Munir Mohammed, IEEE SA senior manager of product development and market engagement. “These projects not only align with our technical standards but also drive technological progress, enhance global collaboration, and ultimately improve the quality of life for communities worldwide.”
For more information on the program or to participate in service-learning projects, visit EPICS in IEEE.
On 7 November, this article was updated from an earlier version.
The focus of the new $100 million fund, Crosscut’s sixth, will include energy and power, space and underwater exploration, advanced manufacturing, advanced materials, and security and defense.
© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.
Just before this special issue on invention went to press, I got a message from IEEE senior member and patent attorney George Macdonald. Nearly two decades after I first reported on Corliss Orville “Cob” Burandt’s struggle with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the 77-year-old inventor’s patent case was being revived.
From 1981 to 1990, Burandt had received a dozen U.S. patents for improvements to automotive engines, starting with his 1990 patent for variable valve-timing technology (U.S. Patent No. 4,961,406A). But he failed to convince any automakers to license his technology. What’s worse, he claims, some of the world’s major carmakers now use his inventions in their hybrid engines.
Shortly after reading my piece in 2005, Macdonald stepped forward to represent Burandt. By then, the inventor had already lost his patents because he hadn’t paid the US $40,000 in maintenance fees to keep them active.
Macdonald filed a petition to pay the maintenance fees late and another to revive a related child case. The maintenance fee petition was denied in 2006. While the petition to revive was still pending, Macdonald passed the maintenance fee baton to Hunton Andrews Kurth (HAK), which took the case pro bono. HAK attorneys argued that the USPTO should reinstate the 1990 parent patent.
The timing was crucial: If the parent patent was reinstated before 2008, Burandt would have had the opportunity to compel infringing corporations to pay him licensing fees. Unfortunately, for reasons that remain unclear, the patent office tried to paper Burandt’s legal team to death, Macdonald says. HAK could go no further in the maintenance-fee case after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear it in 2009.
Then, in 2010, the USPTO belatedly revived Burandt’s child continuation application. A continuation application lets an inventor add claims to their original patent application while maintaining the earlier filing date—1988 in this case.
However, this revival came with its own set of challenges. Macdonald was informed in 2011 that the patent examiner would issue the patent but later discovered that the application was placed into a then-secret program called the Sensitive Application Warning System (SAWS) instead. While touted as a way to quash applications for things like perpetual-motion machines, the SAWS process effectively slowed action on Burandt’s case.
After several more years of motions and rulings, Macdonald met IEEE Member Edward Pennington, who agreed to represent Burandt. Earlier this year, Pennington filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia seeking the issuance of Burandt’s patent on the grounds that it was wrongfully denied.
As of this writing, Burandt still hasn’t seen a dime from his inventions. He subsists on his social security benefits. And while his case raises important questions about fairness, transparency, and the rights of individual inventors, Pennington says his client isn’t interested in becoming a poster boy for poor inventors.
“We’re not out to change policy at the patent office or to give Mr. Burandt a framed copy of the patent to say, ‘Look at me, I’m an inventor,’ ” says Pennington. “This is just to say, ‘Here’s a guy that would like to benefit from his idea.’ It just so happens that he’s pretty much in need. And even the slightest royalty would go a long ways for the guy.”
In the 1800s, aluminum was considered more valuable than gold or silver because it was so expensive to produce the metal in any quantity. Thanks to the Hall-Héroult smelting process, which pioneered the electrochemical reduction of aluminum oxide in 1886, electrochemistry advancements made aluminum more available and affordable, rapidly transforming it into a core material used in the manufacturing of aircraft, power lines, food-storage containers and more.
As society mobilizes against the pressing climate crisis we face today, we find ourselves seeking transformative solutions to tackle environmental challenges. Much as electrochemistry modernized aluminum production, science holds the key to revolutionizing steel and iron manufacturing.
As the world embraces clean energy solutions such as wind turbines, electric vehicles, and solar panels to address the climate crisis, changing how we approach manufacturing becomes critical. Traditional steel production—which requires a significant amount of energy to burn fossil fuels at temperatures exceeding 1,600 °C to convert ore into iron—currently accounts for about 10 percent of the planet’s annual CO2 emissions. Continuing with conventional methods risks undermining progress toward environmental goals.
Scientists already are applying electrochemistry—which provides direct electrical control of oxidation-reduction reactions—to convert ore into iron. The conversion is an essential step in steel production and the most emissions-spewing part. Electrochemical engineers can drive the shift toward a cleaner steel and iron industry by rethinking and reprioritizing optimizations.
When I first studied engineering thermodynamics in 1998, electricity—which was five times the price per joule of heat—was considered a premium form of energy to be used only when absolutely required.
Since then the price of electricity has steadily decreased. But emissions are now known to be much more harmful and costly.
Engineers today need to adjust currently accepted practices to develop new solutions that prioritize mass efficiency over energy efficiency.
In addition to electrochemical engineers working toward a cleaner steel and iron industry, advancements in technology and cheaper renewables have put us in an “electrochemical moment” that promises change across multiple sectors.
The plummeting cost of photovoltaic panels and wind turbines, for example, has led to more affordable renewable electricity. Advances in electrical distribution systems that were designed for electric vehicles can be repurposed for modular electrochemical reactors.
Electrochemistry holds the potential to support the development of clean, green infrastructure beyond batteries, electrolyzers, and fuel cells. Electrochemical processes and methods can be scaled to produce metals, ceramics, composites, and even polymers at scales previously reserved for thermochemical processes. With enough effort and thought, electrochemical production can lead to billions of tons of metal, concrete, and plastic. And because electrochemistry directly accesses the electron transfer fundamental to chemistry, the same materials can be recycled using renewable energy.
As renewables are expected to account for more than 90 percent of global electricity expansion during the next five years, scientists and engineers focused on electrochemistry must figure out how best to utilize low-cost wind and solar energy.
The core components of electrochemical systems, including complex oxides, corrosion-resistant metals, and high-power precision power converters, are now an exciting set of tools for the next evolution of electrochemical engineering.
The scientists who came before have created a stable set of building blocks; the next generation of electrochemical engineers needs to use them to create elegant, reliable reactors and other systems to produce the processes of the future.
Three decades ago, electrochemical engineering courses were, for the most part, electives and graduate-level. Now almost every institutional top-ranked R&D center has full tracks of electrochemical engineering. Students interested in the field should take both electroanalytical chemistry and electrochemical methods classes and electrochemical energy storage and materials processing coursework.
Although scaled electrochemical production is possible, it is not inevitable. It will require the combined efforts of the next generation of engineers to reach its potential scale.
Just as scientists found a way to unlock the potential of the abundant, once-unattainable aluminum, engineers now have the opportunity to shape a cleaner, more sustainable future. Electrochemistry has the power to flip the switch to clean energy, paving the way for a world in which environmental harmony and industrial progress go hand in hand.
NASCAR, the stock car racing sanctioning body known for its high-octane events across the United States, is taking a significant step toward a greener future. In July, during the Chicago Street Race event, NASCAR unveiled a prototype battery-powered race car that marks the beginning of its push to decarbonize motorsports. This move is part of NASCAR’s broader strategy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2035.
The electric prototype represents a collaborative effort between NASCAR and its traditional Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) partners—Chevrolet, Ford, and Toyota—along with ABB, a global technology leader. Built by NASCAR engineers, the car features three 6-Phase motors from Stohl Advanced Research and Development, an Austrian specialist in electric vehicle powertrains. These motors together produce 1,000 kilowatts at peak power, equivalent to approximately 1,300 horsepower. The energy is supplied by a 78-kilowatt-hour liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery, operating at 756 volts, though the specific battery chemistry remains a closely guarded secret.
C.J. Tobin, Senior Engineer of Vehicle Systems at NASCAR and the lead engineer on the EV prototype project, explained the motivation behind the development. He told IEEE Spectrum that “The push for electric vehicles is continuing to grow, and when we started this project one and a half years ago, that growth was rapid. We wanted to showcase our ability to put an electric stock car on the track in collaboration with our OEM partners. Our racing series have always been a platform for OEMs to showcase their stock cars, and this is just another tool for them to demonstrate what they can offer to the public.”
Eleftheria Kontou, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign whose primary research focus is transportation engineering, said in an interview that “It was an excellent introduction of the new technology to NASCAR fans, and I hope that the fans will be open to seeing more innovations in that space.”
John Probst, NASCAR’s SVP of Innovation and Racing Development speaks during the unveiling of the new EV prototype. Jared C. Tilton/Getty Images
The electric race car is not just about speed; it’s also about sustainability. The car’s body panels are made from ampliTex, a sustainable flax-based composite supplied by Bcomp, a Swiss manufacturer specializing in composites made from natural fibers. AmpliTex is lighter, more moldable, and more durable than traditional materials like steel or aluminum, making the car more efficient and aerodynamic.
Regenerative braking is another key feature of the electric race car. As it slows down, the car can convert some of its kinetic energy into electric charge that feeds back into the battery. This feature most advantageous on road courses like the one in Chicago and on short oval tracks like Martinsville Speedway in Virginia.
“The Chicago Street Race was a great introduction for the EV prototype because it happens in a real-world setup where electric vehicles tend to thrive,” says Kontou, who also serves on the Steering Committee of the Illinois Alliance for Clean Transportation. “[It was a good venue for the car’s unveiling] because navigating the course requires more braking than is typical at many speedway tracks.”
Though the electric prototype is part of a larger NASCAR sustainability initiative, “There are no plans to use the electric vehicle in competition at this time,” a spokesman said. “The internal combustion engine plays an important role in NASCAR and there are no plans to move away from that.” So, die-hard stock-car racing fans can still anticipate the sounds and smells of V-8 engines burning gasoline as they hurtle around tracks and through street courses.
“The Chicago Street Race was a great introduction for the EV prototype because it happens in a real-world setup where electric vehicles tend to thrive.” —Eleftheria Kontou, University of Illinois
In its sustainability efforts, NASCAR lags well behind Formula One, its largest rival atop the world’s motorsports hierarchy. Since 2014, Formula One’s parent organization, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), has had an all-electric racing spinoff, called Formula E. For the current season, which began in July, the ABB FIA Formula E World Championship series boasts 11 teams competing in 17 races. This year’s races feature the league’s third generation of electric race cars, and a fourth generation is planned for introduction in 2026.
Asked how NASCAR plans to follow through on its pledge to make its core operations net-zero emissions by its self-imposed target date, the spokesman pointed to changes that would counterbalance the output of traditional stock cars, which are notorious for their poor fuel efficiency and high carbon emissions. Those include 100 percent renewable electricity at NASCAR-owned racetracks and facilities, and tradeoffs such as recycling and on-site charging stations for use by fans with EVs.
The spokesman also noted that NASCAR and its OEM partners are developing racing fuel that’s more sustainable in light of the fact that stock cars consume, on average, about 47 liters for every 100 km they drive (5 miles per gallon). For comparison, U.S. federal regulators announced in June that they would begin enforcing an industry-wide fleet average of approximately 5.6 liters per 100 kilometers (50.4 miles per gallon) for model year 2031 and beyond. Fortunately for NASCAR, race cars are exempt from fuel-efficiency and tailpipe-emissions rules.
While some may be tempted to compare NASCAR’s prototype racer with the cars featured in the ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, Tobin emphasized that NASCAR’s approach in designing the prototype was distinct. “Outside of us seeing that there was a series out there racing electric vehicles and seeing how things were run with Formula E, we leaned heavily on our OEMs and went with what they wanted to see at that time,” he said.
The apparently slow transition to electric vehicles in NASCAR is seen by some in the organization as both a response to environmental concerns and a proactive move to stay ahead of potential legislation that could threaten the future of motorsports. “NASCAR and our OEM partners want to be in the driver’s seat, no matter where we’re going,” says Tobin. “With the development of [the NextGen EV prototype], we wanted to showcase the modularity of the chassis and what powertrains we can build upon it—whether that be alternative fuels, battery electric power, or something unforeseen in the future…We want to continue to push the envelope.”
According to the International Maritime Organization, shipping was responsible for over 1 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2018. A significant share of those emissions came from seaport activities, including ship berthing, cargo handling, and transportation within port areas. In response, governments, NGOs, and environmental watchdog groups are sounding alarms and advocating for urgent measures to mitigate pollution at the world’s ports.
One of the most promising solutions for the decarbonization of port operations involves electrifying these facilities. This plan envisions ships plugging into dockside electric power rather than running their diesel-powered auxiliary generators for lighting, cargo handling, heating and cooling, accommodation, and onboard electronics. It would also call for replacing diesel-powered cranes, forklifts, and trucks that move massive shipping containers from ship to shore with battery-powered alternatives.
To delve deeper into this transformative approach, IEEE Spectrum recently spoke with John Prousalidis, a leading advocate for seaport electrification. Prousalidis, a professor of marine electrical engineering at the National Technical University of Athens, has played a pivotal role in developing standards for seaport electrification through his involvement with the IEEE, the International Electrical Commission (IEC), and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). As vice-chair of the IEEE Marine Power Systems Coordinating Committee, he has been instrumental in advancing these ideas. Last year, Prousalidis co-authored a key paper titled “Holistic Energy Transformation of Ports: The Proteus Plan” in IEEE Electrification Magazine. In the paper, Prousalidis and his co-authors outlined their comprehensive vision for the future of port operations. The main points of the Proteus plan have been integrated in the policy document on Smart and Sustainable Ports coordinated by Prousalidis within the European Public Policy Committee Working Group on Energy; the policy document was approved in July 2024 by the IEEE Global Policy Committee.
Professor John ProusalidisJohn Prousalidis
What exactly is “cold ironing?”
John Prousalidis: Cold ironing involves shutting down a ship’s propulsion and auxiliary engines while at port, and instead, using electricity from shore to power onboard systems like air conditioning, cargo handling equipment, kitchens, and lighting. This reduces emissions because electricity from the grid, especially from renewable sources, is more environmentally friendly than burning diesel fuel on site. The technical challenges include matching the ship’s voltage and frequency with that of the local grid, which, in general, varies globally, while tackling grounding issues to protect against short circuits.
IEEE, along with IEC and ISO, have developed a joint standard, 80005, which is a series of three different standards for high-voltage and low-voltage connection. It is perhaps (along with Wi-Fi, the standard for wireless communication) the “hottest” standard because all governmental bodies tend to make laws stipulating that this is the standard that all ports need to follow to supply power to ships.
How broad has adoption of this standard been?
Prousalidis: The European Union has mandated full compliance by January 1, 2030. In the United States, California led the way with similar measures in 2010. This aggressive remediation via electrification is now being adopted globally, with support from the International Maritime Organization.
Let’s talk about another interesting idea that’s part of the plan: regenerative braking on cranes. How does that work?
Prousalidis: When lowering shipping containers, cranes in regenerative braking mode convert the kinetic energy into electric charge instead of wasting it as heat. Just like when an electric vehicle is coming to a stop, the energy can be fed back into the crane’s battery, potentially saving up to 50 percent in energy costs—though a conservative estimate would be around 20 percent.
What are the estimated upfront costs for implementing cold ironing at, say, the Port of Los Angeles, which is the largest port in the United States?
Prousalidis: The cost for a turnkey solution is approximately US $1.7 million per megawatt, covering grid upgrades, infrastructure, and equipment. A rough estimate using some established rules of thumb would be about $300 million. The electrification process at that port has already begun. There are, as far as I know, about 60 or more electrical connection points for ships at berths there.
How significant would the carbon reduction from present levels be if there were complete electrification with renewable energy at the world’s 10 biggest and busiest ports?
Prousalidis: If ports fully electrify using renewable energy, the European Union’s policy could achieve a 100-percent reduction in ship emissions in the port areas. According to the IMO’s approach, which considers the energy mix of each country, it could lead to a 60-percent reduction. This significant emission reduction means lower emissions of CO2, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and particulate matter, thus reducing shipping’s contribution to global warming and lowering health risks in nearby population centers.
If all goes according to plan, and every country with port operations goes full bore toward electrification, how long do you think it will realistically take to completely decarbonize that aspect of shipping?
Prousalidis: As I said, the European Union is targeting full port electrification by 1 January 2030. However, with around 600 to 700 ports in Europe alone, and the need for grid upgrades, delays are possible. Despite this, we should focus on meeting the 2030 deadline rather than anticipating extensions. This recalls the words of Gemini and Apollo pioneer astronaut, Alan Shepard, when he explained the difference between a test pilot and a normal professional pilot: “Suppose each of them had 10 seconds before crashing. The conventional pilot would think, In 10 seconds I’m going to die. The test pilot would say to himself, I’ve got 10 seconds to save myself and save the craft.” The point is that, in a critical situation like the fight against global warming, we should focus on the time we have to solve the problem, not on what happens after time runs out. But humanity doesn’t have an eject button to press if we don’t make every effort to avoid the detrimental consequences that will come with failure of the “save the planet” projects.
In July, two companies announced a collaboration aimed at helping to decarbonize maritime fuel technology. The companies, Brooklyn-based Amogy and Osaka-based Yanmar, say they plan to combine their respective areas of expertise to develop power plants for ships that use Amogy’s advanced technology for cracking ammonia to produce hydrogen fuel for Yanmar’s hydrogen internal combustion engines.
This partnership responds directly to the maritime industry’s ambitious goals to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has set stringent targets. It is calling for a 40 percent reduction in shipping’s carbon emissions from 2008 levels by 2030. But will the companies have a commercially available reformer-engine unit available in time for shipping fleet owners to launch vessels featuring this technology by the IMO’s deadline? The urgency is there, but so are the technical hurdles that come with new technologies.
Shipping accounts for less than 3 percent of global human-caused CO2 emissions, but decarbonizing the industry would still have a profound impact on global efforts to combat climate change. According to the IMO’s 2020 Fourth Greenhouse Gas Study, shipping produced 1,056 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2018.
Amogy and Yanmar did not respond to IEEE Spectrum‘s requests for comment about the specifics of how they plan to synergize their areas of focus. But John Prousalidis, a professor at the National Technical University of Athens’s School of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, spoke with Spectrum to help put the announcement in context.
“We have a long way to go. I don’t mean to sound like a pessimist, but we have to be very cautious.” —John Prousalidis, National Technical University of Athens
Prousalidis is among a group of researchers pushing for electrification of seaport activities as a means of cutting greenhouse gas emissions and reducing the amount of pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides being spewed into the air by ships at berth and by the cranes, forklifts, and trucks that handle shipping containers in ports. He acknowledged that he hasn’t seen any information specific to Amogy and Yanmar’s technical ideas for using ammonia as ships’ primary fuel source for propulsion, but he has studied maritime sector trends long enough—and helped create standards for the IEEE, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)—in order to have a strong sense of how things will likely play out.
“We have a long way to go,” Prousalidis says. “I don’t mean to sound like a pessimist, but we have to be very cautious.” He points to NASA’s Artemis project, which is using hydrogen as its primary fuel for its rockets.
“The planned missile launch for a flight to the moon was repeatedly postponed because of a hydrogen leak that could not be well traced,” Prousalidis says. “If such a problem took place with one spaceship that is the singular focus of dozens of people who are paying attention to the most minor detail, imagine what could happen on any of the 100,000 ships sailing across the world?”
What’s more, he says, bold but ultimately unsubstantiated announcements from companies are fairly common. Amogy and Yanmar aren’t the first companies to suggest tapping into ammonia for cargo ships—the industry is no stranger to plans to adopt the fuel to move massive ships across the world’s oceans.
“A couple of big pioneering companies have announced that they’re going to have ammonia-fueled ship propulsion pretty soon,” Prousalidis says. “Originally, they announced that it would be available at the end of 2022. Then they said the end of 2023. Now they’re saying something about 2025.”
Shipping produced 1,056 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2018.
Prousalidis adds, “Everybody keeps claiming that ‘in a couple of years’ we’ll have [these alternatives to diesel for marine propulsion] ready. We periodically get these announcements about engines that will be hydrogen-ready or ammonia-ready. But I’m not sure what will happen during real operation. I’m sure that they performed several running tests in their industrial units. But in most cases, according to Murphy’s Law, failures will take place at the worst moment that we can imagine.”
All that notwithstanding, Prousalidis says he believes these technical hurdles will someday be solved, and engines running on alternative fuels will replace their diesel-fueled counterparts eventually. But he says he sees the rollout likely mirroring the introduction of natural gas. At the point when a few machines capable of running on that type of fuel were ready, the rest of the logistics chain was not. “We need to have all these brand-new pieces of equipment, including piping, that must be able to withstand the toxicity and combustibility of these new fuels. This is a big challenge, but it means that all engineers have work to do.”
Spectrum also reached out to researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy with several questions about what Amogy and Yanmar say they are looking to pull off. The DOE’s e-mail response: “Theoretically possible, but we don’t have enough technical details (temperature of coupling engine to cracker, difficulty of manifolding, startup dynamics, controls, etc.) to say for certain and if it is a good idea or not.”
This article was updated on 5 August 2024 to correct global shipping emission data.
Login