Communicator

Electricity [TWh/yr] required globally to provide green fuels for all shipping segments where actual data uncertainties are included.

A newly published academic article addresses the availability of green alternative fuels for marine shipping (and aviation). The article makes a compelling case for nuclear propulsion or otherwise see freight will stay fossil in the foreseeable future.

The paper presents some basic realities of replacing fossil fuels in shipping with green alternative fuels for the same amount of work being performed. The required amount of electric power for producing these green alternative fuels is subsequently calculated. Compared on a scale equal to major industrial entities globally, it is proven beyond any doubt that there is basically not enough electricity in the world to make a relevant amount of green alternative fuels for shipping.

Basically, the gravimetric energy densities are orders of magnitude too low, or the thermodynamical losses are too high, for electricity to replace fossil fuel in this particular application. This finding also questions the conventional wisdom of the merit of an all-encompassing electrification of society. There are, however, niches where a relevant supply of green alternative fuels is possible to secure, albeit difficult.

Therefore, much of today’s research on green alternative fuels rests on a hidden assumption—that there will be available fuels. However, green alternative fuels will not be available in relevant quantities unless the research is well contextualized for small ships on short, domestic distances. The fuel availability is, therefore, a key constraint to incorporate in future work on green alternative fuels for shipping.

Furthermore, it seems prudent to open up a wider search for solutions, including nuclear propulsion, based on the fact that the gravimetric energy densities are physical realities that we must respect.

Source: Emblemsvåg, J. A Study on the Limitations of Green Alternative Fuels in Global Shipping in the Foreseeable Future. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2025, 13, 79.

#marinefuel  #bunkerfuel  #fueloil  #marinediesel  #aviationfuel  #greenhydrogen  #greenammonia  #greenmethanol  #nuclearenergy 

*Excludes non-cash finance leases of $43 MM in Refining, $30 MM in Midstream and $2 MM in Corporate and Other.
** Our share of joint ventures’ capital spending.

December 16, 2024 | Phillips 66 News Release

Phillips 66 announced a 2025 capital budget of $2.1 billion, including $998 million for sustaining capital and $1.1 billion for growth capital. The budget underscores Phillips 66 dedication to delivering value to shareholders by funding growth in the NGL wellhead-to-market value chain and further enhancing refining competitiveness.

▪️ In Midstream, the capital budget of $975 million comprises $429 million for sustaining projects and $546 million for growth projects. ▪️ The budget advances the integrated NGL wellhead-to-market value chain by strengthening the company’s position in key basins, including increasing gas processing capacity.
▪️ In Refining, Phillips 66 plans to invest $822 million, including $414 million for sustaining capital. Refining growth capital of $408 million supports the company’s commitment to high-return, low-capital projects.
▪️ The Marketing and Specialties capital budget reflects the continued enhancement of the company’s branded network.
The Renewable Fuels capital budget reflects investments at the Rodeo Renewable Energy Complex toward the optimization of feedstocks and logistics for renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel production.
Corporate and Other capital will primarily fund information technology projects.

Phillips 66’s proportionate share of capital spending by joint ventures Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LLC (CPChem) and WRB Refining LP (WRB) is expected to total $877 million and be self-funded. Including Phillips 66’s proportionate share of capital spending associated with joint ventures CPChem and WRB, the company’s total 2025 capital program is projected to be $3 billion.

▪️ CPChem’s growth capital will continue to fund the construction of world-scale petrochemical facilities on the U.S. Gulf Coast and in Ras Laffan, Qatar, through joint ventures. The facilities are expected to start up in 2026.
▪️ WRB’s capital spending will primarily be directed to sustaining projects.

#phillips  #chevron  #wrb  #refining  #renewablediesel  #saf  #aviationfuel  #ngl  #cpchem  #raslaffan  #quatar  #usgc  #goldentriangle  #rodeo 

SAF or Sustainable Aviation Fuel is also called HEFA-SPK.

#SAF  #aviationfuel  #sustainableaviationfuel  #hefa

After halting work on biofuel plant in Rotterdam, 🇳🇱 The Netherlands, and booking a $1bn write down, Shell has also pulled out of e-SAF project planned with state-owned 🇸🇪 Swedish power utility company Vattenfall.

“Vattenfall and Shell have decided to pause their collaboration in the HySkies electrofuel project while Vattenfall continues the search for new partners,” said Vattenfall in a statement.

The joint project, with the planned capex of €780m ($845m), was launched in 2021 with initial plans to produce 82,000 tonnes of e-SAF and 9,000 tonnes of renewable diesel per annum. The project envisaged the use of hydrogen from 200MW electrolysis plant, biogenic CO2 captured from a waste-to-energy plant and sustainable ethanol as feedstocks at the site.

It was due to begin operations in March of 2027.

On the other hand, the company said that it will also not avail financial support via the EU Innovation Fund, considering it is infeasible for the project to succeed within the framework of that agreement and aiming to free up funds for others to use in their ambitions to decarbonise.

Vattenfall-Shell e-SAF project was awarded €80.2mn ($87mn) grant in January 2023.

#saf  #hefa  #hefa -spk #aviationfuel  #renewablediesel  #sustainableaviationfuel  #shell  #vattenfall  #electrolysis  #hydrogen  #greenhydrogen  #carboncapture  #ccu  #ethanol  #bioethanol 

Source: Fayaz Hussain, 8^th July 2024, SAF Investor

Shell announced that it will book an impairment charge of as much as $1.0bn on account of pausing the construction of Rotterdam biofuel plant as well as an additional $0.8bn from divestment of its chemical plant in 🇸🇬 Singapore, the company announced in its second quarter update note.

“Non-cash post tax impairments of $1.5-$2bn are expected, and mainly include the Singapore Chemicals & Products assets ($0.6-$0.8bn) as well as Rotterdam's HEFA ($0.6-$1.0bn), which is reported in the marketing segment,” the company said in a statement.

Earlier this week, Shell announced that it is pausing work on the development of Rotterdam  biofuel plant in 🇳🇱 The Netherlands owing to weak market conditions. The site was planned to have a production capacity of 820,000 tonnes a year to produce SAF/HVO using waste feedstocks.

“Temporarily pausing on-site construction now will allow us to assess the most commercial way forward for the project,” said Huibert Vigeveno, renewable and energy solutions director. Shell.

“We are committed to our target of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, with low-carbon fuels as a key part of Shell’s strategy to help us and our customers profitably decarbonise. And we will continue to use shareholder capital in a measured and disciplined way, delivering more value with less emissions.”

To note, according to Shell’s 2023 annual filing the company had revised the capex requirement for the conversion of Rotterdam site to $2.1bn from $0.58bn in 2022 driven by business acquisition and construction.

Source: Fayaz Hussain, 5^th July 2024, SAF Investor

#shell #hefa  #hvo  #biofuel  #aviationfuel  #SAF#SAF