Developing a maritime energy transition strategy: understanding your position

Navigating the intricate waters of maritime decarbonisation requires a comprehensive understanding of one’s position in the landscape. This article delves into the essential steps for framing an energy transition strategy, emphasising the critical role of the “Understand” phase. By dissecting the diagnosis, tools, and connections involved, readers will be equipped with a robust blueprint to tackle the challenges posed by decarbonisation, bridging the gap between raw data and actionable insights.

Gaining understanding is about realising the root causes of a problem in order to set about finding the right solutions. The purpose of this is to ultimately avoid wasted effort and convert learning into action. This begins with a systematic diagnosis in order to select the right tools to apply.

Diagnose

Once the data analysis is completed, the present and target states defined, and the gap between them established, the next step requires a diagnostic analysis, otherwise known as a root cause analysis. Where a gap analysis answers “what” and “where” questions, the root cause analysis poses “why” questions. In fact, a popular technique for launching a root cause analysis is the “five whys” approach. 

Root Cause Analysis and the Five Whys Approach

Continuing the example above, the analysis revealed that a vessel is misaligned with CII, so a diagnosis or root cause analysis is required to understand why and identify the corrective actions that need to take place. Studying the Annual Emissions Ratio (AER) closer will provide major clues and corrective actions are likely to become apparent since there are a limited number of variables. 

The vessel in this example will need to find reductions in energy consumption for the same amount of work done, or find operational efficiencies which increase the amount of work done for given consumption. In all cases, it would be useful to group the analysis into two: actual problems, where the influence is in evidence, and potential problems, which could represent influencing factors, even if the evidence is incomplete or unclear.

Let’s take a look at a basic example of a Five Whys approach to the problem above:

• Why has the vessel failed to attain a rating of C or above?
  • Because the carbon intensity was too high over the reporting year.
    
• Why was the carbon intensity high?
  • (one reason) Because port waiting times were high, leading to increased idle time emissions.
    
• Why were port waiting times high?
  • Because the vessel made best speed voyages to each safe port / safe berth, regardless of berth availability.
    
• Why did the vessel proceed at best speed?
  • Because it was contractually obliged to do so under the charter party agreement.
    
• Why does the charter party agreement stipulate best speed?
  • Because dynamic demurrage or just in time clauses have not been negotiated with the charterer.

This simplified example demonstrates a logical approach to finding reasons for the vessel failing to achieve a compliant CII rating. In this case, a potential course of action to address the problem is identified: seek to negotiate a charter agreement that is better aligned with just in time port arrivals in order to reduce the impact of ‘sail fast, then wait’, which is known to erode CII rating performance.

Tool

During a Riviera Maritime Media Webinar on the subject of improving CII compliance ratings, a panel consisting of fleet operators and ship technologists described several strategies for improving CII. These included implementing a just in time (JIT) arrival mechanism to facilitate speed reductions, reducing energy demand on board, retrofitting ships with energy saving devices such as air lubrication, switching to lower-carbon fuels, and implementing “cold ironing” where available.

Selecting and prioritising the most appropriate tools for decarbonisation depends entirely on the diagnosis and the tools available to the operator in light of certain factors. The following questions could help to identify these factors:

• Is the identified solution technological, behavioural, or contractual in nature? 
• Is it a process, procedure, condition, or culture that needs to change?
• If the solution is technical, how mature is the readiness and availability of the technology? Is there an off-the-shelf solution? 
• What budget can be assigned to solving this problem? Can we expect a return on investment?
• Which other resources – both internal and external – would the solution need for implementation?

Connect

Once solutions have been found and prioritised for each problem, it is vitally important to zoom out to take a macro view. How do these problems and solutions relate to each other? Is there a single solution which could solve more than one problem? How might one solution impact another? If so, what is the balance of risk versus reward?

It isn’t just problems and solutions which need to be joined together, it is the three core domains too – the operation, the asset, and the human element. 

Imagine that our CII improvement problem requires a speed reduction solution rooted in human behaviour. Building habits among captains and deck officers to seek opportunities to sail slower and reduce engine loads might start with a company seminar where ideas are generated and shared among seafaring staff. This addresses the human domain. But building these new habits might also benefit from technology-based decision support tools. One example is placing a consumption indicator at the throttle lever on the bridge which provides efficiency information to the operator in real time. If the engine is being pressed to accelerate harder than is necessary, the operator is given a warning and can take the decision to adjust the engine power demand accordingly. This solution falls into both the asset and operations domains but acts as a supporting measure to a human element solution.

In essence, understanding one’s position in the maritime energy transition is pivotal for achieving meaningful progress. From the meticulous root cause analysis to the selection of apt tools and fostering connections across core domains, each step contributes to a holistic and informed approach. As the maritime sector evolves, it is these strategic insights and practices that will guide businesses towards a sustainable and efficient future, harmonising operations, assets, and the invaluable human element.

This article is an extract from the Thetius Decarbonisation Toolkit, commissioned by Inmarsat. To read the full 35+ page report, fill in the form below.