Odfjell SE - Chemical Tanker Industry Update

- Alternatives Future choice of propulsion is a dilemma if ordering vessels today are not compliant with regulations, technically feasible or readily available Better suited as energy Non-attractive Attractive Challenges carrier than as a fuel Summary of characteristics ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Hydrogen Ammonia of alternative fuels Relative to HFO LPG Methanol DME LNG Battery Thorium Compr. Liquid Compr. Liquid Emissions 1 -8% CO2 per transport work -2% -38% -28% -100% -100% -100% -100% -100% -100% Specific density 2 DWT requirement 3 -4% +125% +2% -17% +13866% -99.9% -71% -71% +115% +115% Energy density +40% +148% +32% +60% -99% +2637090% +979% +252% +202% Tank volume requirement +176% Carrying temperature 4 -42°C Ambient -24°C -163°C Ambient Ambient Celsius, given state Ambient -253°C Ambient -33°C ? II Summary Moderate reduction, but potential interm. step Not offering enough emissions reduction Potential Potential intermediate intermediate step step Extensive volume requirement Radioactive & political resistance. Extensive volume requirement Temperature and volume density questionable Realistic long-term alternative, but still immature Realistic long-term alternative, but still immature No propulsion solutions points out as an obvious alternative in the short-term to solve medium to long-term targets - This should keep a lid on speculative new orders Source: Odfjell 29

View entire presentation