Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “marine fuels”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Development of the Well-to-Wake Life Cycle Assessment Model for Marine Fuels in R&D GREET 2025

The Marine analysis capabilities in the 2025 Research and Development Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Technologies (R&D GREET) have been updated to incorporate the latest findings from the Fourth International Maritime Organization (IMO) GHG Study.1 To support these updates and enhance user flexibility, the former single marine module used in previous R&D GREET versions has been split into two workbook tabs: The Marine_Fuel tab, which covers the fuel-cycle, and the Marine_Trip tab, which covers the trip-cycle. In the Marine_Fuel tab, fuel cycle results for 39 marine fuels are available—assuming a slow speed diesel engine—and can be seen in Appendix A. However, there are options for changing feedstocks for multiple fuels, ability to view results with or without pilot fuels for fuels such as methanol and ammonia, and carbon capture options. All these combinations make the number of total possible pathways over one hundred. For each pathway, life cycle emission results are divided into feedstock, conversion, and combustion categories, along with pilot fuel supply chain emissions for fuels used in dual fuel engines. In the newly created Marine_Trip tab, users can view the life cycle emissions of using these fuels from a trip perspective. Compared to R&D GREET 2024, 16 new types of vessels are added in R&D GREET 2025. Examples of results assuming the default size for each vessel type are available in Appendix A. Additional information categories on vessels are included such as vessel size, main propulsion type, engine power rating, combustion cycle, etc. based on the Fourth IMO GHG Study. Operational mode of the trip, fuel consumption, and load calculation were updated based on the report. The fuel consumption calculation also incorporates low-load adjustment, speed–power correction, weather correction, and fouling correction factors. Furthermore, fuel consumption in boilers or steam turbines is also added for the first time, besides fuel use in main propulsion engines and auxiliary engines. This effort makes the R&D GREET Marine capabilities more robust than before. Users will be able to estimate fuel consumption more accurately for more diverse choices of vessel categories, vessel sizes, and energy converters.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Life Cycle Assessment of Methanol from Fossil, Biomass, and Waste Sources, and Its Use as a Marine Fuel in Dual-Fuel Engines

Methanol is gaining interest in the marine sector from energy security and reducing emissions perspective. This study provides a comparative life cycle assessment of methanol as a marine fuel, across GHG and criteria air pollutant emission metrics, when it is used in a dual-fuel engine. Twelve methanol pathways from four different feedstock categories were considered, including (1) cellulosic biomass forest residues and clean pine mix, corn stover, switchgrass, and miscanthus; (2) organic wastes renewable natural gas from wastewater sludge, swine manure, food waste, and landfill gas; (3) fossil resources coal and natural gas (NG); and (4) e-methanol using captured carbon dioxide. When used in a dual-fuel engine with pilot fuel, life cycle GHG emissions for woody biomass-based methanol were approximately 19 gCO 2 e MJ −1 , while emissions from waste-based sources ranged between −154 and 31 gCO 2 e MJ −1 . Methanol from renewable sources showed a GHG reduction potential between 58 and 226% compared to conventional NG-based methanol (122 gCO 2 e MJ −1 ), primarily due to the avoided emissions from conventional waste management. When carbon from process emissions were captured, the reduction could be up to 327%. All pathways exhibited lower NO X , and particulate matter emissions compared to the baseline marine fuel (MGO 0.1% sulfur), while woody biomass and coal pathways had higher SO X emissions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Spill Behavior, Detection, and Mitigation for Emerging Nontraditional Marine Fuels

In this report, we describe the predicted impact of large spills or releases of alternative marine fuels. The fuels covered in this report are those that have been identified as potential future fuels for the marine shipping sector by industry experts and government agencies overseeing the development of renewable and low-carbon fuels. Several of these fuels are already in use, such as liquified natural gas, renewable diesel, ethanol, methanol, and biodiesel. Other fuels are hydrogen, dimethyl ether, ammonia, and bio-intermediates, such as catalytic fast pyrolysis biooils and hydrothermal liquefaction bio-crudes. The property databases of these fuels are extensive enough to form predictive assessments. Other potential marine fuels, such as lignin ethanol, have not been extensively evaluated and are therefore not included is this study. For each fuel chemistry, we have surmised the spill profiles and environmental impacts based on existing studies and relevant properties. The technologies used to detect spills (especially those for crude oil detection) are also reviewed for their applicability with alternative fuels, and in some instances, recommendations to improve these technologies for use with a particular fuel chemistry are put forward. Finally, current containment and remediation technologies are reviewed and assessed for their efficacy at handling these alternative fuels.

04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Primer on the Cost of Marine Fuels Compliant with IMO 2020 Rule

This report aims to provide information for owners and operators of U.S. ocean-going marine cargo vessels on the cost of different approaches to compliance with the IMO mandate to reduce the sulfur content of marine fuels (outside emission control areas) to no more than 0.5%. The IMO 2020 rule came into effect on January 1, 2020. The report discusses a suite of options for compliance including low-sulfur petroleum-based fuels and alternative fuels. Since fuel prices are a primary factor in determining the cost of the various alternatives, the document also includes a discussion of the main drivers of marine fuel prices. The cost analysis compares the average annual costs (capital and fuel) out to 2050 of each compliance approach under alternative scenarios regarding fuel prices, policy, and technology innovation. The cost calculations focus on representative U.S. fleet vessels for containership and tanker types. Even though the analysis focuses on average cost of approaches to comply with IMO 2020, the comparison of approaches also acknowledges other benefits or risks including fuel price risk and the contribution of the approach to achieving other potential environmental performance objectives or regulations.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2026

Handling and Properties of Methanol as a Marine Fuel

Given the increasing concern around greenhouse gas emissions and the decline in the availability of fossil fuels, there is increasing global demand to develop alternate fuels for maritime transportation that are sustainable and which have lower greenhouse gas emissions. Methanol is one such alternative fuel that has garnered considerable attention given its potential to be produced by more sustainable processes and its more favorable greenhouse gas emission profile in comparison with current fossil fuels. Understanding the physical and chemical properties of methanol under a range of conditions is essential for its development as a marine fuel. In this study, we seek to define physical and chemical properties of different methanol samples to simulate real-world storage conditions as these data are lacking in the literature. Several methanol samples were evaluated: nearly pure methanol; International Organization for Standardization (ISO) marine methanol (MM) grades A, B, and C; and methanol plus higher alcohols. We first evaluated all methanol samples for impurities, acetic acid content, density, and distillation range. We then characterized the effects of water absorption and found that methanol can easily absorb unacceptable water content from humid air within hours, necessitating storage conditions that prevent this process. In eight-week aging experiments at 20 °C and 40 °C in ambient air, we did not observe significant oxidation for any of the methanol samples; however, we did observe increases in acid number. We assessed the impact of contamination of methanol with water, marine gas oil (MGO), and an MGO–biodiesel mixture on density, viscosity, distillation range, and lubricity. Finally, we show that MGO contamination of methanol results in a slight increase in sooting tendency. In aggregate, our results provide an in-depth analysis of physical and chemical properties of methanol as well as the impacts of storage conditions and impurities on the properties of fuel methanol.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Desalting biocrude for improved downstream processing toward marine fuel application

Hydrothermal liquefaction of wet wastes (e.g., food waste and sewage sludge) offers a promising avenue for producing biocrude, but the resulting product is often contaminated with metals and water, impacting the biocrude upgrading steps to produce final fuel (e.g., jet and diesel). Here this study investigates the use of aqueous solutions of formic acid for desalting biocrudes and improving their quality. The results show that this approach significantly reduces both metal and water content, enabling mild hydrotreatment with reduced hydrogen consumption to further enhance the biocrude's quality. A preliminary technoeconomic analysis based on these experimental results shows that even without optimization, this washing process can yield biocrude with a minimum selling price of $1.87/GGE. Overall, our study demonstrates the potential for using dilute formic acid aqueous solutions to improve the quality of biocrudes, which can lead to more efficient and cost-effective conversion into biofuels.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marine Fuel Innovation in the Great Lakes and St Lawrence Seaway

NLR collaborated with five Great Lakes ports to conduct analysis on potential risks and opportunities for making additional fuels available at their ports. The project included: Identifying existing and anticipated fuel production within the region; examining current port infrastructure and activities; exploring potential siting feasibility of additional energy infrastructure based on available area; introducing the Alternative Energy for Ports Explorer (APEX) tool to help ports understand existing energy resources and infrastructure. This presentation summarizes the work we did and our key findings.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Alkyl dialkoxyalkanoates as bioderived, high cetane diesel fuels

A fuel for an internal combustion engine includes a C 5 to C 30 dialkoxyalkanoate corresponding to formula (I), wherein the R 1 group is —H or a —CH 3 group, the R 2 and R 2 ′ groups are alkyl groups independently selected to have 1 to 9 carbon atoms; and the R 3 group is selected to have 1 to 9 carbon atoms. The compounds described herein may be used as neat fuels or mixed fuels (with diesel, biodiesel, jet fuel, marine fuel or other fuel compounds) in autoignition or spark ignition engines, such as diesel engines, gasoline (spark ignition) engines, MCCI, Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) engines, or more generally in Low-Temperature Gasoline Combustion (LTGC) engines (using gasoline-like fuels), that have the high-efficiency advantages of HCCI but can operate with some level of charge inhomogeneities. Methods of making these compounds are environmentally friendly and can be done in a continuous manner.

Myllenbeck, Nicholas↗
DOE OSTI2023

Marine Alternative Fuel Pricing, Supply, and Demand

The International Maritime Organization low sulfur fuel rules and greenhouse gas-reduction strategy may create a significant perturbation to global refinery operations, impacting volumes and prices of marine fuel globally and within the United States and incentivizing the transition to alternative fuel use. The goals of this project are to (1) enhance understanding of how very low-sulfur fuel-primarily fuel oil and diesel-and low carbon fuel requirements and promising biofuel processes will affect the marine fuel supply chain; and (2) explore how these perturbations interact with and impact indicators such as pricing, number of trips, and demand behavior, along with the potential to meet low sulfur and carbon fuel demand with biofuel supply chains, (3) merge innovative thinking in the area of marine fuels within research centers of DOE (NREL) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (Volpe). These goals will be accomplished through the combination of detailed refinery, marine fuel burn, system dynamics, and geospatially explicit linear programming models.

biofuel↗
DOE OSTI2026

Opportunities and Challenges for Hydrotreating of Catalytic Fast Pyrolysis Oil to Fuels

Catalytic fast pyrolysis (CFP) provides a versatile platform for producing fuels to combat climate change and meet decarbonizing targets. In this contribution, we will discuss the hydroprocessing of CFP oils to a variety of fuels, including sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), diesel, and marine fuel. Both standalone and co-hydroprocessing with petroleum streams will be covered. Hydrotreating CFP oil at temperatures around 400 Degrees Celsius can produce a highly deoxygenated product with oxygen contents below the detection limit. However, the quality of fuel fractions produced has been a problem, manifesting as low octane numbers for the gasoline-range fraction and low cetane numbers for the diesel-range fraction. Incorporating an initial transition zone for hydrogenation during hydrotreating was shown to dramatically increase the diesel fraction cetane number from 24 to 45. A similar approach enabled the production of a cycloalkane-rich SAF fraction meeting key ASTM 4054 guidelines with respect to density, viscosity, heating value, volatility, freeze and flash point. Over 400 hours of hydrotreating for SAF was demonstrated with no signs of catalyst bed fouling, measured by pressure drop over the catalyst bed. Compared to other fuels, marine fuel is unique in that it does not require complete deoxygenation. We investigated the minimum hydrotreating requirements to produce fuel compatible with very low sulfur fuel oil, and the results suggested 30% reduction in hydrotreating costs for this approach. Co-hydroprocessing offers an opportunity to take advantage of refinery infrastructure and economies of scale although the operation is less flexible with respect to operating conditions. Co-hydroprocessing CFP oil with petroleum streams gave efficient deoxygenation at milder conditions (e.g. at temperatures of 320 Degrees Celsius) than required for standalone hydrotreating. Over 90% incorporation of biogenic carbon in the CFP oil was confirmed by carbon-14 analysis. Hydrotreating of CFP oil, whether by standalone or co-processing, can produce a variety of fuel cuts, whose quality can be tailored by changing process conditions. Challenges remain, including long-term catalyst performance and determining CFP oil quality requirements.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Comparison of ammonia with methanol, liquefied natural gas and conventional marine transportation fuels through life cycle cost and emissions analysis

This work evaluates ammonia as a potential marine fuel for a SUEZMAX tanker and compares it with methanol, liquefied natural gas, and conventional fuel oils. The motivation arises from the need to identify low-emission, cost-competitive fuel options that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping. The central hypothesis is that ammonia produced from renewable energy sources can achieve lower well-to-wake greenhouse gas emissions with varying life cycle costs based on the region. Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis were performed for a thirty-year vessel lifetime on two representative trade routes: from Saudi Arabia to Japan and from Saudi Arabia to the Netherlands. Four ammonia production pathways were assessed: natural gas, natural gas with carbon capture, natural gas pyrolysis, and renewable electricity–based synthesis. Results show that wind-based ammonia produced in Saudi Arabia achieved the lowest life cycle well-to-wake greenhouse gas emissions, between 0.58 and 0.64 million metric tons, among all fuels when using regional grid process electricity. With renewable process electricity, ammonia produced from natural gas pyrolysis in Saudi Arabia showed comparable emissions of 0.37 to 0.44 million metric tons with wind-based ammonia of 0.37 to 0.43 million metric tons. Liquefied natural gas exhibited the lowest life cycle cost, between 402 and 412 million United States dollars, and the only negative carbon abatement cost, ranging from −277 to –322 United States dollars per metric ton of greenhouse gas, compared with high sulfur fuel oil. The findings indicate that renewable ammonia offers a promising long-term pathway for reducing shipping emissions, while liquefied natural gas remains the most cost-effective option in the near term.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) Cost and Performance Data for Transportation Technologies

The 2022 Transportation Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) provides detailed cost and performance data, estimates, and assumptions for vehicle and fuel technologies in the United States. It includes current and projected estimates: time-series through 2050 for light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicle technologies; scenarios for conventional and alternative fuels. It details the assumptions used to calculate those costs, such as natural gas and electricity prices, discount rates, and vehicle miles traveled. The 2022 Transportation ATB vehicle data are specifically for cars powered by gasoline, diesel, natural gas, gasoline hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and fuel-cell powertrains and for trucks powered by diesel, diesel hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and fuel cell powertrains. Fuels and blendstocks include gasoline, ethanol, blendstock for oxygenate blending, diesel, diesel from biomass, natural gas, electricity, hydrogen, aviation fuel, and marine fuel. At this time, the ATB does not include other vehicles such as buses, 2- and 3-wheeled motorized vehicles, or non-road vehicles such as aircraft, vessels, locomotives, and those for industry and agriculture. See "ATB Transportation Website" resource below for more project information.

2022↗
DOE OSTI2024

2024 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) Cost and Performance Data for Transportation Technologies

The 2024 Transportation Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) provides detailed cost and performance data, estimates, and assumptions for vehicle and fuel technologies in the United States. It includes current and projected estimates: time-series through 2050 for light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicle technologies; scenarios for conventional and alternative fuels. It details the assumptions used to calculate those costs, such as natural gas and electricity prices, discount rates, and vehicle miles traveled. The 2024 Transportation ATB vehicle data are specifically for cars powered by gasoline, diesel, natural gas, gasoline hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and fuel-cell powertrains and for trucks powered by diesel, diesel hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and fuel cell powertrains. Fuels and blendstocks include gasoline, ethanol, blendstock for oxygenate blending, diesel, diesel from biomass, natural gas, electricity, hydrogen, aviation fuel, and marine fuel. At this time, the ATB does not include other vehicles such as 2- and 3-wheeled motorized vehicles, or non-road vehicles such as aircraft, vessels, locomotives, and those for industry and agriculture. See "Transportation ATB Website" resource below for more project information.

2024↗
DOE OSTI2021

Biofuel Options for Marine Applications: Technoeconomic and Life-Cycle Analyses

This study performed technoeconomic and life-cycle analyses to assess the economic feasibility and emission benefits and tradeoffs of various biofuel production pathways as an alternative to conventional marine fuels. We analyzed production pathways for (1) Fischer-Tropsch diesel from biomass and cofeeding biomass with natural gas or coal, (2) renewable diesel via hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids from yellow grease and cofeeding yellow grease with heavy oil, and (3) bio-oil via fast pyrolysis of low-ash woody feedstock. We also developed a new version of the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) marine fuel module for the estimation of life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) and criteria air pollutant (CAP) emissions of conventional and biobased marine fuels. The alternative fuels considered have a minimum fuel selling price between 2.36 and 4.58 $/heavy fuel oil gallon equivalent (HFOGE), and all exhibit improved life-cycle GHG emissions compared to heavy fuel oil (HFO), with reductions ranging from 40 to 93%. The alternative fuels also exhibit reductions in sulfur oxides and particulate matter emissions. Additionally, when compared with marine gas oil and liquified natural gas, they perform favorably across most emission categories except for cases where carbon and sulfur emissions are increased by the cofed fossil feedstocks. The pyrolysis bio-oil offers the most promising marginal CO2 abatement cost at less than $100/tonne CO2e for HFO prices >$1.09/HFOGE followed by Fischer-Tropsch diesel from biomass and natural gas pathways, which fall below $100/tonne CO2e for HFO prices >$2.25/HFOGE. Pathways that cofeed fossil feedstocks with biomass do not perform as well for marginal CO2 abatement cost, particularly at low HFO prices. This study indicates that biofuels could be a cost-effective means of reducing GHG, sulfur oxide, and particulate matter emissions from the maritime shipping industry and that cofeeding biomass with natural gas could be a practical approach to smooth a transition to biofuels by reducing alternative fuel costs while still lowering GHG emissions, although marginal CO2 abatement costs are less favorable for the fossil cofeed pathways.

Greenhouse gas, life cycle assessment, techno-econ↗