Economic modelling and comparative analysis of scrubber technologies for various ship types utilising different marine fuels

Hazar, C, Yuksel, O orcid iconORCID: 0000-0002-5728-5866 and Bayraktar, M (2025) Economic modelling and comparative analysis of scrubber technologies for various ship types utilising different marine fuels. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. pp. 1-25. ISSN 1618-954X

[thumbnail of Economic Modelling and Comparative Analysis of Scrubber Technologies for Various Ship Types Utilising Different Marine Fuels.pdf] Text
Economic Modelling and Comparative Analysis of Scrubber Technologies for Various Ship Types Utilising Different Marine Fuels.pdf - Accepted Version
Access Restricted until 26 July 2026.

Download (5MB)

Abstract

This study conducts an in-depth economic evaluation of four different types of scrubbers installed on container ships of various sizes. The analysis compares liquefied natural gas (LNG), methanol (MEOH), and very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) with the intermediate fuel oil (IFO) utilised scrubber installation cases. Levelized cost of energy (LCOE) and discounted payback period (DPP) serve as performance indicators under different interest rates (5%, 7%, and 10%) in the scenario-based (minimum, mean, maximum prices) economic calculations. Including the LNG and MEOH scenarios, along with an assessment of the carbon tax effect, represents the innovative contribution of the analysis. Results indicate that the annual fuel consumption of auxiliary engines increases by an average of 257.04 tons with wet scrubber usage. Installation costs of scrubbers vary widely regarding the vessel size and scrubber type. Carbon tax raises annual IFO costs by 35.36% on average. VLSFO, LNG, and MEOH indicate respective annual expenditure increases of 28.37%, 10.78%, and 26.48%. DPPs of open-loop scrubbers are the best among other types for up to 3.85 years. Overall, scrubber installation options outperform alternative fuel utilisation regarding DPP and LCOE metrics, particularly under varying market conditions, emphasising the influence of geopolitical factors on fuel viability.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use, but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-025-03268-9
Uncontrolled Keywords: 4015 Maritime Engineering; 40 Engineering; 05 Environmental Sciences; 06 Biological Sciences; 09 Engineering; Environmental Sciences; 31 Biological sciences; 40 Engineering; 41 Environmental sciences
Subjects: T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)
V Naval Science > VM Naval architecture. Shipbuilding. Marine engineering
Divisions: Engineering
Publisher: Springer
Date of acceptance: 7 July 2025
Date Deposited: 29 Aug 2025 09:20
Last Modified: 29 Aug 2025 09:30
DOI or ID number: 10.1007/s10098-025-03268-9
URI: https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/27047
View Item View Item