News in English

On Board Carbon Capture and Storage Webinar

On Thursday the 7 May, the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) hosted a webinar on On Board Carbon Capture and Storage (OCCS), as a new pathway to achieve compliance with greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations. The panel was made up of experts in the subjects, who have just produced a new study commissioned by ICS offering up-to-date, high-level strategic guidance for shipowners on the evolving OCCS landscape, including Maritime Decarbonisation Specialist at Lloyd’s Register Olympia Tsitonakis, Marine Performance Services Technical Specialist at Lloyd’s Register Iason Kontochristos, Technical Consultant at Lloyd’s Register Dr. Emil Shivachev, and Technical Director at ICS Chris Waddington.
The webinar began with our moderator, ICS’ Principal Director John Stawpert, who introduced the topic with reference to the new study. The first segment of the webinar was conducted by Chris, who provided an overview of OCCS from ICS’ perspective. He gave context by highlighting that it will be some years before the availability of the green fuels matches demand, and in the meantime OCCS has the potential to make a significant contribution to shipping’s decarbonisation. Chris explained that the technology is at a high readiness level, we just need the regulatory framework, which is expected to be ready around 2028.
Lloyd’s Register (LR) then started their presentation, with Olympia opening and setting out the webinar’s agenda:
Description of OCCS technologies
Presentation of the disposal pathways
Review of the regulatory framework
Conclusion and Key findings
Alongside this introduction, Olympia delved into why we should look at OCCS as an alternative technology. She outlined the decarbonisation gap, fuel uncertainty due to issues such as cost and infrastructure, midlife vessel being under compliance pressure, regulatory and carbon cost pressure, the flexibility for emission reduction, and the emergence of energy CO2 value chains (particularly in European areas and the United States), explaining why these factors mean we should consider OCCS as a viable pathway.
Emil took over the presentation as the webinar moved into a technology overview. He explained that there are two main approaches for a Marine Carbon Capture System, being pre-combustion and post-combustion. The current focus in maritime is post-combustion as it is more developed. There are five primary post-combustion technologies, including: chemical absorption (chemical solvents), membrane separation (polymer filtration), physical separation (absorption), cryogenic separation (cooling), and calcium looping (mineralisation). Once the carbon has been captured (e.g. as CO2 or calcium carbonate), it will then be processed onboard, stored in onboard tanks or containers, and removed by offloading the equipment to a shore-based facility.

Emil moved the discussion onto the integrational challenges and operational impacts. Firstly being the On-Board storage and system integration. In this challenge, the vessel type is significant due to the space requirements and additional weight driven by liquid CO2 storage. For example, Emil highlighted that oil tankers have an advantage due to their large cargo area where storage tanks can be kept. The second main challenge is the energy demand, and the third is port and infrastructure readiness. There is limited port capability for capture-grade C02 offloading, and storage and transport networks remain fragmented in their early stages.
Olympia began her presentation on the potential disposal pathways. She shared that the CO2 can either be utilised or sequestered. Utilisation leads to synthetic fuel production or industrial or agricultural use, whereas shore-based offloading sees geological storage. C02 sequestration projects are accelerating rapidly but unevenly. Large-scale capacity is seen in the US and UK, with the Americas leading pipeline mega-hubs and the UK staying infrastructure driven. Port interface requirements need to be streamlined as C02 handling is not a standard cargo operation and must meet injection ready C02 specifications, for example. On C02 offloading, transport, and disposal costs, capture remains the largest cost component with about 27-100 euros per ton of C02 captured. Transport is more flexible, however stays at a high cost, and storage is dependent on the geology. Additionally, system level factors drive cost, for example C02 quality and pre-conditioning, pressure temperature alignment, and regulatory liability.
The webinar shifted to the regulatory overview of OCCS, where Iason was able to lead the discussion. He outlined the four regulatory components, being the IMO regulatory framework, the EU regulatory framework, International Conventions, and Classification society rules. Whilst it was noted that OCCS could align with the Net-Zero framework, IMO’s EEDI/EEXI have no consideration of OCCS. Similarly, CII does not recognise C02 capture, storage, or offloading, meaning OCCS is not accounted for in IMO’s short-term GHG measures. With EU regulation, there is asymmetry with acceptance of OCCS under EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), but exclusion from FuelEU Maritime. The International Conventions regulating movement of C02 are fragmented due to national status and C02 categorisation, creating potential barriers to cross-border transportation. However, Iason highlighted that classification societies are enabling OCCS deployment through risk-based approvals and AiPs.
Each speaker gave their conclusions by listing the key findings highlighted in the webinar: technology readiness, vessel integration, C02 value chain and port access, geography, hubs, and regulation and compliance. Iason underlined the fact that OCCS may be niche, but it is an emerging technology with significant opportunities. Finalising regulatory frameworks is an important factor in achieving industrial level uptake.
The webinar shifted to the question-and-answer section, with many sent in from the attendees. Firstly, Emil was questioned about the space and weight characteristics of OCCS systems, to which he highlighted that there isn’t a ‘one size fits all solution’ and it depends on target capture rate. Olympia was asked about the current state of development of the cost-effective solutions. She responded, highlighting that permanent geology storage is most developed – where the carbon is injected under the seabed. She also pointed out that converting C02 into limestone is an emerging solution for sustainable and low risk products. A notable point raised from the question-and-answer section was an enquiry about the training needed for seafarers, where Emil shared that although the systems are expected to be largely automatic, training is a necessity. The current training requirements for crew handling OCCS systems are lacking, which could lead to operational error and emergencies. Olympia spoke about the financial side, stating that commercial viability will heavily depend on carbon pricing. John responded, sharing the importance of decision-makers investing in infrastructure now, rather than later. The final question was for Iason, asking whether the main issue preventing the progress of OCCS lies with regulation or commercialisation. He shared that it is tricky to answer at this stage, but in his point of view, finance and regulatory barriers are effectively the same problem but from different perspectives. The economic challenges stem from regulatory uncertainty as OCCS is not recognised under key regional frameworks. Investment will follow regulation particularly in regions where OCCS infrastructure is already in place.
As the webinar came to a close, John asked our panellists what key takeaways they want the audience to remember. Iason kicked off the closing remarks, sharing that OCCS is technically viable but is constrained due to the fragmented regulatory landscape. He encouraged participants to not look at gaps as dead ends, but to work to fill them by evolving regulation, viewing OCCS as an investment in regulatory preparation for future climate controls.
Olympia concluded her take, stating that disposal is not the main constraint, integration between capture, transport, and storage is. Whilst port interface is the key bottleneck for OCCS, C02 hubs are the vital pillars to integration, and will allow carbon capture to scale.
Emil echoed the views by his fellow speakers, emphasizing the technical feasibility whilst stating that it is not a ‘one size fits all’ solution. The technology choice must align with how the vessel type operates. He stressed that OCCS can play a meaningful role in decarbonisation, but deployment depends on regulation and infrastructure.

ICS