Anyone in business is aware of the rising cost of operating, particularly when it comes to fuel. There’s also the building pressure to burn less carbon, with an increasing number of buyers and consumers paying attention to business practices as well as the products. The challenge is trying to understand what options you have, how much will it cost and is it worth the risk for you business or sector? To help fisheries and aquaculture businesses across Australia explore their alternative fuel options, Seafood Industry Australia recently hosted the webinar below. The project being presented aimed to cut through the noise and compare the major future fuel options that might power our fleets in the future.
Key moments in the video:
- 8:33 Alternate fuels
- 9:45 Head-to-head comparison of diesel v grey and green methanol
- 11:20 Methanol production and usage
- 14:50 Engine technology
- 17:20 Final thoughts
- 20:28 Discussion of the influence of AMSA regulations on alternative fuels
- 25:09 Outboard motors
- 29:24 Refuelling and cost savings with grey methanol
For the report this webinar is based on, check out 2021-089: Climate Resilient Wild Catch Fisheries
Top Image Credit: 2021-089: Climate Resilient Wild Catch Fisheries
What are your thoughts on alternative fuel options?
Leave a comment and rate this article below.
7 comments, add yours.
Mr David J Sterling
In respect to Hydrogen as a fuel, I’ve read in quite a few places that if hydrogen was used it would be in high pressure gas cylinders rather than cryogenic (very low temp) liquid cylinders. I wonder how tall the bar (tank) would be if it was high pressure gas rather than liquid?
Mr David Sterling
** there is no capacity to edit a comment.
Regarding hydrogen as a fuel, I’ve read in several sources that it would likely be stored in high-pressure gas cylinders rather than cryogenic liquid tanks. This makes me wonder—how tall would the tank need to be if storing hydrogen as a high-pressure gas instead of a liquid?
Steve J Eayrs
AuthorA great point you make Dave. AMSA of course will have a lot to do in this space determining if it is possible to retrofit such fuel sources and developing associated standards.
Mr David Sterling
** there is no capacity to edit a comment.
Regarding hydrogen as a fuel, I’ve read in several sources that it would likely be stored in high-pressure gas cylinders rather than cryogenic liquid tanks. This makes me wonder—how tall would the tank need to be if storing hydrogen as a high-pressure gas instead of a liquid?
Mr David J Sterling
In the podcast, Dave Carter warned that unless we cut seafood’s carbon footprint by 50% per decade, the industry risks being “cancelled.” But what realistic pathways exist to achieve this?
It’s hard to see how such a transformation could happen under the current bureaucratic paradigm—but in an alternative framework, it could be not only possible but relatively straightforward.
A Three-Stage Approach to Carbon Reduction in Trawl Fisheries:
1️⃣ Maximizing Resource Use – Retaining fish as a byproduct instead of discarding it as bycatch could immediately deliver a 50% reduction in carbon footprint.
2️⃣ Renewable Fuel from Bycatch Waste – Utilizing non-marketable fish waste as a renewable fuel source could displace 50% of diesel consumption. Theoretical estimates suggest that the required biomass is well within current bycatch levels.
3️⃣ Advanced Trawl Systems – Innovations like 5-rig trawling, in-pull winches, W-trawl configurations, and alternative steering systems in a practical combination could drive another 50% reduction by further improving efficiency and reducing fuel use.
The real challenge? Bureaucracy remains entrenched in an outdated paradigm, unable to collectively recognize solutions that could tackle the most pressing issue facing the trawl industry—despite the world’s urgent need to decarbonize food production.
Are we ready to shift gears and embrace purposeful innovation? 🚀
#SustainableFisheries #CarbonReduction #FishingInnovation #MarineTechnology #TrawlEfficiency
Mr David J Sterling
A relevant search indicates that the answer is 43% higher.
Other interesting insights: Beyond the energy required to produce hydrogen, an additional 12% is needed to compress it for high-pressure gas storage, while liquefying hydrogen demands an extra 35%.
Steve J Eayrs
AuthorDo you happen to still have access to the source that provides such a figure? Be useful to investigate further.