Interest in using liquefied natural gas as vessel fuel is highlighting the need for regulatory policies and operational and safety standards, according to a new Maritime Administration study on LNG bunkering.

The U.S. is hardly the only country trying to a handle on using LNG as a maritime fuel. Vessel owners and operators worldwide are evaluating LNG fuel as an economical way to meet increasingly stringent air-quality standards imposed by the International Maritime Organization and, in some cases, regional regulators.

IMO rules next year will require marine fuel with a maximum 0.1 percent sulfur content, compared with 1 percent now, in emission control areas in the North and Baltic seas, English Channel and within 200 miles of the U.S. and Canada. Some regions, including Europe and California, require low-sulfur fuel at berth. Marpol Annex VI would limit vessel fuels’ sulfur content to 0.5 percent globally, beginning in 2020.

“Because the use of LNG as a maritime propulsion fuel is a relatively new concept in the U.S., there are significant safety and regulatory gaps,” the study said. “In addition there are several challenges related to the development of a national infrastructure for LNG bunkering.”=

Marad contracted with technical and safety advisory company DNV GL to analyze LNG bunkering infrastructure, safety, regulations and training, and to recommend best practices for vessel and port operators and LNG suppliers.

United Arab Shipping Co. has announced plans to establish an LNG bunkering station in the Middle East and designed 10 of its large new ships — five with capacities of 18,000 20-foot-equivalent units and five with 14,000-TEU capacity —  to be able to burn LNG fuel.

Lloyd’s Register said its 2014 survey of 22 major ports around the world showed most “are either planning for, or are anticipating, the wide-scale development of LNG bunkering,” even though no active cellular container ships currently use LNG and some industry leaders have called LNG impractical for large container ships.

In the U.S. domestic trades, TOTE, Matson and Crowley are building LNG-powered vessels. LNG also is being used for offshore oil and gas support vessels in the Gulf of Mexico, and is being considered for Great Lakes cargo vessels, and ferries in Washington State and Staten Island, New York.

Norway has provided government and commercial subsidies to increase LNG fuel use. LNG bunkering also is being developed in other Northern European countries, primarily for smaller vessels on inland or short-sea services.

LNG transfer to ships may be accomplished with trucks, pipelines, bunkering vessels, or portable tanks on the vessels. Each has pluses and minuses from a cost, operational and safety standpoint. The Marad study recommended further analysis to identify ports best suited for LNG bunkering, to compare safety risks of various types of bunkering, to develop uniform standards for regulations, and to develop training programs for crews and first responders to accidents.

Among issues requiring further analysis, the study said, is identification of ports “where LNG bunkering infrastructure would be in the national best interest as opposed to locations that are less desirable for security, safety, or other reasons.”In addition to safety and technical issues, selection of sites for LNG bunkering sites must consider “not-in-my-backyard” attitudes from the public, the Marad study cautioned.

“The greatest challenge to co-locating bunkering with other uses of LNG as a transportation fuel is the management of public perception of risks,” the study said. “NIMBY issues will likely be the default and most pervasive position of opponents to LNG bunkering.”

Contact Joseph Bonney at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and follow him on Twitter: @JosephBonney.