What question did this study set out to answer?

To assess the techno-economic and environmental impacts of switching between heavy fuel oil, liquefied natural gas, and ammonia under Red Sea crisis routing disruptions and maritime carbon pricing.

August 19, 2026Journal of Shipping and TradeOpen Access

Techno-economic and environmental assessment of HFO, LNG, and ammonia under the red sea crisis and IMO carbon pricing: an OPEX-based multi-scenario analysis of Suez Canal and Cape of Good Hope routing

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

SOSamer Hassan Okasha

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Techno-economic modeling reveals operating costs rise up to 155% for container ships diverted around Africa, suggesting carbon pricing enhances alternative fuel resilience during geopolitical crises.

Key Points

To assess the techno-economic and environmental impacts of switching between heavy fuel oil, liquefied natural gas, and ammonia under Red Sea crisis routing disruptions and maritime carbon pricing.
Constructed an operational expenditure (OPEX)-based multi-scenario framework for a 15,000 TEU containership traversing the Rotterdam–Singapore route.
Evaluated fuel costs, tank-to-wake CO2 emissions pricing, and canal transit tolls across Suez Canal (8,288 nm) and Cape of Good Hope (11,755 nm) voyages under baseline and crisis conditions.
Rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope escalated total operating costs by approximately 155% for heavy fuel oil, 118% for liquefied natural gas, and 58% for ammonia relative to standard Suez Canal transit.
Voyage diversions increased total CO2 emissions from 4,114–5,481 tons on the Suez Canal route to 5,797–7,723 tons on the Cape of Good Hope route.
Liquefied natural gas remained the most cost-effective option across most scenarios, whereas ammonia exhibited the highest resilience against fuel price shocks despite higher absolute costs.

Cite This Study

Samer Hassan Okasha (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a85638803308d306e2d6bdd https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-026-00252-4

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

August 19, 2026Journal of Shipping and TradeOpen Access

Techno-economic and environmental assessment of HFO, LNG, and ammonia under the red sea crisis and IMO carbon pricing: an OPEX-based multi-scenario analysis of Suez Canal and Cape of Good Hope routing

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

SOSamer Hassan Okasha

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Techno-economic modeling reveals operating costs rise up to 155% for container ships diverted around Africa, suggesting carbon pricing enhances alternative fuel resilience during geopolitical crises.

Key Points

To assess the techno-economic and environmental impacts of switching between heavy fuel oil, liquefied natural gas, and ammonia under Red Sea crisis routing disruptions and maritime carbon pricing.
Constructed an operational expenditure (OPEX)-based multi-scenario framework for a 15,000 TEU containership traversing the Rotterdam–Singapore route.
Evaluated fuel costs, tank-to-wake CO2 emissions pricing, and canal transit tolls across Suez Canal (8,288 nm) and Cape of Good Hope (11,755 nm) voyages under baseline and crisis conditions.
Rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope escalated total operating costs by approximately 155% for heavy fuel oil, 118% for liquefied natural gas, and 58% for ammonia relative to standard Suez Canal transit.
Voyage diversions increased total CO2 emissions from 4,114–5,481 tons on the Suez Canal route to 5,797–7,723 tons on the Cape of Good Hope route.
Liquefied natural gas remained the most cost-effective option across most scenarios, whereas ammonia exhibited the highest resilience against fuel price shocks despite higher absolute costs.

Cite This Study

Samer Hassan Okasha (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a85638803308d306e2d6bdd https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-026-00252-4

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark