PORT INFRASTRUCTURE
The fuel infrastructure gap By Mike Jacob, President, Pacific Merchant Shipping Association
W hile broad emissions reduction policy goals have been part of the greenhouse gas debate for several dec- ades, for hard-to-decarbonize mar- kets like the maritime industry, these goals require large commitments of infrastructure and investment both by vessel owners and operators and by the providers that will need to pivot to provide new, alternative maritime fuels. As usual, seaports have become a critical component of these broader policy conversations as well. Global climate goals are negotiated in confer- ence halls in New York, London, and Geneva. But the infrastructure that turns those goals into reality has to be built somewhere specific. The fuels need to be produced, stored, and distributed somewhere well before it can be delivered to a vessel on a waterfront. This requires local com- munities to step up and volunteer their land, planning, resources, and commit to hosting these fuel production and downstream activities. Not only will their costs land on a local balance sheet long before any benefit shows up in a global emissions inventory, but much of this will need to happen outside of the control of a seaport. Thinking globally is easy. Acting locally is where the work is. And right now, the maritime industry needs Pacific ports to help do that work. Industry has put its money down Ocean carriers have committed to net-zero fleet operations by 2050, and they have backed that commitment with real capital. According to the World Shipping Council’s dual-fuel vessel dashboard, the container fleet has already taken delivery of more than 400 vessels capable of running
Pacific ports must assist the maritime industry’s clean-fuel commitments by developing clean-fuel supply, or risk losing the benefits altogether
fuels calling on their terminals on a regular basis. Both U.S.-flagged and non-U.S.-flagged ships from compan- ies that have made global commit- ments to decarbonization are becoming increasingly common. However, local production, storage, and delivery of the sustainable fuels that these ships are capable of remains extremely uncom- mon. For example, what limited LNG fueling for vessels that does occur on the U.S. West Coast is supplied pri- marily out of Canada. There are some local delivery services provided by trucking fleets in Southern California, providing fuel from the high desert, but these are also uncommon. Canadian delivery vessels carry- ing LNG are transiting to and from California or Puget Sound to serve ships at berth in those states. Methanol supply remains at demonstration scale, with the Port of Long Beach advertis- ing a $1 million bounty for a vessel to achieve scale fueling. No vessel has ever attempted ethanol refueling in
on sustainable maritime fuels such as LNG, methanol, and ammonia. Roughly 800 more are on order. That orderbook has been growing at about 28 percent per year. This is one of the fastest volun- tary redeployments of private cap- ital toward decarbonization that any industry has ever made. These ships will then be in service for at least another 20 to 25 years. They are being designed, financed, and deployed on the assumption that the fuel they are built to burn will be available at the ports where they call. That assumption puts the next question squarely on the doorstep of ports: will it be? On most of the Pacific coast of North America, the honest answer today is “not even close.” The U.S. Pacific Coast is already behind California and Washington State ports have some of the newest vessels capable of using sustainable maritime
The World Shipping Council Dashboard highlights the trend toward alternative fuels.
October 2026 — PACIFIC PORTS — 35
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator