What shipping told Accelleron about e-fuels — and why the wish list still stands

When the Swiss turbocharger specialist Accelleron — headquartered in Baden and spun off from ABB — asked 200 maritime decision-makers in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain what they really think about e-fuels, the answer was remarkably clear: 93% saw e-fuels as making a decisive contribution to more sustainable shipping, and 92% believed they can significantly cut the sector’s global CO₂ emissions. The survey, conducted by market researcher moweb research, dates from autumn 2023 — and reading it today is instructive, because its findings still map almost perfectly onto the industry’s current agenda.

E-fuels ranked first among the alternatives

Asked which options can contribute most to reducing shipping’s emissions, respondents ranked e-fuels (92%) clearly ahead of biofuels (69%), LNG (60%), hydrogen (52%) and fossil fuels combined with carbon capture (32%). Two thirds saw a competitive advantage in adopting e-fuels, and three quarters expected them to be indispensable by 2045 at the latest. Shipping companies were already preparing: 47% through internal training, 41% by seeking strategic partnerships with e-fuel suppliers, and 36% by planning technical retrofits of their vessels.

The logic behind this ranking is one we know well at SPIN: deep-sea shipping is a textbook hard-to-electrify sector. Batteries cannot deliver the energy density that transoceanic voyages demand, while e-fuels — made from renewable electricity, hydrogen and recycled CO₂ — work in the engines and bunkering infrastructure the industry already has.

On the carbon question our position is deliberately broad. What matters is not whether the CO₂ is biogenic, atmospheric or captured from an industrial source, but whether using it creates an incentive to bring additional fossil fuel out of the ground. Carbon that is already in circulation and gets used again displaces fossil carbon instead of mobilising new carbon — which is why carbon capture and utilisation from industrial sources belongs in the picture, not at its margins. And where those sources are themselves increasingly fed with recycled CO₂, the circle closes entirely.

The two big asks — then and now

The survey’s caveats were just as telling as its enthusiasm. 44% of respondents rated the availability of e-fuels by 2030 as mostly poor, and four in ten shipping companies pointed to insufficient regulatory framework conditions and a lack of political support. Accelleron’s leadership drew the corresponding conclusion: industry and lawmakers need to focus on building supply infrastructure and creating incentives that bring e-fuels towards long-term cost parity with fossil fuels.

Three years on, that wish list still stands — but there is measurable movement. Production projects are maturing, and certification is catching up: SPIN member INERATEC’s ERA ONE plant recently became the world’s first facility to win full RFNBO certification for its e-fuels, a precondition for those fuels to count towards EU targets. What remains scarce is exactly what the surveyed executives predicted: volume, and the framework conditions that make investment decisions bankable.

For Switzerland, the takeaway is straightforward. The demand signal from shipping has been on the table, loud and clear, since 2023. Defossilising the sector is not blocked by scepticism on the water — it is waiting for supply and policy on land. That is precisely where Power-to-X, and the framework conditions SPIN advocates for, come in.

Sources: Accelleron press release, survey “E-Fuels in the Shipping Industry”

🤖 AI transparency: This text and its visual were created using AI, reviewed and approved by a human.