In addition, both companies are investing in the asset of environmentally friendly ships. Maersk has recently committed to purchasing vessels using methanol as a primary fuel source. Meanwhile, the French shipping company has ordered LNG (liquefied natural gas)-powered ships that seamlessly transition to bio/e-methane, the environmentally friendly substitute for conventional LNG. They also align with their sustainability goals by supplying vessels designed to run on biomethanol.

CMA CGM Group chairman and CEO Rodolphe Saadé said:

By combining the know-how and expertise of two shipping leaders, we will accelerate the development of new solutions and technologies, enabling our industry to reach its CO₂ reduction targets. We are looking forward to being joined by other companies.

What do Maersk and CMA CGM Decarbonisation Partnership Initiative Support?

Maersk and CMA CGM have ventured into a collaborative effort to advance the adoption of eco-friendly alternative fuels for pushing containerships. Their specific initiatives include:

• Developing high standards for alternative sustainable, green fuels and helping to set the framework of mass production of green methane and green methanol.
• Improving and upholding safety and operational standards for green methanol-powered vessels and expediting the readiness of ports worldwide for bunkering and supplying bio/e-methanol at strategically significant port locations.
• Continuing to explore jointly R&D on other components of the net zero solution as new alternative fuels, like ammonia, or innovation technology for our ships.

A.P. Moller – Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc said:

A.P. Moller – Maersk wants to accelerate the green transition in shipping and logistics and to do so, we need strong involvement from partners across the industry.  We are pleased to have an ally in CMA CGM and it’s a testament that when we unite through determined efforts and partnerships, a tangible and optimistic path towards a sustainable future emerges.

Methanol Fuel Ships and Shipping Industry

Methanol is usually produced from natural gas, coal, biomass, and carbon dioxide sources. Ships using these fuels are called Methanol Fuel Ships.

👉🏻For more detailed information about Methanol Fuel ships and the shipping industry, you can click here and check out our blog post on the subject.

The post Decarbonisation Partnership – CMA CGM and MAERSK appeared first on Shipsgo Blog.

As the ShipsGo team, we pursued comprehensive research about the importance of environmental sensitivity for beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) and freight forwarders in container transportation. The study was developed by collaborating with the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey with the participation of university professors and students. Eighty-one countries participated in this study. 70% of all participants are from 20 countries. USA and Turkey are the leading countries in participation. 

Primarily, we aimed to clarify the container transportation buying behavior of the users in the decarbonization process. We detect insights for all participants of the container shipping industry. We wanted to share the process and the results to create awareness with this blog based on the research.

In this blog, we covered the subject of environmental sensitivity in container transportation and what it means for BCOs and freight forwarders?

What is Environmental Sensitivity?

Environmental sensitivity is a condition that perceives and processes environmental exposures. Basically, our ability to understand and then process all environmental components.

Does the Container Carrier is Being Environmentally Sensitive Matter?

According to the BCO’s (32.7% of the participants) and the freight forwarders (67.3% of the participants) from 81 countries, container carriers’ environmental sensitivity is a variable in selecting stage of most of the participants. 71.8% of all respondents, 72.9% of the forwarders, and 71.2% of BCOs agree that “Environmental Sensitivity of the Container Carrier” is the carrier selection variable. Besides, 14.3% of all respondents have no idea, whereas 13.9% do not agree.

Does the Carrier’s Environmental Sensitivity Worth Paying Extra Freights and Accepting Longer Transit Times?

Even If the carrier is environmentally sensitive, only 56,8 % of the users agree to pay more freight costs. 62,9 % of the users accept longer transit times. 

Comparing the freight forwarders and BCO’s, freight forwarders are more aware of both actions. This attitude might relate to being in the same industry (logistics and transportation) and facing the logistics environmental facts more intensely than the BCOs.

What are the Other Important Factors in Container Carrier Selection?

According to the results, for both freight forwarders and BCOs, schedule reliability is the most crucial factor for carrier selection. The second critical factor is transit time, whereas transshipment is the third. The less essential factors are service frequency and freight cost for the participants. However, surprising results appeared when we combined these factors:

• A higher freight cost is acceptable if there is a shorter transit time.
• A higher freight cost is acceptable if there is schedule reliability.
• A longer transit time is acceptable if there is a higher service frequency.

While we are ending this blog, we conclude that users tend to use an integrated approach in the container carrier selection process. Container carriers should be environmentally friendly. They need to be reliable for their schedule, and have shorter transit times. Together, these three characteristics can be called a “perfect set” in the container carrier selection process.

Click to review Environmental Sensitivity PDF

You can review related ShipsGo Blog Posts

The post Environmental Sensitivity for Container Transportation appeared first on Shipsgo Blog.