Fuels like ammonia will greatly reduce carbon emissions—better for the environment, but are they safe for our infrastructure? The Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) recently conducted a market research survey to assess hazards associated with alternative fuel production, storage, and transport at U.S. ports. High-risk ports could be the sites for future ammonia release tests that will inform preparedness and response.
The future of net-zero carbon emission fuel for the maritime sector is coming. According to a new S&T market research survey, by 2050 the global production of ammonia could double, if not triple, due to its potential as a net-zero carbon emission alternative to fossil fuels. After Singapore pioneered ammonia bunkering (filling a ship’s fuel tank), the American Bureau of Shipping has taken the first step towards developing bunkering in the U.S. While this is an exciting development, storage and handling and the production plants’ proximity to ports increase risks of large-scale spills of toxic ammonia gas—endangering workers, nearby communities, and the environment.
To better understand the chemical implications of switching fuel sources, S&T’s Chemical Security Analysis Center (CSAC) conducted a market research survey, “Market Landscape and Future Trends in Emerging Energy Industry at U.S. Ports,” through its Jack Rabbit (JR) Program, in collaboration with S&T partnership intermediary MilTech at Montana State University. The survey assessed hazards of alternative fuel production, storage, and transport at U.S. ports.
“Understanding port readiness to handle emerging fuels is critical to informing emergency plans before incidents occur. S&T wants to provide better support to disadvantaged areas around ports, where people often reside or work,” according to CSAC. “CSAC plans to increase awareness, build resilience, and reduce chemical incident and terrorism risks for people and the environment on both land and water. If preventive measures are not in place, spilled pressurized ammonia in water environments can be even more catastrophic than the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.”
Knowing the chemical security risks allows for better prevention and preparation
The main goal of S&T’s survey, initiated two years ago, was to proactively assess chemical security risks posed by the projected use of ammonia and its derivative fuels: hydrogen, methanol, and ethanol. While clean energy offers numerous benefits, alternative fuels come with their own chemical hazards—ammonia is toxic, hydrogen is explosive and flammable, and ethanol is flammable—that are critical to consider when transporting and storing them. The survey demonstrated future large-scale use, including production and shipping volume, port infrastructure adaptability, and port authorities’ risk tolerance, and identified the most likely ports to transition to emerging fuels and build corresponding bunkering infrastructure.
CSAC assessed the chemical risk nationwide and identified specific U.S. ports that could be impacted by alternative fuels during an incident. Findings will help CSAC inform mitigation plans for protecting the U.S. maritime transportation sector and assist with potential adjustments to Maritime Transportation Security Act regulations, all in collaboration with Department of Homeland Security components agencies.
Following the survey’s completion, CSAC determined that the standard JR Program chemical test releases must be performed in a more complex environment than before. CSAC recently conducted JR III chamber experiments to test the effect of environmental factors affecting ammonia cloud behavior in water environments and is now analyzing the experimental dataset.
“Until now, we’ve conducted chemical releases in a lab over concrete and outdoors in open desert environment, and the corresponding risk assessments are not applicable to the water environment,” according to CSAC. “At ports, highly concentrated ammonia will react with the water and vegetation, which can soak up much of the released ammonia and thus stop the hazardous cloud from going downwind on land. It is critical to understand dispersion phenomena in interconnected maritime and land environments.”
Survey’s findings are already spurring action
One of the survey’s recommendations was that CSAC engage with the ports and collaborate with federal agencies and first responders to implement preventative measures, including the use of advanced dispersion modeling tools, a common operating picture (real-time situational awareness shown to stakeholders), and mass alert notification systems.
CSAC has already launched a collaboration with global modeling experts to enhance waterborne hazard prediction and joined forces with the Ammonia Safety Training Institute and the port of Los Angeles to communicate the anticipated hazards and support emergency response preparedness. Additionally, CSAC is working with the private sector for future ammonia test releases.
“We signed a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement in August with CF Industries, a leading green ammonia U.S. manufacturer, to develop and exchange mutually beneficial information regarding the risk assessment and mitigation of large-scale ammonia releases,” according to CSAC. “We will conduct modeling simulations to assess both airborne hazards on land and waterborne hazards in marine environments at ports.”
S&T surveyed first responders and port authorities about the potential hazards in their communities related to the ongoing energy transition, and they expressed interest in collaborating with CSAC to mitigate risks. Notable global ammonia spill incidents underscore the need for enhanced safety protocols at storage sites, especially densely populated port areas in U.S.
What’s next for CSAC and the maritime industry
The market research survey concluded, and its key findings can be found in a corresponding fact sheet about alternative fuels’ impact on U.S. ports.
For smoother-sailing adoption of alternative fuels, CSAC plans to further assess the hazards and risks identified in the survey at key ports and develop mitigation strategies and will partner with federal agencies involved in the maritime energy transition. Although ammonia as a maritime fuel source offers significant benefits, particularly in reducing carbon emissions and meeting sustainability goals when produced carbon-free (via green hydrogen), current production methods are mostly fossil-fuel-based, and the infrastructure for storing, handling, and refueling ammonia at ports is not yet widespread.
“Results will inform modeling advancement and mitigation strategies to help emergency response preparedness in multi-domain environments found at ports,” according to CSAC.
