CASE STUDIES / EMISSIONS · AUG 2024
How scheduling changes affect fleet emissions.
The study compares three ways to schedule the same 40-vessel, 200-cargo portfolio over six months.
-23%
REPORTED CO₂ REDUCTION VS MANUAL REFERENCE · SIX MONTHS
Compare three schedules for the same deliveries.
01 · PORTFOLIO
The reference schedule meets the contracts. A second schedule maximises profit. A third includes an emissions objective. Each covers 40 vessels and 200 cargoes over six months.
40 VESSELS · 200 CARGOES · 6 MONTHS · ALL CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS FULFILLED IN EVERY CASE
Manual
Reference schedule that meets the modelled delivery commitments.
AI-optimised
Profit-based ADP and schedule optimisation: routing, speed, bunker and idle time decided together.
AI + CO2 objective
Schedule calculated with an additional emissions objective.
Compare modelled CO₂ emissions.
02 · RESULT
The rounded totals are 2.1, 1.8 and 1.6 million tonnes. The source reports approximately 475,000 tonnes saved against the manual reference, or 23%.
FUEL AND BOG CONSUMPTION: ~39M / ~34M / ~30M MMBTU ACROSS THE THREE CASES
Inspect the changes in the vessel plan.
03 · X-LNG RESULTS
Routing, sailing speed and idle time affect fuel consumption and emissions. These X-LNG views show the schedules being compared. A lower emissions total alone does not establish equal profit.
04 · RESULT
23% lower modelled CO₂ emissions than the manual reference schedule.
The 23% reduction is the source’s reported result. Chart totals are rounded. The global estimate assumes the same savings per vessel and two comparable six-month periods.
Keep the fleet extrapolation separate.
05 · GLOBAL ESTIMATE
Applying 475,000 tonnes of six-month savings to 800 vessels gives approximately 19 million tonnes per year. This assumes every vessel achieves comparable savings; it is not measured global performance.
475K T
CO2 SAVED IN 6 MONTHS · 40 VESSELS
950K T
ANNUALISED ESTIMATE · 40 VESSELS
19M T
ANNUALISED EXTRAPOLATION · 800 VESSELS
20
800-VESSEL FLEET / 40-VESSEL STUDY
What this comparison shows.
06 · TAKEAWAYS
Compare modelled CO₂ emissions
The rounded totals are 2.1, 1.8 and 1.6 million tonnes. The source reports approximately 475,000 tonnes saved against the manual reference, or 23%.
Keep the fleet extrapolation separate
Applying 475,000 tonnes of six-month savings to 800 vessels gives approximately 19 million tonnes per year. This assumes every vessel achieves comparable savings; it is not measured global performance.
Scope of the result
The 23% reduction is the source’s reported result. Chart totals are rounded. The global estimate assumes the same savings per vessel and two comparable six-month periods.
How the study was calculated.
07 · CALCULATION
Set up the comparison
The reference schedule meets the contracts. A second schedule maximises profit. A third includes an emissions objective. Each covers 40 vessels and 200 cargoes over six months.
Calculate the alternatives
Routing, sailing speed and idle time affect fuel consumption and emissions. These X-LNG views show the schedules being compared. A lower emissions total alone does not establish equal profit.
Review the result
23% lower modelled CO₂ emissions than the manual reference schedule.
Modelled results depend on the contracts, prices and operating assumptions used.