Module MAR6024 Assessment Brief: Strategic Decarbonization Analysis
1. Assessment Details & Metadata
- Module Code: MAR6024
- Module Title: Advanced Maritime Operations & Sustainability
- Institution Context: UK Maritime Higher Education (Level 6/Honours)
- Assessment Type: Individual Research Report
- Weighting: 100% of Module Grade
- Word Count: 3,000 words (+/- 10%)
- Submission Deadline: Thursday, 14 May 2026, 14:00 GMT
2. Context & Scenario
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) Revised GHG Strategy (2023) mandates net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by or around 2050. Concurrently, the UK Government’s Clean Maritime Plan requires the UK domestic maritime sector to plan for zero-emission propulsion. Shipowners operating in the UK Emission Control Areas (ECAs) and the North Sea basin face immediate pressure to retrograde existing fleets or commission newbuilds capable of utilizing alternative fuels.
You are acting as a Senior Fleet Technical Consultant for a mid-sized UK-based shipping company operating a fleet of Ro-Pax ferries on short-sea routes between Portsmouth, UK, and Bilbao, Spain. The Board of Directors requires a technical and economic feasibility report to determine the future propulsion strategy for the fleet to meet 2030 and 2040 compliance targets.
3. Task Instructions
Produce a 3,000-word professional technical report evaluating the feasibility of transitioning the specific Ro-Pax fleet mentioned above to one of the following alternative fuel systems:
Get a Custom-Written Paper Delivered to Your Inbox
Our subject-specialist writers craft plagiarism-free, rubric-matched papers from scratch — available for students in Australia, UK, UAE, Kuwait, Canada and USA.
- Green Ammonia (NH3)
- Green Hydrogen (H2) via Fuel Cells
Your report must address the following four critical dimensions:
Part A: Technical Engineering & Safety Analysis (30%)
Analyze the physical and engineering implications of your chosen fuel. Address energy density (volumetric vs. gravimetric) and the subsequent impact on cargo capacity/vehicle deck space. Evaluate specific safety risks relevant to Ro-Pax passenger operations (e.g., toxicity of Ammonia vs. flammability/embrittlement of Hydrogen) and necessary modifications to bunkering systems.
Part B: Economic & Supply Chain Logistics (30%)
Conduct a CAPEX and OPEX analysis. Compare the projected costs of retrofitting versus newbuilds. Critically assess the availability of green fuel bunkering infrastructure at the ports of Portsmouth and Bilbao. Analyze the impact of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS) and EU ETS on the operational costs if the transition is delayed.
Dissertation App Writers Are Online Right Now
Thousands of students at universities from RMIT to UCL to AUM Kuwait submit with confidence using our expert writing service. Human-written, Turnitin-safe, on time.
Part C: Regulatory & Environmental Compliance (20%)
Demonstrate how the chosen fuel strategy aligns with:
- SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) fire safety and IGF Code requirements.
- MARPOL Annex VI (SOx/NOx limits).
- The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) rating trajectory for the vessel up to 2035.
Part D: Strategic Recommendation (20%)
Synthesize your findings into a definitive “Go/No-Go” recommendation for the Board. Provide a high-level implementation timeline (Gantt chart required) spanning 2026–2035.
4. Formatting & Submission Requirements
- Format: Report style (Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Numbered Sections, References).
- Citation Style: Harvard (Cite Them Right) – minimum 15 academic/industry sources.
- Diagrams: You must include at least two technical diagrams (e.g., fuel tank arrangement, bunkering process flow) and one data table (CAPEX/OPEX comparison).
- File Type: PDF only.
5. Grading Rubric (Level 6)
| Criteria | Fail (<40%) | Pass (40-49%) | Merit/Credit (50-69%) | Distinction (>70%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical Knowledge & Engineering Analysis | Fails to identify key fuel properties; serious misunderstandings of ship stability or safety codes. | Basic description of fuel types; limited application to the specific Ro-Pax vessel context. | Solid analysis of energy density and storage; clearly links technical constraints to vessel operations. | Exceptional insight into thermodynamic challenges; rigorous evaluation of retrofitting complexities and safety systems (IGF Code). |
| Critical Evaluation & Argumentation | Descriptive only; relies on assertions without evidence. | Some attempt to weigh pros/cons, but arguments lack depth or economic realism. | Clear, balanced evaluation of costs vs. benefits; uses data to support arguments regarding ETS and bunker availability. | Sophisticated synthesis of conflicting data (e.g., CAPEX vs. long-term compliance); demonstrates professional judgment in the final recommendation. |
| Structure, Professionalism & Referencing | Disorganized; missing sections; poor citation practice. | Standard structure followed; bibliography present but limited. | Professional report format; effective use of diagrams; consistent Harvard referencing. | Industry-standard presentation; precise terminology; comprehensive and recent academic bibliography. |
6.
Adopting green ammonia (NH3) as a primary fuel for the Ro-Pax fleet requires a fundamental reconfiguration of the vessel’s tank arrangements due to ammonia’s low volumetric energy density, which is approximately 12.7 MJ/L compared to 36 MJ/L for Marine Gas Oil (MGO). Consequently, the fuel storage volume must increase by a factor of 2.8 to maintain the current nautical range between Portsmouth and Bilbao, likely necessitating the sacrifice of lower vehicle deck space or the installation of deck-mounted tanks which alters the vessel’s metacentric height (GM). Furthermore, the toxicity of anhydrous ammonia mandates the installation of double-walled fuel pipes and gas-tight “safe return to port” machinery spaces as per the interim guidelines of the IGF Code, significantly escalating the retrofitting capital expenditure beyond the baseline engine conversion costs.
7. Recommended Resources
- Reference 1: Al-Aboosi, F.Y. and El-Halwagi, M.M. (2025) ‘Sustainable Maritime Decarbonization: A Review of Hydrogen and Ammonia as Future Clean Marine Energies’, Sustainability, 17(24), p. 11364. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411364.
- Reference 2: UMAS (2025) International Maritime Decarbonisation Transitions – Main Report. London: University Maritime Advisory Services. Available at: https://www.u-mas.co.uk.
- Reference 3: International Maritime Organization (2023) 2023 IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships. Resolution MEPC.377(80). London: IMO.
- Reference 4: Department for Transport (2024) Clean Maritime Plan: The UK’s Route to Net Zero Shipping. London: HMSO.
- Reference 5: Mallouppas, G. and Yfantis, E.A. (2021) ‘Decarbonization in Shipping Industry: A Review of Research, Technology Development, and Innovation Proposals’, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9(4), p. 415. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9040415.