You forget that fuel is really expensive as well. And per gwh, electricity can be quite affordable if you don't do something as silly as pay grid prices for it. The mwh price is 80–90$, so 3 gwh (3000mwh) would be about 240K $. That's a lot of money. But filling up the tank of container ship is actually more expensive. Something like 5000 tons of fuel would be what you need. At 500$ per ton, you are looking at 2.5M $ in fuel.
Sourcing the electricity cheaper than that should be possible. E.g. wind and solar are closer to 20-30$/mwh.
The main issue is harbor infrastructure and battery production and scaling this. But from a cost point of view, sacrificing 20% cargo for an order of magnitude reduction in fuel cost is going to be very tempting.
> Transoceanic battery-powered cargo vessels are probably 100 years away - fusion will arrive first.
Or 3 years according to CATL. One of you is probably a few years off. I personally think 3 years is a bit ambitious. But ten years sounds like we might see some proof of concept at least. I have a hunch that CATL is going to be very eager to deliver such a proof of concept.
As stated elsewhere, even if the electricity to charge was free, batteries won't be economically competitive with HFO/LSMFO in this century.
> But from a cost point of view, sacrificing 20% cargo for an order of magnitude reduction in fuel cost is going to be very tempting.
No, it's not and this shows a profound misunderstanding of the maritime sector. Not to mention, it would be at least 20% of DWT and probably 40% of gross tonnage, and all at the most valuable (lowest/most-stable) part of the hull.
> Or 3 years according to CATL.
CATL make no such claim. They claim that they will be able to show electric ocean-going vessels, which there already are. They make no claims about transoceanic shipping, other than partnering with Maersk, which as stated above, will be for hybrid propulsion to avoid expensive low-sulfur fuels in ECAs and will be charged from HFO at sea.
Sourcing the electricity cheaper than that should be possible. E.g. wind and solar are closer to 20-30$/mwh.
The main issue is harbor infrastructure and battery production and scaling this. But from a cost point of view, sacrificing 20% cargo for an order of magnitude reduction in fuel cost is going to be very tempting.
> Transoceanic battery-powered cargo vessels are probably 100 years away - fusion will arrive first.
Or 3 years according to CATL. One of you is probably a few years off. I personally think 3 years is a bit ambitious. But ten years sounds like we might see some proof of concept at least. I have a hunch that CATL is going to be very eager to deliver such a proof of concept.