IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i20p9314-d1775614.html

Investigating Ammonia as an Alternative Marine Fuel: A SWOT Analysis Using the Best–Worst Method

Author

Listed:
  • Canberk Hazar

    (Department of Marine Engineering, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, 67300 Zonguldak, Turkey)

  • Alper Seyhan

    (Department of Maritime Transportation and Management Engineering, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, 67300 Zonguldak, Turkey)

Abstract

The shipping industry remains heavily dependent on heavy fuel oils, which account for approximately 77% of fuel consumption and contribute significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In line with the IMO’s decarbonization targets, ammonia has emerged as a promising carbon-free alternative. This study evaluates the strategic viability of ammonia, especially green production, as a marine fuel through a hybrid SWOT–Best–Worst Method (BWM) analysis, combining literature insights with expert judgment. Data were collected from 17 maritime professionals with an average of 15.7 years of experience, ensuring robust sectoral representation and methodological consistency. The results highlight that opportunities hold the greatest weight (0.352), particularly the criteria “mandatory carbon-free by 2050” (O3:0.106) and “ammonia–hydrogen climate solution” (O2:0.080). Weaknesses rank second (0.270), with “higher toxicity than other marine fuels” (W5:0.077) as the most critical concern. Strengths (0.242) underscore ammonia’s advantage as a “carbon-free and sulfur-free fuel” (S1:0.078), while threats (0.137) remain less influential, though “costly green ammonia” (T3:0.035) and “uncertainty of green ammonia” (T1:0.034) present notable risks. Overall, the analysis suggests that regulatory imperatives and environmental benefits outweigh safety, technical, and economic challenges. Ammonia demonstrates strong potential to serve as viable marine fuel in achieving the maritime sector’s long-term decarbonization goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Canberk Hazar & Alper Seyhan, 2025. "Investigating Ammonia as an Alternative Marine Fuel: A SWOT Analysis Using the Best–Worst Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-23, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:20:p:9314-:d:1775614
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/20/9314/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/20/9314/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jinxi Zhou & Junling Zhang & Guoxian Jiang & Kai Xie, 2024. "Using DPF to Control Particulate Matter Emissions from Ships to Ensure the Sustainable Development of the Shipping Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Seyed Behbood Issa-Zadeh & Claudia Lizette Garay-Rondero, 2025. "Decarbonizing Seaport Maritime Traffic: Finding Hope," World, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Omer Soner & Erkan Celik & Emre Akyuz, 2022. "A fuzzy best–worst method (BWM) to assess the potential environmental impacts of the process of ship recycling," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 396-409, April.
    5. Wang, Yadong & Zhu, Shenghui & Iris, Çağatay, 2025. "An exact algorithm for fleet co-deployment and slot co-chartering in a sustainable shipping alliance under emissions trading system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 327(2), pages 450-468.
    6. Gunnar Prause & Eunice O. Olaniyi & Wolfgang Gerstlberger, 2023. "Ammonia Production as Alternative Energy for the Baltic Sea Region," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Rouwenhorst, Kevin H.R. & Van der Ham, Aloijsius G.J. & Mul, Guido & Kersten, Sascha R.A., 2019. "Islanded ammonia power systems: Technology review & conceptual process design," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Cesaro, Zac & Ives, Matthew & Nayak-Luke, Richard & Mason, Mike & Bañares-Alcántara, René, 2021. "Ammonia to power: Forecasting the levelized cost of electricity from green ammonia in large-scale power plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    9. Phan Anh Duong & Borim Ryu & Chongmin Kim & Jinuk Lee & Hokeun Kang, 2022. "Energy and Exergy Analysis of an Ammonia Fuel Cell Integrated System for Marine Vessels," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Antonio Chavando & Valter Silva & João Cardoso & Daniela Eusebio, 2024. "Advancements and Challenges of Ammonia as a Sustainable Fuel for the Maritime Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-35, June.
    11. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    12. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Feng, Jianghong & Guo, Ping & Xu, Guangyi & Xu, Gangyan & Ning, Yu, 2024. "An integrated decision framework for resilient sustainable waste electric vehicle battery recycling transfer station site selection," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 373(C).
    2. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "Better decisions with less cognitive load: The Parsimonious BWM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.
    4. Jie Lu & Feng Li & Desheng Wu, 2024. "A Two-Stage Sustainable Supplier Selection Model Considering Disruption Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    6. Kheybari, Siamak & Javdanmehr, Mahsa & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Rezaei, Jafar, 2021. "Corn cultivation location selection for bioethanol production: An application of BWM and extended PROMETHEE II," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    7. Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan & Nazia Tabassum & Niaz Ahmed Khan & Mohammad Jahangir Alam, 2022. "Procurement challenges in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Le Ngo Ngoc Thu & Long Van Hoang & Quynh Manh Doan & Nguyen Tan Huynh, 2024. "The performance model of logistic distribution centers: Quality function deployment based on the Best-Worst Method," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(10), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Gao, Fei & Wang, Weixiang & Bi, Chencan & Bi, Wenhao & Zhang, An, 2023. "Prioritization of used aircraft acquisition criteria: A fuzzy best–worst method (BWM)-based approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Cavallo, Bice & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2025. "A comparative study on precision of direct evaluations, the Pairwise Comparisons Method and the Best-Worst Method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    11. Danish Farooq & Sarbast Moslem & Arshad Jamal & Farhan Muhammad Butt & Yahya Almarhabi & Rana Faisal Tufail & Meshal Almoshaogeh, 2021. "Assessment of Significant Factors Affecting Frequent Lane-Changing Related to Road Safety: An Integrated Approach of the AHP–BWM Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
    12. Aziz Naghizadeh Vardin & Ramin Ansari & Mohammad Khalilzadeh & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Romualdas Bausys, 2021. "An Integrated Decision Support Model Based on BWM and Fuzzy-VIKOR Techniques for Contractor Selection in Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-28, June.
    13. Junnan Wu & Xin Liu & Dianqi Pan & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Kai Ke, 2023. "Research on Safety Evaluation of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Based on Improved Best-Worst Method and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    14. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Zhao, Fei & Li, Yalou & Zhou, Xiaoxin & Wang, Dandan & Wei, Yawei & Li, Fang, 2023. "Co-optimization of decarbonized operation of coal-fired power plants and seasonal storage based on green ammonia co-firing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 341(C).
    16. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    17. Ghuge, Sagar & Akarte, Milind, 2024. "Additive manufacturing service bureau selection: A Bayesian network integrated framework," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    18. Wen, Du & Aziz, Muhammad, 2022. "Techno-economic analyses of power-to-ammonia-to-power and biomass-to-ammonia-to-power pathways for carbon neutrality scenario," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 319(C).
    19. Rehman, Ubaid ur, 2025. "Evaluation and assessment of clean energy technologies: A bipolar fuzzy BWM-EDAS method for sustainable solution," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    20. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:20:p:9314-:d:1775614. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.