Abstract
The continuous expansion of shipping trade has brought about increasingly serious marine pollution problems. In the context of emission reduction in the global shipping industry, this paper focuses on the operation optimization of container ships inside and outside the emission control area (ECA). From the dual perspectives of shipowners and the general public, models in the annual operating cycle are established to study the economic and environmental benefit differences between traditional fuels, i.e., heavy fuel oil (HFO) and low-sulfur fuel oil (LSFO), and alternative fuels, i.e., liquefied natural gas (LNG) and methanol. Sensitivity analysis was carried out for the proportion of ECA and ship speed. The results show that, in the current situation of high natural gas prices, the use of HFO after the installation of scrubbers is still the most cost-effective option in the short term, followed by the use of LSFO and methanol. LNG is no longer an attractive option, while LSFO and methanol are the best options for both cost and the environment. With the tightening of ECA regulations, methanol will become the optimal choice when the ECA ratio is higher than 47%. By reducing the speed of the ship, the pollutant emission can be effectively reduced, but it will also lead to an overall decrease in profits. Considering the future "zero carbon" emission targets, slow streaming is only suitable as a short-term response measure, while switching to green power energy is a choice that is more in line with the long-term development strategy.