In response to global concerns about climate change and decarbonization across every sector, pressure has mounted on the maritime industry to reduce its environmental impacts, specifically its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, representing around 2.8% of the global total. As such, it prompts new alternative fuels that align with the International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s 2050 net-zero target. In recent years, several alternative fuels, such as hydrogen, ammonia, and methanol, have been proposed. However, alternative fuels face many challenges regarding cost, safety, and efficiency compared to traditional fossil fuels. Currently, methanol is considered one of the most promising alternatives since it is available, easy to store, and can take full advantage of existing infrastructure in situ. Moreover, methanol has a lower carbon intensity than conventional fossil fuels. However, its usage poses related risks of toxicity and flammability; thus, this area still needs in-depth research regarding hazard control. This study implements a systematic five-step methodology. Through a comprehensive literature review, the predominant hazards are delineated. To systematically analyze these risks, this study introduces a novel hazard-based coding system developed to categorize hazards into three classifications: toxicity, flammability, and explosivity. This system is specifically designed to analyze qualitative reports from thirty methanol accident investigations utilizing MAXQDA software. Subsequently, safety barriers related to methanol are identified, followed by a gap analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of existing safety measures. The findings indicate that physical hazards, including flammability and explosivity, represented the majority of identified risks. Furthermore, tank explosions emerged as a prominent sub-hazard, frequently linked to the highest number of reported fatalities. A gap analysis delineates the identified barriers related to Equipment and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Human Error Reduction, the Legal Framework, and First Aid, comparing them against the current measures outlined in IMO Circular 1621 and other legislative frameworks. Consequently, the analysis highlights critical gaps in technical guidelines and operational procedures related to methanol use. The study recommends the development of fuel-specific safety protocols, mandatory training for seafarers, and regulatory updates to address the unique hazards of methanol. These measures are necessary to create higher safety standards and make methanol a viable alternative fuel by ensuring its safe integration into the industry.

The maritime industry has been characterized as a high-risk domain owing to various risks associated with its complicated operations. This aspect imposes significant importance on the human element role, especially during unanticipated events. When major emergencies occur on ships, the response of the ship’s Master and his supporting team becomes crucial in controlling the situation and preventing the escalation of threat. In recognition of this fact, the IMO Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) 95/2010 convention has developed a range of emergency response competencies. However, data on accidents and incidents in shipping reveal that the human element is still considered the primary factor contributing to most cases of ship loss. Furthermore, several cases have been reasoned for improper and ineffective management of the emergency. This might raise serious concerns regarding the adequacy of IMO model courses and whether they provide learners with the required level of knowledge, skills, situational awareness, and confidence to appropriately respond should a real major emergency occurs onboard. With the aim of enhancing the current level of maritime emergency management training, the authors of this study intended to identify possible gaps in current STCW training criteria by conducting a comparison with similar emergency response training standards established by the Offshore Petroleum Industry Training Organization (OPITO). The Qualitative analysis was used to compare three case studies of emergency-related STCW courses with two OPITO courses that have similar objectives, in terms of their aims, scopes, principles, outlines, number of delegates, outcomes, decision-making processes and assessment criteria, in order to assess whether the OPITO emergency response training provides more extensive scope for ensuring the optimum management of an extended range of emergency events rather than the currently delivered STCW courses. The study is concluded by identifying possible gaps and proposing specific modifications to the STCW standard which can be marked as a first step in the direction of establishing effective training for managing and controlling major emergencies onboard ships. Received: 10 November 2022 Accepted: 04 December 2022 Published: 01 March 2023