Post on 18-Jan-2015
description
transcript
Ole Sævild, Administrerende Direktør
AGENDA
SEA‐CARGO.
St t l ibiliti d h ll Structural possibilities and challenges
Environmental transport by sea Environmental transport by seaThe use of technology and innovation
WE CAN FIGHT GRAVITY – BUT CANNOT WIN!
SEA-CARGO
Established in 2001 – through merger of four different North Sea operators!Established in 2001 through merger of four different North Sea operators!
• Ship owners/operators Headquarter in Bergen
• Shipping agents Bergen, Stavanger, Esbjerg, Amsterdam, Immingham and Aberdeen
• Stevedores/terminal Aberdeen, Immingham, Esbjerg
• Group turnover Abt. NOK 600 mill
• No of staff Abt. 80 people
• Ship in operations 7
• Ships on order 4 (of which 2 based on Natural gas)
SEA-CARGO BUSINESS CONCEPT
Sea‐Cargo – connecting West‐CoastNorway with UK and mainland Europe byNorway with UK and mainland Europe byway of a seaway bridge.
Sea‐Cargo aim to be the preferred carrierto its customers – providing a fast, reliableand safe transport corridor, using modernships, and providing high frequency for alltypes of unitized cargoestypes of unitized cargoes.
SEA-CARGO GROUP STRUCTURE
SEA‐CARGO SKIPS ASSEA‐CARGO AS
SEA CARGO AGENCIES (owned subsidiaries)
AGENCIES NORWAY AGENCIES UK AGENCIES EUROPE
SEA‐CARGO AGENCIES (owned subsidiaries)
Agencies Bergen ASAgencies Bergen AS Agencies Immingham LtdAgencies Immingham Ltd Agencies Amsterdam BVAgencies Amsterdam BV
Agencies Tananger ASAgencies Tananger AS Agencies Esbjerg BVAgencies Esbjerg BVAgencies Aberdeen LtdAgencies Aberdeen Ltd
SEA-CARGO BUSINESS CONCEPT
THE SEA‐CARGO BUSINESS CONCEPT
SEA‐CARGO SEA‐CARGO SEA‐CARGO SEA‐CARGO SEA‐CARGO LINER
ACTIVITIESINDUSTRIAL
SHIP SOLUTIONS
LINER AGENCIES
TERMINAL & WAREHOUSE SERVICES
SALES AND LOGISTICS
THE SEA‐CARGO TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS
INNOVATION BY SEA-CARGO
INNOVATION BY SEA-CARGO
World’s first cargo vessel operated on LNG (Natural gas)!
AGENDA
SEA‐CARGO.
Structural possibilities and challenges
E i l b Environmental transport by seaThe use of technology and innovation
WE CAN FIGHT GRAVITY – BUT CANNOT WIN!
STRUCTURAL ISSUES
Hva mener norske myndigheter når de i NTP sier at det skal arbeides for å fra last fra land til sjø?
STRUCTURAL CHALLENGES !
LAND BASED INFRASTRUCTURE
PORT OPERATIONS
PILOTAGE AND COASTAL FEES PILOTAGE AND COASTAL FEES
DUES/FEES ON FUEL
LAND BASED INFRASTRUCTURE
KYSTSTAMVEGEN :
Prosjekt som Kvivsvegen (antyda 400-700 mill.) og mogleg ny trase over Tysnes på strekkja mellom over Tysnes på strekkja mellom Stord og Bergen, er heller ikkje med i denne summen. Skal ein på sikt fjerne fleire ferjesamband sikt fjerne fleire ferjesamband, noko som er eit klårt mål, vil til dømes eit tunnelalternativ under Boknafjorden (Rogfast) kome på Boknafjorden (Rogfast) kome på om lag 1,9 mrd. kroner. Eit ferjefritt stamvegsamband mellom Stord og Bergen er førebels g gkostnadsrekna til rundt 6 mrd.
ååDette vil bety slutten for Dette vil bety slutten for deler deler av kystflåtenav kystflåten
PILOTAGE AND COASTAL FEES
PORT CHARGES/PILOTAGE COSTPORT CHARGES/PILOTAGE COST
250 000
300 000
250 000
300 000
200 000
YAGE
200 000
YAGE
100 000
150 000
NOK / VO
100 000
150 000
NOK / VO
50 000 50 000
COMETA TRANS CARRIER MINERVA
Pilotage 95 400 104 400 124 960
Portcosts 35 172 68 845 144 320
‐COMETA TRANS CARRIER MINERVA
Pilotage 95 400 104 400 124 960
Portcosts 35 172 68 845 144 320
‐
KOSTNADER VED BRUK AV LOS (Tananger/Trondheim)!
PILOTAGE AND COASTAL FEES
PORT CHARGES/PILOTAGE COSTPORT CHARGES/PILOTAGE COST
250 000
300 000
250 000
300 000
200 000
OYA
GE
200 000
OYA
GE
100 000
150 000
NOK / VO
100 000
150 000
NOK / VO
50 000 50 000
COMETA TRANS CARRIER MINERVA
Pilotage ‐ ‐ 124 960
Portcosts 35 172 68 845 144 320
‐COMETA TRANS CARRIER MINERVA
Pilotage ‐ ‐ 124 960
Portcosts 35 172 68 845 144 320
‐
KOSTNADER UTEN BRUK AV LOS (Tananger/Trondheim)!
DUES/FEES ON FUEL/
• Mineraloljeavgift
• CO2 avgift
• NOX avgift
• Etc.Etc.
DUES/FEES ON FUEL/
A) Avgift kr. 150,000 – 300,000
B) Avgift kr. 0
C) Avgift kr. 0
DUES/FEES ON FUEL/
A B CA B C
Kr. 0 Kr. 30,000 Kr. 60,000
De faktiske utslippen av NOX er selvsagt nøyaktig de samme !
INFRASTRUKTUR ELLER “PENE TALL” ?
pp g øy g
AGENDA
SEA‐CARGO.
Structural possibilities and challenges
E i t l t t b Environmental transport by seaThe use of technology and innovation
WE CAN FIGHT GRAVITY – BUT CANNOT WIN!
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION
L d i f t h l d i ti
and
Sideport solutions 1968
Leaders in use of technology and innovation
Sideport solutions 1968Asymmetrical stern 1986Automatic loading systems 1986 (low manning req.) Electronic charts 1990Teflon coated tanks 1990 (chemical carrier)Combined gas/chemical tanker 2000BigLng project management 2005Natural gas operated RORO vessel 2010Natural gas operated RORO vessel 2010
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION
Big LNG –gas fuelled ships in short sea trades
A project supported of the Norwegian Research Council for a two yearA project supported of the Norwegian Research Council for a two year period (2006 ‐ 2007) and with project funds of abt. 8 mill NOK (Euro 1 mill).
Project leader: SeatransProject management: MARINTEK
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION
Big LNG objectives
• Develop ship concepts with LNG as fuel. Cost comparison with conventional heavy fuel oil solutions.
M h i l l i (di d i )– Mechanical propulsion (direct drive)– LNG fuel tanks / Storage– Rules and regulations
Cost of installation– Cost of installation
• Distribution of LNG as fuel in the North Sea and Baltic (bunker terminal and port requirements)q )‐ Availability of gas/lng
• Price mechanism for LNG as fuel– Related to the price of heavy fuel oil– Price predictability
ENVIRONMENTAL FOCUS ON TRANSPORT
BACKGROUND – WHY GAS ?BACKGROUND – WHY GAS ?
Environmental reasons E i lEconomical reasons (fossil fuel scenario (peak oil scenario))
ENVIRONMENTAL ALTERNATIVE = GAS
CO2 is reduced by 20‐25% S l h i i i li i d
Particulate matters is close to zero NO i d d b 80 90% Sulphur emission is eliminated NOx is reduced by 80‐90%
Emissions MDO versus Natural Gas
6
g/kWh
800
g/kWh
0
2
4
0
200
400
600
g/kWh
0MDO 1% S natural gas
g/kWh
MDO 1% S natural gas
0,2
0,3
0,4
12
18
0
0,1
MDO 1% S natural gas0
6
MDO 1% S natural gas
GAS PRODUCTION IN NORWAY
SNØHVIT LNG PLANT – LNG PROD.CAPACITY OF 4,1 MILL TONS/YEAREurope's first export facility for production of liquefied natural gas (LNG)Europe s first export facility for production of liquefied natural gas (LNG)
Recoverable reserves: 193 billion cubic metres of natural gas 113 million barrels of condensate (light oil), corresponding to 17.9 million cubic metres5.1 million tonnes of natural gas liquids (NGL)
Water depths: 250‐345 metres
Annual exports: ‐ 5.67 billion standard cubic metres (scm) of LNG, corresponding to 4.1 million tonnes
Production period: 2007‐2035
OTHER DRIVERS
Peak oil scenarioPeak oil scenario.
OTHER DRIVERS
Fossile fuel
OTHER DRIVERS
4,5
5
MARPOL ANNEXS VI / MPEC 58 ‐ NEW SULPHUR LIMITS FROM 2010
3
3,5
4
2
2,5%
0,5
1
1,5
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
ECA LIMIT 1,50 1,50 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10
GLOBAL LIMIT 4,50 4,50 4,50 4,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 3,50 0,50 0,50 0,50 0,50
0
GAS/LNG AVAILABILITY/
DISTRIBUTION ?DISTRIBUTION ?
Availability already as for oil products !
GAS/LNG COST/PRICE/ /
P i l ti b t Oil d G i li it d (if ) ! Price correlation between Oil and Gas is very limited (if any) !
Oil prices expected to increase dramatically in a 2‐3 year horizon
Gas prices expected to be “weak” for a longer period (ref. Stockman)
GAS favourable with Oil prices > USD 550/ts (GAS/IFO) GAS favourable with Oil prices > USD 550/ts (GAS/IFO)
ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT BY SEA
We believe that in 5‐10 years majority of ships ordered for short sea tradesWe believe that in 5 10 years majority of ships ordered for short sea trades will use Natural gas (LNG) as energy source.
Because:• Increasing environmental demand from customers authorities and the• Increasing environmental demand from customers, authorities and the
public.– NOx fee in Norway, 15 kr/kg. Increasing....– (S)ECA sones, max 1,5%, 1,0% and finally 0,1% sulphur( ) , , , , y , p– General public pressure on reduction of emissions (EU white paper).
• No satisfactory alternative fuel or ECR (emission cleaning) that satisfy future environmental demands.
OPPSUMMERING
Regler og avgifts strukturen må ”harmoniseres”
Los systemet må endres og moderniseres Los systemet må endres og moderniseres
Ønskelisten må spisses (de viktigste saken)
Vi må selv ta ansvaret for utviklingen og derved vår egen fremtid!
WE CAN FIGHT GRAVITY – BUT CANNOT WIN!