Challenges for sCould New fuels and Sc
Carsten Kruse, Ste
hipping industryrubbers be the answer?
ena Line Danmark
Transport by sea is environmimprovement is needed� Shipping is taking care of the residues
more and more fine distillate to land b� Systematic work to reduce the effect o
in all major shipping companies� The reduction of fuel consumption is a� Example: Stena Superior 20% better
8-9% better than anything today
mentally friendly but
s from refineries that are producing based transporton the environment is common practice
a key issuethan 2009
14.2.22.6Sour
There are many routes and shipsulphur rules
000 individual ships in SECA 2010200 ships 100% of the time600 ships > 50% of their timerce IHS Fairplay
ps that are affected by new
Stena Line is heavily affected
Stricter rule for emission atwo major challenges for th� IMO decisions on SECA with 0,
from 2015, which is 35 times strwill add a massive cost to these
� The oil price has been establishand is not expected to fall
� The shipping community has to
and higher price on oil are he shipping industry1 % maximum sulphur content ricter than the rest of the world, e areashed on a level above 110$/barrel
o look for new types of fuel
Stena has a technichal depacompetitive solutions
• Development of new types of s• The specifications are set by th
ship-owner – not by the yard• Type of propellers, hull design,
engine configuration etc has tospecified
• Saves money in operation• Meet customers demands• Secure compliance to safety, environmental and other standards• Competitiveness
artment to develop new
shipshe
o be
We have looked at four diffthis challenge1. Run on Marine Gas oil with 0,12. New types of fuel LNG or Meth3. Install exhaust gas cleaning eq4. Reduce operations and adjust
The solution is in a comb
ferent ways of meeting
1% sulphurhanolquipment, Scrubberst to the new situation
bination of the things above
1. To go for low sulphurpossible - but expensive
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
HFO HFO 1% LSMGO 0,1%
42%
53%
3,5%
8%
r Marine gasoil is e
• The last bit from 0,5 to 0,1 is very expensive
• When demand for 0,1% increases the price is expected to raise more
• Already today there is a lack of LSMGO in EU and new demand will be imported
USD/ton
2. New types of fuel
• LNG Liquefied Natural Gas• LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
• Methanol• Ethanol• DME Di-Methyl-Ether• Synthetic Diesel (Gas To Liquid, Coa• RME Raps-Methyl-Ether• Bio oils
Projects are ongoing but ….
l To Liquid)Metan (LNG)
Methanol
2. LNG (liquefied natural
• Natural gas at -163°C• LNG ships use gas from cargo for
propulsion• Reduction of emissions: CO2 -25
- 85%, Sox and particles very low
gas)
r
5%, NOXw
Challenges:• Size of tanks• Methane slip vs. CO2• Distribution / bunkering• Not possible to convert ferries.
2. We believe Methanol
• Can be produced in many ways and used
• Transport with regular tanker
• Infrastructure and safety similar to etha
• Liquid – no high pressure
• Big commodity (45 millions ton/year)
• Similar positive reductions as LNG in ter
• Green energy source for the future?
could be a solution
d for many purposes
nol
rms of Nox & SOx
But• Toxic• Formaldehyd in exhaust gases • Dubble volume vs Diesel
Metanol
Summary new fuels
• Lack of small scale distribution miss- terminals- ships
• Lack of international standards and • Lack of national and regional rule an• Suitable for new buildings but often
ing
regulationsnd standardsproblematic with existing fleet
3. Scrubber study
� Two ships were selected as candidate� (All) suppliers were invited to a semin� Three chosen for further technical ana
esaralysis and cost estimation
Scrubber study
Typical Stena ferry with 20 MW enand 2-4 MW auxillary power.
Operational profile; often running
2 x 12 MW scrubbers found to be
Wet scrubbers 480 ton including l
Dry scrubber >500 ton
ngine power from 4 engines
g on 2 or 3 engines.
best solution
liquids
Total investment 8 M€ / shi
� Cost estimation includes,- Hardware - Installation incl. Site team etc.- Operation and maintenance- Loss of income during installation- Loss of revenue due to lower cargo
� Specific comparison - Single vs multiple inlet
p
capacity
Rev loss installation
12%
Owners delivery4%
Yard delivery41%
Scrubber38%
Other5%
Operating cost is abo
• The reagent is the biggest cost – is highly corrosive and dangerous. Separate piping and tanks has to be constructed.
• Higher cost for maintenance of main engines due to higher sulphur content
out 600T€/year
Caustik soda70%
Energy11%
Freshwater5%
Maintenance Scrubber
9%
Maintenance Main
Engines5%
35 ton per week!
Important factors when takScrubber installation
• Age of vesselHard to get a good return on in20 years at the time for compl
• Deadweight Will limit the possibility for ma
• Anticipated price spread betweThe spread will ultimately deciprofitable or not
• New technology. Both Dry Scruto function but still a risk to chfully tested
king decision about
nvestment for ships older than etion of the installation
ny ships
een 0,1% and 3,5%, de if the investment is
ubber or Wet Scrubber seems hoose a technique that is not
It´s not easy to combin
• The SCR needs high temperature 390 C – not possible after wet scrubbing
• SCRs is not functioning well with high sulphur content (clogging – se picture)
• We don’t have a solution for this today
ne Scrubber and SCR
Important input when takininstallation
• Most suppliers is offering test inreluctant to offer any guarantee
• Amount of caustic soda (NaOH)tonnes/week to be supplied withspecial pipes.
• Problem at this stage to get gooto lack of experience
g decision about Scrubber
stallation and are very e of functionality) when HFO 3,5% approx 40 h lorry and pumped onboard in
od firm offers from shipyard due
In the end the cost increasescrubbers or not
M€
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Today F1 1% MGO Ferry 1 0,1%
Scrubber Ferry 1 Today F
-15%
e will still be there,
F2 1% MGOFerry 2 Scrubber Ferry 2
Operation
Investement
Loss of capacity
Fuel
No clear solution for shippingand higher fuelprice� Marine gas oil significantly more� New type of fuel are under deve� Scrubbers not ready for comme
case very expensive
Therefore we will start to ca
g to meet new regulations
e expensive than today's 1% fuelelopment but nothing ready yetercial installations yet and in any
arefully look at our business
Thank you!
www.stenateknik.comm
22