This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Feature 3 | GERMAN MARINE INDUSTRIES ECA beavers in gas-fuelled feeder frenzy


Regulation and costs are conspiring to change the way we power new ships. Benjamin Scholz and Ralf Plump of Germanischer Lloyd’s Environmental Research division believe the Baltic region will benefit from the latest design, the Gas-Fuelled Feeder Container Vessel.


to find alternative fuels, new designs and more efficient operational methods that will reduce the impact on the environment and thereby improve the financial efficiency of the shipping company. Germanischer Lloyd (GL) has linked


A


with its partners MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, TGE Marine Gas Engineering and Neptun- Stahlkonstruktions GmbH to develop a liquefied natural gas (LNG) fuelled container feeder ship that could save as much as US$4million a year in fuel costs for owners if the price differentials that we see today continue until 2015 and beyond.


Motivation and objective Reduction of emissions is the focus for the global community and is very much a part of the of the public’s awareness at this time. Emission targets adopted by the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) and introduced into the MARPOL-Code (Annex VI) will affect the maritime industry in the next 10 years. Numerous limitations, which will come into force step-by-step, have been developed and will reduce the emissions of Nitrogen- and Sulphur Oxides, un-burnt hydrocarbons, particulate matter as well introducing CO2 changes of between US$25-100/tonne. Local areas like Sulphur Emission


Control Areas (SECA, North Sea and Baltic) or Emission Control Areas (ECA) have considerably more stringent requirements regarding emission targets than is required globally from the MARPOL regulation. A new ECA will come into force around the coasts of Canada and the US in August 2011. Additional ECA’s are expected in other regions of the world. From 2015 the maximum sulphur content


of fuel oil is limited to only 0.1% for all vessels operating in SECAs/ECAs.


106


s the regulatory squeeze on emissions from the maritime industry continues the race is on


hazardous areas and the potential risk that might affect the safety of the ship, personnel and equipment, cp. Figure. 2/Figure 3.


Figure. 1 Tank design of the gas fuelled feeder container vessel, source: TGE Marine Gas Engineering.


From 2016 NOx emissions for new


Figure. 2 Tank design of the gas fuelled feeder container vessel, source: TGE Marine Gas Engineering


buildings operating in ECAs are limited to so-called Tier III. To fulfil this NOx limit, diesel engines burning marine fuel oils require exhaust gas aſter-treatment measures which means additional investment and operational costs. One possible approach to meet these


emission requirements is to use natural gas as fuel for propulsion and electric power generation onboard. The usage of gas as fuel is associated with environmental benefits compared to any oil based fuel. LNG as fuel has the potential to reduce the CO2


emissions by around 25 % to 30


% depending on the gas composition. SOx and particulate emissions can be reduced to almost zero NOx-emissions are reduced by more than 80 %.


Gas fuelled feeder concept Motivating the industry through financial mechanisms, the price of fuel and the requirement to pay for polluting, means that owners will be open to new concepts and ship designs and MAN Diesel and GL and their partners have modified an existing feeder vessel design. Te basic design for the integration of a


gas-fuelled main engine is the CV Neptun 1200, which has a capacity of 1284TEU, by


The engine room concept is based on the gas safe machinery configuration which considers that the arrangements in machinery space are gas safe under all conditions. Therefore all gas supply piping should be enclosed in a gas tight enclosure within this concept. The required redundancy for the fuel supply of the main engine (in case of a gas shut-down) is given with the dual fuel concept. In practise the change-over from gas to diesel oil will not be recognised.


Neptun-St hlkonstruktions GmbH. The vessel has a length of 166.15m overall and is equipped with a MAN 8L58/64, 11200kW diesel engine.


The diesel oil capacity has been increased by 36 % to 432tonnes due to the additional demand for the pilot fuel injection of the engine. The LNG tank capacity is about 400tonnes LNG and increases the operational range of the vessel from 12600sm (“heavy fuel oil” design) to 15800sm. The container capacity is reduced by 48TEU to 1236TEU. [3].


Within the research project the Figure 3 Tank/engine room installation, source: Neptun- Stahlkonstruktions GmbH


conventional main engine has been replaced by the dual fuel engine MAN 9L51/60DF and the engine room systems have been modified accordingly. Te LNG-tanks, designed as a pressure vessel (Type-C) according to the IGC-Code, are located in the aſt cargo hold. Te outer tanks in this arrangement are reduced to the aſt due to the shape of the hull and to keep the required distance from the outer shell of the vessel. Te gas processing equipment for gas conditioning is located above the LNG containment system and designed in accordance to MSC.285(86). Both rooms are planned next to the engine room to minimise hazardous areas and the potential risk that might affect the safety of the ship, personnel and equipment, cp. Figure. 1/Figure 2. Te engine room concept is based on


the gas safe machinery configuration which considers that the arrangements in machinery space are gas safe under all conditions. Therefore all gas supply piping should be enclosed in a gas tight enclosure within this concept. Te required redundancy for the fuel supply of the main


The Naval Architect September 2010 3


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164