GREEN CRAFT TECHNOLOGY


these third-party tests establish beyond a doubt that PureBallast performs as required. In addition, the tests performed by NIVA


confirm that PureBallast leaves no residual compounds or toxicity after ballast water treatment. Alfa Laval’s application for Active Substance Basic Approval was submitted in April 2006. In performing the tests, extensive efforts


were made to control the scaling between pilot and full-scale equipment. All of the guidelines for IMO testing were followed, and the pilot tests were conducted at a flow rate of 25m3


/h with more than 25m3 of


water to be treated. In this way, with proper scaling, the pilot tests corresponded to official IMO procedures.


Approval With its application for Active Substance Basic Approval submitted, Alfa Laval has already begun the complicated IMO approval process. Full-scale land-based tests of PureBallast began in October 2006, and these will proceed according to a very strict timetable. In general, the IMO approval process takes over a year. Alfa Laval’s goal is to have the first fully


approved ballast water treatment system with certification completed in mid-2007. However, based on the consistently positive trials and pilot test results, the company made PureBallast commercially available from December 2006.


Schematic diagram of ballast water operation.


Key results of the PureBallast testing performed by NIVA under the supervision of DNV.


Managing fuel efficiency and emissions F


UEL prices have been steadily increasing for the marine industry over the past few


years, and with energy amounting to a possible 35% to 40% of total passenger ship operational costs, the impact on corporate profit margins can be significant. In fact, prices have risen more than two-fold since 2003, with an uncertain outlook ahead introducing a level of economic risk. Environmental concerns are also a high


priority for shipowners. MARPOL 73/78 Annex VI sets limits on the emission of NOx and SOx, as well as having recently made the Baltic Sea a sulphur emission control area (SECA). The North Sea and the English Channel are due to follow suit this year, and there are suggestions that further SECAs will be introduced, including around North America. The International Maritime Organization’s


(IMO) Maritime Environment Protection Committee adopted guidelines for the voluntary CO2


indexing of ships in July


2005, which closely correlate with ship fuel consumption. Many shipowners go beyond compliance with these regulations to demonstrate their commitment to a greener shipping industry. In association with Lloyd’s Register (LR),


studies have recently been undertaken to investigate how to reduce ships’ fuel consumption and emissions while remaining cost-neutral. Adopting advanced technologies


SHIP & BOAT INTERNATIONAL MAY/JUNE 2007


and best-practice operation management indicated significant potential for consumption reduction. It is thought to be feasible if all aspects of ship design, machinery procurement, and ship operation are considered, as well as alternative technologies and fuels. For newbuilds, the proposed operating


profile and tailoring the selection of the plant should be taken into account, whereas for existing ships, ship energy management should harmonise the ship’s operations with the efficient use of the installed plant. An energy-efficient ship may be more


expensive, but counterbalanced against the rising cost of fuel, the extra investment may be able to be recouped in just a few years. New efficient designs could take into


consideration alternative configurations for ships’ engineering systems, using energy- efficient rotating machinery, wider use of shore services, improvements in hydrodynamics and propulsion, and a reduction in energy for hotel-type services. In-service ships can also benefit from


energy conservation and optimisation activities. LR recommends the use of a combination of benchmarking, energy audits, and performance monitoring. Benchmarking evaluates the performance


of a ship and its main machinery against industry standards; an energy audit reviews ship and machinery efficiency, as well as operational and management processes; and


performance monitoring ensures compliance with best practice. An energy audit assesses both technical


and non-technical aspects of operation, using a comprehensive level of data-gathering and analysis, in combination with a shipboard energy survey. A recent survey concluded that the fuel consumption of a particular passenger ship could be reduced by around 10% if all the recommended measures were implemented. These included voyage planning, speed


management, engine power management, performance monitoring, auxiliary load reduction, and alternative fuels and technologies. Previously, a 10% reduction was seen to


been an optimistic target, but with diligent management from the surveyed owner, this amount was achievable. There may also be further opportunities for shipowners who would like to do more than just reduce their fuel consumption, in light of the advent of emissions monitoring systems, emissions trading schemes, and voluntary CO2


emissions


indexing. A saving of 4% in fuel consumption would


mean an average of US$650,000 in energy cost savings per ship each year, along with a reduction of 5500tonnes of CO2 year. CO2


currently trades at approximately


US$30 per tonne, therefore introducing energy-efficiency methods could represent up to a US$800,000 saving per ship each year.


49 levels per


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