case study - green-marine

Case study:

The use of hybrid technology for a fleet towboat

Presented by Jan Flores, P.E.

2

NETSCo Services

Naval Architecture

• Structural analysis

• Inclining experiments

• Loading manuals

• Stability analysis

• Casualty response

• Capacity plans

Vessel Services

• Design

• Modifications

• Conversions

• Repowerings

Facility Services

• Marine terminal upgrades

• Transmodal material

handling

• Dock design, modification

and rehabilitation

• Mooring arrangements

3

NETSCo Area of Expertise

Environmental

Initiatives:• Ballast Water Treatment

• Emissions Reduction

• Energy EfficiencySpecialized Vessels:• ATB’s

• LNG Bunker

• Self Unloaders

• Tankers

• What are Hybrid Technologies?

• Brief History of Hybrid Technologies

• Hybrid Technologies Overview

• Case Study: Fleet Tow Boat• Operational Profiles

• System Selection and Design

• Assumptions and Results

• Case Study: Ferry Barge Push Boat• Operational Profile

• Assumptions and Results

• Going Forward

• Next Steps

Agenda

4

• Combinations of different technologies to provide power

Definition of Hybrid Power

• Fossil Fuel Engines

• Wind Energy

• Battery Power (Chemical)

• Hydro-Electric Power

• Solar Energy

• Fuel Cells

Examples: Any Combo of

5

Brief History of Hybrid Technology

6

Hybrid Technologies Overview

• Conventional Propulsion• Typically Diesel Engines and Gensets

• Most common propulsion arrangement

• Hybrid Propulsion (Conventional Drive)• Diesel Engine w/ Electric M/G

• Hybrid ready gearbox or combination M/G/reduction gear• PTI or PTO Operation

• Hybrid Propulsion (Electric Drive)• Electric motors provide all propulsion

• Propulsion power form D/G’s or Battery Power

• Plug-in Battery Propulsion• Batteries provide all propulsion power to electric motors

• Clean and quiet operation• Requires massive battery arrays and complex shore charging facilities

Propulsion Arrangements

7


• All Mechanical• Diesel (typically) engines do all the work

• Diesel Electric• Diesel generators provide power for electric

drive• No direct engine to propeller shaft power

• Boost• Diesel engine provides most of the power• Smaller electric drive assists main engine

• All Electric• Stored power (batteries) provide power for

electric drive• No diesel (or other fuel) engines running

Modes of Operation

8


• Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC)• Pros: Highest Energy Density, Cheapest Cost

(relatively)

• Cons: Lower Cycle Life and lower thermal stability

• Uses: Applications requiring lots of energy and smaller package weight and size.

Li-ion Battery Chemistries

• Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP)• Pros: Highest Power Density, midrange Cycle Life and

thermal stability

• Cons: higher cost, lower Energy Density

• Uses: High power (battery starting) and peak shaving applications .

• Lithium Titanate (LTO)• Pros: Highest Cycle Life and Thermal Stability

• Cons: Lowest Energy Density, Highest Cost

• Uses: Applications requiring very high cycling of batteries.

9

10

Case Study: Fleet Tow Boat

• LOA 54’

• Beam 22’

• HP 1200hp

• Engines (x2) 600hp Cummins KTA19-M3

• Generators (x2) 30kW

Vessel Particulars

11


• Dockside: 50%(15kWh)

• Transit to Fleet: 15% (290kW)

• Fleeting Operations: 25% (927kW)

• Transit to Dock: 10% (290kW)

Operational Profile

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Dockside Tranist to Fleet Fleeting Transit toTerminal

TIM

E H

R

PO

WE

R K

W

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

OPERATIONAL PROFILE - CONVENTIONAL PROPULSION

M/E + D/G Power Time

12


System Selection and Design - Arrangement

• Conventional Propulsion• High fuel consumption • High emissions (CO2, NOX, SOX)

• Hybrid Propulsion (Electric Drive)• High CapEx• High Voltages

• Plug-In Battery Propulsion• Extremely large battery arrays• Complex and expensive shore power connection (battery charging)

• Hybrid Propulsion (Conventional Drive)• Least complex for retrofit application• Low CapEx (compared to other Hybrid solutions)• Flexible modes of operation

13


System Selection and Design – Li-ion Chemistry

• LFP & LTO

• Higher Cost when compared to NMC

• Lower Energy Density

(more batteries = bigger arrays and additional weight)

• NMC• Smaller Arrays

• Low C Rate Application

(Energy Density more important than Power Density)

• Lower Upfront Cost

14


System Selection and Design - Arrangement

Battery DC Power to & from Converter

AC Power to & from M/G

AC Power to Switchboard

D/G AC Power to Switchboard

AC Power from Shore Supply

15


System Selection and Design – Hybrid (Dual Mode)

• No engines utilized during transits

• Battery array sized for round trip “Transit” propulsion & hotel loads

• Batteries assist (boost) M/E and provide hotel and auxiliary power during “Fleeting” operations

• Battery charging at dockside in between trips

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000


TIM

E H

R

PO

WE

R K

W


OPERATIONAL PROFILE – HYBRID (DUAL MODE)

M/E + D/G Power Batt Power Time

16


System Selection and Design – Hybrid (All Electric)

• No engines utilized during transits

• Battery array sized for round trip “Transit” propulsion & hotel loads

• M/E and D/G provide propulsion and electrical power during “Fleeting” operations


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000


TIM

E H

R

PO

WE

R K

W


OPERATIONAL PROFILE - HYBRID (ALL ELECTRIC)


17


System Selection and Design – Hybrid (Boost Mode)

• M/E and D/G provide propulsion and electrical power during “Transit” operations

• Batteries assist (boost) M/E and provide hotel and auxiliary power during “Fleeting” operations


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000


TIM

E H

R

PO

WE

R K

W


OPERATIONAL PROFILE - HYBRID (BOOST MODE)


18


Assumptions and Results – Fuel Cost Comparison

Assumptions

• Based on average North American price for MGO ($606 USD/mT)

• Based on average North American kWh price ($0.12 per kWh)

Results

• Vary degrees of savings depending on operational mode when compared to conventional propulsion

19


Assumptions and Results – Battery Comparison

Assumptions

• * Based on 80% DOD, 85% SOC and 80% EOL capacity

• ** Size of array is representative and can be rearranged to facilitate installation.

• Charge times based on typical 1C charge data, scaled for specified C rate

• *** Based on 8000 Cycle Life at 80% DOD

Results

• Operational Profile and Mode selection had huge impact on the battery array size and charging profile.

• Number of charge/discharge cycles greatly influences calendar life of batteries

20

Case Study: Ferry Barge Push Boat

Operational Profile

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Dockside Tranist toCruise Ship

Loading Cruise toLanding

Unloading Landing toCruise

Return toDock

TIM

E H

R

PO

WE

R K

W


OPERATIONAL PROFILE - CONVENTIONAL PROPULSION

M/E + D/G Power Time

21

Case Study: Ferry Barge Push BoatAssumptions and Results – Fuel Cost Comparison

Assumptions

• Based on average North American price for MGO ($606 USD/mT)

• Based on average North American kWh price ($0.12 per kWh)

Results

• Vary degrees of savings depending on operational mode when compared to conventional propulsion

Dockside – All Electric Mode, batteries

sized for all 3 trips, charging while dockside.

Landing – All Electric Mode, batteries sized

for a single trip, charging while unloading at

landing.

22

Case Study: Ferry Barge Push BoatAssumptions and Results – Battery Comparison

Assumptions

• * Based on 80% DOD, 85% SOC and 80% EOL capacity

• ** Size of array is representative and can be rearranged to facilitate installation.

• Charge times based on typical 1C charge data, scaled for specified C rate

• *** Based on 8000 Cycle Life at 80% DOD

Results

• Operational Profile and Mode selection had huge impact on the battery array size and charging profile.

• Number of charge/discharge cycles greatly influences calendar life of batteries

23

Going Forward

• NO One Size Fits All!!

• Feasibility, Fuel Cost Analysis studies on your vessel or fleet

• Understand Rules (USCG, CLASS)

24

Next Steps – Maritime Engineering

• Concept study from drawings and data

• Ship visit and survey

• Feasibility studies

• Basic Design

• Detailed integration engineering

• Installation

• Compliance

25

Thank you for your time!

Tampa Office

NETSCo, Inc.

Tel: (813) 223.5464

E-mail: [email protected]

Cleveland Office

NETSCo, Inc.

Tel: (440) 236.9191

E-mail: [email protected]

case study - green-marine

Documents