lng as fuel• warm lng has lower energy content and produce more bog while bunkering. • receiving...

Luis GUERRERO

LNG AS FUEL

2nd November 2015

LNG: one solution

3

LNG as a workable alternative fuel

►NOx reduced more than 80%

►Without SOx emissiones

►No particulate material

►CO2 can be reduced by 25% depending onthe technology (no methane slip in 2 strokeengines)

4

LNG VERSUS OTHER FUELS

►Pro

Better energy efficiency

No residues, unlike the scrubbers

Reduces air pollution

Less noise and vibrations

►Cons

More storage tank volume ( 1 litre LNG isequivalent to 0,6 litres GO). Twice FO and thricedual

Logistics not available at some ports yet

Training of crew

Return of investment

Not enough experience with the regulations

LNG BUNKERING

6

EXPERIENCE IN LNG TRANSFER AND GAS FUELLED SHIPS

► Safety records during 50 years of LNG carriers operation.

► Exmar – Gutteling flexible hoses. STS LNG transfer.

► STS LNG transfers. Coral Methane and Pioneer Knutsen.

► No significant accidents reported on gas fuelled ships.

► Anyhow, special attention must be paid to LNG bunkering:

• Basically small gas fuelled ships until now.

• Diversity of size, type of ship and bunkering scenarios.

► Need to keep the LNG shipping safety records in LNG bunkering.

7

GUIDELINES AND POSSIBILITIES FOR LNG BUNKERING.

Bunkering Facility

Type C tank Atmospheric tankBunkership

Tanktruck

Shorebased

Bunkership

Shorebased

Receiving Ship

Type C tank Fig.1 Fig.4 (*) (*) Fig.5

Atmospherictank

Fig.2 (*) (*) Fig.3 (*)

(*) Possible arrangement but not shown in the presentation

► Bureau Veritas Guidelines for bunkering (NI 618) issued in July 2014.

► IACS unified guidelines for LNG bunkering.

8

► Example of bunker transfer from type C to type C• Vapour return line not required (pressure tanks)

• Pressure equilibrium to happen in bunker and fuel tanks

LNG BUNKERING POSSIBILITIES - FIG. 1

9

► Example of bunker transfer from type C to Atmospheric• Vapour return line highly recommended (alternative means of pressure control for the fuel

tank advisable)

• Bunker subject to the supply pressure and capacity to handle BOG in the receiving tank.


10

► Example of bunker transfer between atmospheric tanks• Vapour return line highly recommended (alternative means of pressure control for the fuel

tank advisable)

• Bunker subject to the supply pressure and capacity to handle BOG in the receiving tank.


11

► Example of bunker transfer truck to ship (type C)• Vapour return line is generally not possible

• Bunker feasible in any case due to the pump. Reduced transfer rate expected compared

with FIG.1 with vapour return line

• Possibility to have inert gas facilities in the pier


12

► Example of bunker transfer shore (atmospheric) to ship (type C)• Vapour return line is advisable to reduce bunker time

• Bunker feasible in any case due to the pump

• Cryogenic and vapour return piping length depend on the terminal location


13

LNG BUNKERING. GENERAL TECHNICAL ISSUES

► Compatibility of equipment between the supplier and the fed ship.

► Adequate/compatible pressure and temperature of supplier and receivingtanks and bunkering rates.

• Warm LNG has lower energy content and produce more BoG while bunkering.

• Receiving tank with warm LNG increases the bunkering pressure because of BoG.

• It may be preferable in some cases to have the lowest possible LNG temperatureeven for pressurized type “C” tanks.

► LNG transfer by increasing the pressure in bunkering ship tank (e.g.heating/vaporization of LNG) or by means of cryogenic transfer pumps.

► How do we fill the tank?

► Do we need a vapour return to bunkering ship or bunkering station?

► Bunkering rates required to be as high as possible (could be hours in aTruck to Ship transfer operation of less than 100 m3 but no more than onehour in a Ship to Ship operation). Limitations of the containment system,filling levels, vapour pressure, etc shall be taken into consideration.

► Possibility of roll-over due to different densities of the fuel bunkered andstored on board of the gas fuel ship. Stratification of LNG with differentdensities which might release a big amount of BoG.

14

LNG BUNKERING. SOME OPERATIONAL ISSUES

► Bunkering permitted while commercial operations are taking place?

► What happen in case of passenger ships?

► Simultaneous bunkering/unloading operations (fuel, oil, water, sludge).

► How to meter the LNG transferred (natural gas price is by energy content)?Temperature and pressure of LNG lead to different densities and energy contents.

► Required to have suitable methane composition to avoid misfiring in the engines.

► Traffic situation in the port. Permission. Extension of the hazardous area.

► Daylight conditions, visibility and weather.

15

SAFETY MEANS AND PRECAUTIONS

► Simplicity and standardization of the bunker connections.

► Avoid venting of gas. Vapour retour to the bunkering ship ifpossible. Quick couplings.

► Avoid LNG leakage – dry break couplings.

► Protection of the surrounding areas – barriers to be provided(water curtains, stainless steel trays).

► Reliable system and materials (piping, valves, pumps, etc) tooperate with cryogenic liquid and prepare for quick shut down inemergency situation (dry and break away couplings).

► Emergency Shut Down (ESD) systems interconnection.

► Suitable communication system (VHF normally permitted, portableVHF allowed if ex-proof).

► Inerting process and equipment (inert gas/N2 generator).

► Personnel protection devices and specific training.

► Arrangement and safety means in the bunkering station (includingprotection against explosion following a leakage).

► Risk analysis (safety zones, leakages, emergency situations, etc).

16

SPECIFIC ISSUES OF BUNKERING SHIP

► Reliable and safe designs. Different type/size of gas fuelled ships to bunker.

► High loading rates/filling levels but safe bunker operation.

► At least IGF CODE and CLASS Rules for liquefied gas carriers compliance.

► Issues in relation with the AREA OF OPERATION.• Ports and harbours in addition to LNG terminals.• Proximity of other ships, industrial infra-structures or living areas.• More severe consequences of potential venting and increased risks of collision.

► Very specific TRANSFER SYSTEM• LNG bunkering requires specific equipment (at least transfer arms or hoses or similar

equipment).• Transfer equipment to be covered by class when used on a routine basis.

Courtesy Sirius Veder Gas AB

Courtesy GdF Suez

17

BOG MANAGEMENT FOR LNG BUNKERING SHIPS

► A key issue: Very specific operational profile of the ship.

• Ship waiting in port with no BOG consumption in engines.

• Extra BOG generated during the bunkering operation.

► Ways to control the pressure in the tanks.

• Gas Combustion Unit (GCU).

• Boiler.

• Mechanical refrigeration.

• Pressurized tank.

Independent Type C (4 barg)

Prismatic0.25-0.7 barg

18

► LNG tank pressure and temperature control.• Reliquefaction units to keep the cargo cool and liquefy the BOG.

• Very cool cargo means less extra BOG during transfer and moreenergy content in the fuel transferred.

• High pressure/warm temperature lead to specific issues whenbunkering atmospheric tanks.

► Venting must be avoided.• IGC Code + specific area of operation (risk of explosion, etc).

BOG MANAGEMENT FOR LNG BUNKERING SHIPS

Courtesy GTT Courtesy AGA gas

19

LNG - Bunkering Ships

►BV assessment of LNG bunkering ships.► Classification of NYK / ENGIE / MITSUI 5.100 m3 at HHIC

► Classification of SIRIUS VEDER 5.800 m3 at BODEWES

► AiP 4.000 m3 GTT membrane LNG carrier for bunkering

► Assessment of LNG transfer and re-liquefaction systems

►New BV Notation under development► NR.620 “LNG bunkering ship”

► Additional service features: RE, IG-Supply, Initial-CD & BOG

► Scheduled publication date October 2015

20

LNG tanks

►Containment systems: GTT NO96, MARK III, MARK III-Flex, CS1 KOGAS KC-1 Samsung SCA IHI SPB MOSS DSME ACT-IB Nordic Yards ADBT STX tipo B Tanks type C, possible in containers

Containerized Type C

Type C

MOSS

Membrane tank Independent type B

21

Membrane Technologies for LNG storage

GTT

Others

Kogas KC1, Samsung SCA, DSME Solidus

Mark V

22

Challenge

• Space for LNG storage on board• Heating/ refrigeration systems• Segregation of spaces• Protection against leakages• Arrangements for bunkering.

23

LNG BUNKERING. RISK ASSESSMENT

F AnnualFrequency

Definition

1 < 10-4 Extremely improbable: not expected in the system life

2 10-4 - 10-3 Improbable: not anticipated in the system life

3 10-3 - 10-2 Extremely remote: should not happen in the system life

4 10-2 - 10-1 Remote: expected few times in the system life

5 > 10-1 Reasonably probable: expected several times in the system life

SA Severity Definition

1 Negligible No damage to personnel, safety functions fully available

2 Minor Light injuries to personnel and/or local damage to safety functions

3 Severe Serious injuries to personnel and/or large local damages to safety functions

4 Critical Fatalities amongst personnel locally, impairment of safety functions

5 Catastrophic A large number of fatalities amongst personnel also outside the event area, total impairment of safety functions

24

Why a risk assessment for LNG bunkering?

25

LNG Cloud Ignition

► Very slow deflagration in open air and very low overpressure in open air (less than 50 mbar).

► Possibility of very small fire balls but far less dangerous than the ones observed for LPG.

► Explosion in confined spaces: Skikda 2004.

26

Main concern: ventilation, leakage prevention and detection

The manifold must be able to avoid the connection hose to break in case of extremerelative motions or emergency

Fire detection and extinction

HFO/MDO, lub.oil and sludge manifolds with separate spill

tray

LNG Vapor return

Overboard discharge from spill tray

Air lock

Control panel

Communications, alarms, ESD

BUNKERING STATION

27

OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS

Relative motions ship-quay-LNG barge

Draft variations

Mooring in different whether conditions:

• METOCEAN data.

• Ships data.

• SOFTWARE BV HydroSTAR and ARIANE

28

LNG BUNKERING. REGULATIONS

Port Authorities alone or in associations (IAPH).

• Bunkering operations.

Local regulations (flag administrations).

• Bunkering operations and/or ships involved.

IGC and CCNR.

• Bunkering ship.

Guidelines MSC.285(86), IGF and CCNR.

• Gas fuelled ship.

ISO.

• LNG bunkering equipment and installations.

SIGTTO LNG Ship to Ship Transfer Guidelines.

ISGOTT & ISGINTT.

29

REGULATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS AS FUEL (I)

Historically the IMO gas codes were the firstregulation authorizing and ruling the use of boil offgas as fuel (on LNG carriers).

Classification rules for gas fuel engines and gasfuelled ships:

• NR481 in 2002: Design and installation ofdual fuel engines using low pressure gas,

• NR529 in 2007: Safety rules for gas-fuelledengine installation on ships.

The IMO has addressed the use of natural gas asfuel in their Interim guidelines on safety fornatural gas fuelled engine installations in ships(IMO Res. MSC.285(86) adopted in June 2009)

The IMO started the elaboration of the InternationalCode for Gas Fuelled Ships (IGF code) in 2009

30

IGF Code is adopted. LNG as fuel.

In the future IMO IGF code will not belimited to natural gas fuel but will addressseveral more options.

IGF application 1st January 2017.

SOLAS• SOLAS amendment is also adopted this year, to

include the provisions for low flash point fuels bymeans of IGF.

• Amendments in Chapter II-1 (Part A, F and newPart G), Chapter II-2 (Part B) and Annexes.

• Chapter II-1, PART G - Ships using low-flashpointfuels – Regulation 56: Application: This part neednot apply to gas carriers using their cargoes asfuel and complying with the requirements ofchapter 16 IGC Code, as defined in VII.

REGULATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS AS FUEL (II)

31

IMO IGF CODE – GAS FUEL CONTAINMENT SYSTEM

Independent Type CMembrane

Large ships: important to have enough autonomy without affecting thecargo capacity (LNG is a bulky fuel)

IGF approval of CCS based on new IGC code.

Independent Type A or BPrismatic

MSC.285(86) – The storage tank used for liquefied gas should be anindependent tank designed in accordance with IGC Code.

IGF Code allow the use of Membrane and Portable tanks.

Portable Type C

32

SHIP GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

► Segregation principle

SAFE AREA CARGO AREA

Classic arrangement for gas carrier

33

IGF - SHIP GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

► Segregation on gas fuelled ship might be more difficult to apply

► Main philosophy is to keep to a maximum the level of segregation between gas dangerous spaces and safe spaces

No direct communication between gas spaces and non-hazardous spaces

Reinforced fire insulation of gas spaces (A60 + Cofferdam)

Hazardous area classification

Segregation of piping systems

34

TANK LOCATION

► Tank location has been one of the most contentious and debated issuewithin the industry.

► Final position has been defined at the last MSC94

► No restriction for location below the accommodations provided that risksare properly identified and addressed

35

Position of the tanks. Deterministic method – Part A-1, paragraph5.3.3.

5.3.3.1. Distance from ship side = B/5 or 11.5 m whichever is less atthe summer load line

5.3.3.2. Distance from side shell or aft terminal =

Passenger ships B/10

Cargo ships

5.3.3.1. Distance from ship bottom = B/15 or 2.0 m whichever is less

Alternative to the 5.3.3.1. Probabilistic method – Part A-1,paragraph 5.3.4.

IMO IGF CODE – POSITION OF THE FUEL TANKS

36

TANK LOCATION - DETERMINISTIC APPROACH

For passenger ships, junction between B/15

and B/10 should be more precisely defined

Minimum distance from ship side at summer waterline : B/5 or 11.5 m whichever is

less, Minimum distance from ship

side : Passenger ships : B/10Cargo ships : Between 0.8 and 2m depending on the tank capacity

Minimum distance from bottom line : B/15 or 2 m

whichever is less

37

TANK LOCATION – PROBABILISTIC APPROACH

Li

L

l

Fcn criteria is calculated using simplified method from probabilistic stability. This value is supposed to represent the probability to hit the

tank in case of collision

∙ ∙

Criteria :

0.02 for Pax ships

0.04for Cargo shipsMinimum distance from ship side :

Passenger ships : B/10Cargo ships : Between 0.8 and

2m depending on the tank capacity

► In order to provide more flexibility in ship design, an alternativeprobabilistic method is also defined

BV references

39

Experience with LNG as fuel

► 2001 GDFSuez , Wartsila y Chantiers de l’Atlantique (STX Europe). GdFSuez Global Energy, Provalys and Gazelys (First methane carrier withdual fuel electric propulsion, delivered in 2004)

►Methan carrier Castillo de Santisteban de 173.000m3 built STX KoreaDual Fuel delivered in 2010 to Empresa Naviera Elcano S.A.

►En 2012 Coral Energy delivered at Meyer Werft a Anthony Veder

►Since 2004 BV has classified 26 methane carriers with dual fuel enginesand electric propulsion

40

Container vessels

► 14.000 teu Daewoo ,CMA-CGM

► Feeder 1,000 teu, Baltic Sea

41

►Conversion of a 3,750 dwt oil/chemical tanker Bergen Viking

►Rolls-Royce scope:

• 2 x C26:33L6AG only-gas generator sets

• 2 x vacuum isolated type C LNG storage tanks on deck

• Gas fuel systems

•Courtesy Rolls-Royce

•CONVERSION TO GAS FUEL

•Courtesy Bergen Tankers A/S

42

►Conversion of Oil / Chemical Tanker (JiP LNG-CONV)

• Project Partners: Furetank, Oresund, Preem, FKAB, Pon Power, Caterpillar, SSPA and BUREAU VERITAS

• Convert existing 17,600 dwt oil/chemical tanker Fure West

• Dual fuel main engine MAK 7M46DF of 6300 kW

• Caterpillar 3508 auxiliary engine(s)

• Type C LNG storage tanks on deck (2 x 255 m3 capacity)

•CONVERSION TO DUAL FUEL

43

► Two Ferries for Seaspan.

• DF propulsion

• 2 x Wartsila 9L 34DF generators

• Single 200 cbm Type C tank below the main deck

•RECENT NEWBUILDINGS – 4 STROKES DF ENGINES

44

Petroleros, quimiqueros, bunker

►Petrolero para navegación fluvial (aprox. 2.500 tpm)

►Conversión de un quimiquero de 18,000 dwt “Fure West“

►Buques para bunker (combustible a otros buques)

45

•RAL Courtesy •VARD Courtesy •MEYER TURKU Courtesy

•TERNTANK Courtesy •TRANSPORTS DESGAGNES Courtes

•ANTHONY VEDERS Courtesy

46

References in Spain

• BALEARIA: new diesel generator set in LNG

• SUARDIAZ: LNG bunker and change of main engine

47

Experience in engines

► Type approval:

Wartsila dual fuel engines (e.g. 34DF, 32DF, 20DF & 50DF)

MAN dual fuel engines (51/60 DF) y MAN 2 strokes (on-going)

Rolls-Royce Bergen gas engines (KVGB-12G4)

Anglo Belgian Corporation (ABC) dual fuel engines (e.g. DZD / (V)DZD) (en proceso

48

► ME-GI Man B&W already in the Marketfor Methane (LNG as fuel)• Specific EGR system for NOx compliance

► More efficient than 4 stroke DF

► Ethane and LGI

► Safety concerns because of the highpressure needed (gas spill in ER).

► Wartsila 2 strokes low pressure

► Otto cycle

► Pre-combustion chamber

► Tier III compliant running on gas mode

LNG - Propulsion

49

LEG/LPG Coral StarSeries of eight 27,500 m3 LEG

NATURAL GAS AS FUEL – FIRST CANDIDATES

Sirocco 2,700 m3 LPG

► LPG and LEG carriers have been the first examples of newbuilding.• In service Coral Star and Coral Sticho 4,700m3 LEG/LPG Carriers for Anthony

Veder built by Avic Dingheng.

• In service 2,700 m3 LPG for inland navigation Sirocco.

• Eight 27,500m3 LEG/LPG Carriers for Evergas at Sinopacific and Yangzijiang2 already delivered and six more under construction.

• Technology:− Direct driven 4-stroke Dual Fuel Wartsila main engine and Gensets.

− Pressurized type C tanks (approx. 5 bar).

50

►Conversion of a 3,750 dwt oil/chemical tanker Bergen Viking

►Rolls-Royce scope:

• 2 x C26:33L6AG only-gas generator sets

• 2 x vacuum isolated type C LNG storage tanks on deck

• Gas fuel systems

• Switchboard modifications

Courtesy Rolls-Royce

CONVERSION TO GAS FUEL

Courtesy Bergen Tankers A/S

51

►Conversion of Oil / Chemical Tanker (JiP LNG-CONV)

• Project Partners: Furetank, Oresund, Preem, FKAB, Pon Power, Caterpillar, SSPA and BUREAU VERITAS

• Convert existing 17,600 dwt oil/chemical tanker Fure West

• Dual fuel main engine MAK 7M46DF of 6300 kW

• Caterpillar 3508 auxiliary engine(s)

• Type C LNG storage tanks on deck (2 x 255 m3 capacity)

CONVERSION TO DUAL FUEL

52

RECENT NEWBUILDINGS – SLOW SPEED DF ENGINES

► 4 Chemical Tankers for Terntank (Denmark)• Wartsila DF 2-stroke low pressure

• Type C LNG fuel tanks on deck

• First ship scheduled for delivery in 2016

• Avic Dingheng

►Chemical Tankers for Nordic MaritimeServices AS (Norway)

• ME-GI engine (high pressure gas injection)

• Xinle Shpyard

► 3 Asphalt Tankers for Desgagnes Group (Canada)• Wartsila DF 2-stroke low pressure

• Wartsila DF 4-stroke gensets

• Betsiktas yard

53

LNG fuel propulsion ro-pax for TALLINK (SRTP – DUAL FUEL)

49.000 GT, 212m Loa, 2.850 Pax & 150 Crew, Delivery February 2017

Werft Yard Turku

RECENT NEWBUILDINGS – 4 STROKES DF ENGINES

54

LNG POWERED TUG BOATS

►AiP have been granted to RAL designs• RANGLer 3600• RAstar 4000 DF

► Highly sophisticated and powerful tugs► Two orders confirmed for Ostensjo Rederi

in Gondan Shipyard

►BV Involved in some other designs for European tugowners

55

75 m LOA LNG-Powered Electric Supply Barge• Project Partners: SCHRAMM group GmbH & Co. KG, Ingo Schlüter GmbH & Co. KG,

EON Hanse Wärme GmbH, Gasnor AS, Becker Marine Systems, Aida Cruises andBUREAU VERITAS

• Five gas fuelled generator sets to produce electricity in Hamburg port to supplycruise vessels and municipal grid

• LNG ISO tank containers + Caterpillar generator sets

FLEXIBLE SOLUTION IN EU / NORTH AMERICA FOR SHIPS IN PORT

DUAL FUEL POWER BARGES

56

Ultra large container ship (14.000 teu) 2-stroke dual fuel propulsion engine supplied with high pressure gas Auxiliary engines supplied with low pressure gas LNG storage in aluminium type B tanks below the accommodation Innovative gas supply system patented

SHIP DESIGNS (I)

Courtesy DSME

57

Feeder container ship (1.000 teu) Project Partners: VEGA Reederei, MARINE SERVICE and BUREAU VERITAS

Dual fuel main engine 4 strokes Low pressure gas supply Dual fuel generator sets 38m3 vacuum insulated containerised

storage tanks

SHIP DESIGNS (II)

58

LATEST ONGOING PROJECTS – MEMBRANE TANKS

CONTAINER SHIP 16.000 TEU• 2-STROKES / DF LOW PRESSURE ENGINE + DF GENSETS / LNG TANK 14.000 m3

AFRAMAX TANKERS • HIGH PRESSURE ME-GI ENGINE + DF GENSETS / LNG TANK 4.000 m3

CONTAINER SHIP 4.800 TEU• HIGH PRESSURE ME-GI ENGINE + DF GENSETS / LNG TANK 7.000 m3

MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE FOR SMALL SIZE TANK• STANDARD ARRANGEMENT BELOW DECK OR SELFSTANDING ARRANGEMENT ON DECK

Source GTT

59

Move Forward with Confidence

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ATTENTION

[email protected]

lng as fuel• warm lng has lower energy content and produce more bog while bunkering. • receiving...

Documents