Bazari Reynolds Presentation 2

8/8/2019 Bazari Reynolds Presentation 2

1/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Sustainable Energy in

Marine Transportation

Zabi Bazari and Gill Reynolds

Lloyds Register EMEA

IMarEST Conference,

Sustainable Shipping, 1-2 February 2005


2/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Content

Introduction to fuel use and exhaustemissions;

Energy sustainability analysis; International initiatives; Technology developments; Market-based mechanisms; Conclusions.


3/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Marine Transport

Energy Use and Exhaust Emissions


4/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

World Oil Demand

World Oil De man

55

19

10

16

64

16

6

14

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

T ransport Indust ry P ower Gen. Others

Sector

%O

ilDemand

2002

2030


5/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Bunker Demand

Year 1970 2002

Total oil demand [MTOE] 2413 3676

International marine bunker

[MTOE]

106 146

Bunker [% of world oil demand] 4.34% 3.97%


6/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Share of Marine in Transportation CO2

Light duty

road

vehicles

45%

Heavy duty

road

vehicles

30%

Rail, inland

w ater

6%

Aircraft

12%

Maritime

7%


7/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Summary on Fuel Consumption and Emissions

Source Share of Marine

World oil consumption 3.97%World fossil fuel

consumption

1.95%

Oil consumption bytransport sector

7.2%

Wold NOx due to fossilfuels

11% - 12%

World SOx due to fossilfuels

7%


8/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Freight Transport

Energy Sustainability Analysis


9/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Sustainable Energy Indices

Energy Intensity: Amount of energy neededper unit of transport activity (kJ/t-km);

CO2 Emissions Intensity: Amount of CO2generated per unit of transport activity (g/t-

km).

NOx Emissions Intensity: Amount of NOxgenerated per unit of transport activity (g/t-

km).

SOx Emissions Intensity: Amount of SOxgenerated per unit of transport activity (g/t-

km).


10/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Estimation Method

Energy Intensity: Taken fromliterature;

CO 2 Emissions Intensity: Estimatedusing energy intensity, fuel heatingvalue and fuel carbon content;

NOx Emissions Intensity: Estimatedusing energy intensity, fuel heating

value and NOx emission factor. SOx Emissions Intensity: Estimatedusing energy intensity, fuel heatingvalue and fuel sulphur content.


11/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

ina

bleShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Comparisons: Energy Intensity

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Air Road Rai l Marine

EnergyIntensity[kJ/t-km


12/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Comparisons: CO2 Intensity

0

20 0

40 0

60 0

80 0

1000

1200

Ai r Road Rai l Mari n e

CO2Intensity[g

/t-km]


13/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Comparisons: NOx Intensity

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Ai r Road Rai l Mari n e

NOxIntensity[g/t-km


14/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Comparisons: SOx Intensity

0

20 0

40 0

60 0

80 0

1000

1200

Ai r Road Rai l Mari ne

SOxIntensity

[g/t-km


15/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Energy Intensity versus Ship Size (Tankers)

Energy Intens ity versus Displace

0

50

100

150

200

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000

Disp lacem en t [ ton

Energyintensity[kJ/t-km]


16/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Overall Picture

Marine freight transportation has:Lowest energy and CO

2emission

intensities;

Lowest NOx emissions intensity but a

reduced gap with other modes in

particular rail;

Higher level of SOx emissions thanroad and rail but still lower than air

transport.


17/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Reasons for Action

More stringent emissions control targets forother modes of transport;

Issues relating to port air quality and shipoperation in environmentally sensitive areas;

The relatively high level of NOx emissions factorof marine engines;

The high level of sulphur content of marine fuels; The economic factor: Any reduction in CO2

proportionally leads to fuel saving.


18/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

International Initiatives


19/38

Marine Services

Sust a

ina

bleS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Climate Change Convention

COP(Conference of Parties)

SBSTA(Subsidiary Body for

Scientific and Technical

Advice)

SBI(Subsidiary Body

for Implementation)

UNFCCCAgreed: Rio 1992

Ratified: 1994

Kyoto ProtocolAgreed: Kyoto 1997

Ratified: 2005

IMO(Shipping)

ICAO(Aircraft)


20/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

International Maritime Organisation (IMO)

IMO Assembly

MEPC(Marine Environment Protection

Committee)

MSC(Marine Safety Committee)

Air Pollution from Ships(Dealing with NOx, SOx, GHG

emissions, )

Ballast Water Ship Recycling

Current Working Groups


21/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

IMO Activities on GHG Emissions

Study of GHG emissions from shipping(report published in 2000);

Resolution A.963(23) on IMO policiesand practices related to reduction ofGHG emissions from ships (2003):

The Working Group is currentlyexploring technical and operational

issues relating to ways of reducing CO2

emissions.


22/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

European Union (EU)

EU is active on all aspects of energy sustainability:Pollutant control;

Fuel sulphur control;

Emissions trading.

For marine transport, the main emphasis is on fuelsulphur for ships operating within the EU waters;

Directive 1999/32/EC sets future tough limits:1.5% fuel sulphur limit in North Sea/English Channel& Baltic, compatible with IMOs SECA (May 2006 for

the Baltic);1.5% fuel sulphur limit for passenger ships on regularservices between EU ports (July 2007);

0.2% fuel sulphur limit for inland vessels and ships atberth in EU ports (0.1% from 2010).


23/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Local Requirements

Mainly in USA:The US EPA aims to bring the IMO MARPOL AnnexVI NOx emissions limits into force for US flaggedships;

In Alaska, exhaust emission opacity limits havebeen introduced;

Ships visiting Californian ports are required tooperate on MDO rather than HFO;

Designation of selected areas as SECAs is alsoanticipated.

Other local incentive schemes:Swedish environmentally differentiated fairwaysand port dues;

Recent Hamburgs environmentally differentiatedport dues.


24/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Technology Developments

Alternative fuels:Low sulphur fuels;

Natural gas;

Hydrogen.

Alternative Technologies:Natural gas (dual fuel) engines;

Fuel cell;

Electric ship;

Energy EfficiencyEnergy efficient technologies;

Operational controls;


25/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Low Sulphur Fuel

Move to lower sulphur fuel seems to be inevitable (Unlesscost effective flue gas desulphurisation systems become

available);

Issues:Fuel price differentials and economic consequences;

Adaptability of engine technologies to low sulphur fuels;

Lack of widespread availability of low sulphur bunkers;

Ship design and operational complexities associated

with the use of multiple fuel storage and distribution

systems.


26/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Natural Gas

A clean and low-carbon fuel; Significant worldwide reserves; In transportation, mainly used in light duty road

vehicles;

Marine application is limited to LNG ships; Favourable prospect:Production of dual fuel diesel engines;

Development of fuel cells;

Seen as a precursor to future hydrogen economy. Major technical issues:Storage (Main barrier);

Safety.


27/38


28/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Fuel Cell

+ ve- ve

Fuel

channel

Oxidant

channel Cathode

ElectrolyteAnode

Bipolar

plate

End plate

+ ve- ve

Fuel

channel

Oxidant

channel Cathode

ElectrolyteAnode

Bipolar

plate

End plate


29/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Fuel Cell

Compared to thermal power plants:Very effective in reducing pollutant;

Some energy efficiency gains especially in combined

heat and power configuration;

Issues:Technical (low power density, high specific weight, high

specific volume, low reliability and so on);

Needs very clean gaseous fuel (almost sulphur free)

Hydrogen is ideal;

Natural gas require internal fuel reformer;

Other liquid fuels require external reformer including desulphurisation unit.

Cost.


30/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Electric Ship

Mainly naval applications and to some extent passengerships; Significant flexibility in terms of machinery arrangement; Not yet as efficient as conventional mechanical drive ships; Driving force:

Specific operational requirements;

Advent of podded propulsors;

Multi-engine power management systems;

Future potential use of fuel cells;

Future use of shore power;

Future potential use of electrical storage devices;

Moves in automotive sector towards hybrid-electricsystems.


31/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Technology Roadmap

Fuel

M ore

sustainab

Engine Propulsio

H F O o r

M D O

Fuel Cell

Dual fuel diesel/

C O D A G

Diesel

Electrical

Hybrid/electric

system

Direct/geare

drive

Hydroge

Natural Ga


32/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Market-based Mechanisms

Emissions Trading; Fairways and port dues; Fuel price.


33/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Fuel Price

It is an effective market mechanism for uptake of newtechnologies; Has adverse effect on the economy of ship operation; Advantages:

Cleaner fuels become more cost-effective;

Makes the ETS activities more cost-effective bycorrespondingly raising CO2 prices;

Cleaner and more efficient new technologiesbecome more cost effective;

Improves operational and fleet managementpractices in a manner that reduces fuelconsumption.


34/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Conclusions

On energy sustainability andcompared to other modes of freighttransport, marine transportation:

Is the most sustainable mode of

transport from climate changepoint of view;

Has the lowest NOx emissionsintensity;

Its SOx emissions intensity ishigher than road and rail butstill lower than air transport.


35/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Conclusions

To improve the marinetransport energysustainability further:Fuel sulphur needs further reduction

preferably by setting medium to longterm targets;

Energy rating standards, for shipdesign and operation, should bedeveloped and implemented (in-line

with IMOs current activities);

Market-based mechanisms, includingETS, need to be monitored for futureapplication in marine.


36/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Conclusions

On future fuels and technologies:Natural gas is seen as the precursor

to move to hydrogen economy.

Storage capacity is the main barrier

to its use in ships.

The use of hydrogen, as the fuel, and

fuel cells as the main power plant

will evolve in the longer term as the

shift to a low-carbon / hydrogen

economy occurs.


37/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Conclusions

On future fuels and technologies:The above moves, plus other

developments (e.g. electric storage,

shore power, podded drives, etc.),

would lead to future stronger movestowards electric ships.


38/38

Marine Services

Sust a

inableS

hipp

ing

Confe

rence

Sust a

inab

leShipp

ing

Confe

renc

e

Thank You

Bazari Reynolds Presentation 2

Documents

Transcript of Bazari Reynolds Presentation 2