MSC.285(86) and Code for gas-fuelled ships (IGF-Code) technical challenges and perspective - Dr Gerd Würsig, Benjamin Scholz,

Transcription

1 MSC.285(86) and Code for gas-fuelled ships (IGF-Code) technical challenges and perspective - Dr Gerd Würsig, Benjamin Scholz, GL Your competitive edge Take the lead through innovation

2 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 2 Summary compared to conventional fuel oil based ship fuels liquefied gases have significant advantages with regard to environmental effects environmental legislation (NOx, SOx), CO2 reduction targets and cost benefits are the key factors to make liquefied natural gas (LNG) an attractive fuel for shipping In principle LNG is available. In Europe the import terminals are going to be prepared to export LNG Small scale LNG carriers to distribute LNG are existing With more than 20 vessels in operation the prove of safe operation has been given Germany is deeply involved in the development of technology for the next generation of gas fuelled ships Important safety aspects are: Bunkering during normal harbour operation collision risk and ranking of collision consequences storage tank design The IMO IGF-Code is of utmost importance to provide an international legal framework for the technology

3 Why gas as fuel? Environment and Economics IMO agreed to reduce SO x -emissions by controlling the Sulphur content in marine fuels from 2015 onwards. Within SECA s, ship owners need to switch to cleaner fuels like marine gas oil (MGO) with 0.1% Sulphur, if alternative technologies are not or cannot be used. Recent studies point to possible modal shifts from sea to road around the north European SECAs and US ECA Low-Sulphur fuel and distillate demand a costs premium today plus 30$/t for fuel with 1.5% Sulphur plus 300$/t for distillate with 0.1% Alternative fuels could offer a solution GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 3

4 Conventional fuel becomes unatractive For new vessels operating in ECA s from 2016 onwards, 80% reduction of NO x -emissions versus 2010 level is required catalytic converters or extreme EGR is needed Current and potential emission control areas GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 4

5 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 5

6 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 6 No Chicken Egg problem for Fuel Supply

7 LNG/LPG Tanker Norgas Innovation GL , in service since January 2010 Source: GL, I.M. Skaugen I.M. Skaugen SE/Norgas: 6 Newbuildings to m 3, 2009/2011 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 7

8 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 8 Gas as Fuel for Shipping

9 Gas fuelled vessels Mai : car/passenger ferry 2003: two offshore vessels 2006: one car/passenger ferry 2007: four car/passenger ferries 2008:one offshore vessel 2009: four car/passenger ferries, one patrol vessel, one offshore vessel 2010: three car passenger ferries, two patrol vessels IGF Guideline Proposed to IMO DE 48/19 Norway car passenger vessels: two different owners offshore vessels: two different owners patrol vessels: one owner Source: DNV; Wärtsilä LNG Seminar, Waalwik, GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 9

10 GL Guideline for the use of Gas as Fuel for Ships (VI-3-1) In Force GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 10

11 IGF-Code IMO Rules for gas as ship fuel MSC-86 (Mai 2009): IGF Interim Guideline: MSC Resolution MSC footnote to SOLAS Reg. II-1/26 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 11

12 The GL classed chemical tanker Bit Viking of Tarbit Shipping will be converted to LNG as fuel Particulars Deadweight 24,783 MT Length over all 177,03 m Beam 26,30 m Cubic capacity 27,310 m³ 98% Main engines 2 x WÄRTSILÄ 6L46B 5,850 kw Classed GL* 100A5 E3 ESP IW NAV- OC Chemical Tanker Type-2 GF GL Register No To be converted until end of September 2011 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 12

13 1200 TEU CV basic design (2009: GL, MAN, TGE) tank arrangement - TGE-Marine Gas Engineering GmbH GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 13

14 DF 1244 XXX 428 XXX MAN 9L51/60DF XXXXX 9000 XXX 16 XXX GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 14

15 R&D project: Gaspax: - Cruise Ship, RoPax, Mega Yacht - Gross Tonnage: 63,000 GT LOA: 238 m Breadth: 32.2 m Passengers/ Crew: Crew Engines: Dual fuel (2 x 6 MW; 2 x 8 MW) Fuel: 2x1000 m3 LNG/ 800 m3 MGO Hazard Identification carried out Next step: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis no showstoppers have been identified so far GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 15

16 Bunkering during unloading and loading Bunkering scenario Very short time in port Port close to urban areas Source: FKAB Passengers LNG & MGO Truck and cars GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 16

17 Project Proposal BunGas : Development of Bunker Boat and Bunker Requirements (2011/2012) Ship - based bunkering Meyer Werft MAN Diesel TGE-Marine Gas Engineering Germanischer Lloyd Det Norske Veritas AIDA Cruises Bernhard Schulte GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 17

18 CV 18,000 TEU L=400m B=59m H=30.10m DUAL FUEL for main engine and auxiliaries Fuel-Flexibility 40 days range on HFO 33 days range on HFO 7 days range on LNG 7 days range on HFO 33 days range on LNG GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 18

19 LNG-fuelled large container vessel (DSME) DSME, GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 19

20 Basic design and cost studies for different types of vessels GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 20

21 Scope of IGF-Code should provide safety measures for ships using gas/ low flashpoint liquids as fuel including liquefied gas tankers. is intended to address natural gas fuel, other gas fuel types such as butane, hydrogen, propane and low flashpoint liquids namely ethanol, methanol and synthetic fuels. will cover the energy conversion systems of relevance (low and high pressure ICE, gas turbines, boilers, fuel cells) should only address issues not already covered by SOLAS and serve as an addition to SOLAS. should revoke the interim guidelines and Chapter 16 of the IGC Code. should be set into force with SOLAS 2014 GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 21

22 BLG-15 CG on IGF-Code - Status Initial draft prepared by Germany (includes the MSC.285(86)) Results of CG work to IMO BLG 15: Nov 2010 IMO BLG-15 WG: Feb 2011 CG on IGF-Code and IGC-Code: Feb 2011 to Nov 2011 Submission Completion Date 2014 all independent and membrane tank types of IGC-Code accepted GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 22

23 some principles for the IGF-Code - page 1 - Assessment of the collision risk (risk = frequency * consequences) definition of accepted risk Assessment of required collision resistance definition of accepted damage conditions Equivalence between storage tank systems fixed installed and portable Assessment of risk during bunker procedure definition of accepted risk Limiting of consequences limiting of releasable amount of gas Reduction of failure frequencies safety of connection system (couplings, flexible pipes/ hoses) exclude gas release in the vessel: Limiting failure consequences secondary barrier for subsystems (failure of first barrier does not lead to safety relevant consequences) Reduce failure frequency reliable storage systems, connections, valves etc. GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 23

24 some principles for the IGF-Code; - page 2 - Control of accidental gas releases Gas release in case of tank failure Gas release by safety devices Gas release from process equipment (leakages) GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 24

25 Challenges in safety level: e.g. Type-C Tanks (Ch 4 IGC-Code) versus IMDG-Code pressure vessel No leak into hold space no secondary barrier (proved that crack propagation is low enough) No additional thermal protection of ship structure Dome No piping from tank into hold space No double bottom, no double hull (IGC: ) P0> 2 bar g Minimum pressure P0 > 2 bar g (IGC: ) Minimum distance of tank: mm from side shell - less of 2 m or B/15 (IGC: 2.6) Hold space Type C Tank on liquefied gas carriers GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 25

26 Some important characteristics of tank containers Designed according pressure vessel code (no Type C design) Piping between storage tank and outer hull (vacuum jacket) Carbon steel vacuum jacket bottom lines Source: Germanischer Lloyd GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 26

27 Equivalent level of safety for movable tank systems: Tanks which are not permanently installed on board equivalent tank design Tank design has to be equivalent to permanent installed tanks during operation The design has to comply with requirements given for the containment system of permanent installed tanks equivalent monitoring A monitoring system onboard of the vessel has to be provided as for permanent installed tanks equivalent safety against spill and gas release The connection of all necessary tank systems (piping, controls, safety system, relief system etc.) to the gas system of the vessel is part of the bunkering process and has to be finished prior to ship departure from the bunkering station Connection of portable tanks during the sea voyage or maneuvering should not be permitted. GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 27

28 important aspects of ongoing work (from IMO BLG-15) One Correspondence Group to BLG-16 for IGF- and IGC-Code Harmonisation of both Codes intended Submission Completion for IGF-Code Date 2014 all independent tanks and the membrane tanks are included in the IGF-Code tanks must comply with Ch 4 of the IGC-Code also portable tanks have to comply with Ch4 requirements portable tanks have to be equivalent to fixed installations GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 28

29 Thank you for your attention Dr Gerd Würsig, GL Coordinator Gas Technology GASTECH 2011 March 2011 No. 29