Background, structure and objectives of the project Per Fagerlund, Bengt Ramne ScandiNAOS AB
$/ton Final Seminar, Gothenburg, March 21, 2013 Marine fuel price development 1200,00 HFO 3,5% MGO 0,1% 1000,00 800,00 600,00 400,00 200,00 0,00 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Million tons Final Seminar, Gothenburg, March 21, 2013 Fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions 1400 Annual Emissions / consumption 1320 1200 1122 1000 800 Road traffic 600 Aviation Shipping 400 200 178 222 207 280 0 CO2 (Mt C) Fuel consumption Source: Eyring et al. J Geophys Res 110 (2005) compiled by Erik Fridell IVL 2007
Millin tons Final Seminar, Gothenburg, March 21, 2013 NOx, SOx and PM emissions 9 8 8,3 Annual Emissions 7 6 6,5 6 5 4 Road traffic Aviation Shipping 3 2 2,2 2,1 1,7 1 0 0,71 0,0075 0,001 NOx (Mt N) SO2 (Mt S) PM10 Source: Eyring et al. J Geophys Res 110 (2005) compiled by Erik Fridell IVL 2007
Emission legislation g NOx/kWh 16 14 IMO NOx Technical code NOx Tier II - 2011 (Global) 12 NOx Tier III - 2016 (NOx emission control areas) 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 rpm
Final Seminar, Gothenburg, March 21, 2013
Project Effship is based on the vision of a sustainable and successful maritime transport industry one which is energy efficient and has a minimal environmental impact. Specific project goals to achieve this include improving the efficiency of the ship machinery, introducing alternative marine fuels, using wind energy as complementary propulsion power and investigate transport system designs, as ways to reduce the emissions of CO2/GHG, NOx, SOx and PM in marine transports. The project will result in proposals for solutions with respect to maritime fuels, energy efficiency and emission reduction technology that will contribute to the fulfillment of EU s and the Swedish Government s climate goals of 20% more efficient energy usage, 40% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, a minimum of 10 % renewable energy in the transport sector in year 2020 and to fulfill and exceed upcoming international rules.
- Perspectives Short term 2015/2016 SOx, NOx Medium term 2020/2030 SOx, NOx, PM, GHG Long term 2050 and beyond SOx, NOx, PM, GHG, Renewable fuels
Workpackages Title WP 1 Project Management WP 2 Present and future marine fuels WP 3 Exhaust gas cleaning WP 4 Heat recovery WP 5 Energy Transformers WP 6 Wind, wave and sun WP 7 Logistic analysis WP 8 Demonstration of findings WP 9 Final Report Future Projects Work Package leader SSPA/ScandiNAOS Wärtsilä DEC Marine S-MAN Wärtsilä SSPA SSPA ScandiNAOS ScandiNAOS
Finally After fourty months of work, Effship has identified and described a number of proposals for sutainibility and economy for the shipping industry. Effship also propose a program for industrializing and implementing the proposals. One of the proposals Spireth is already under way and more will come.
Order of Magnitude 99.9% marine fuel is oil based Biofuel of 1 st and 2 nd generation have no potential to substitute more than a fraction of the fossil oil used for marine fuel Energy recovery, engine and hull optimization has the potential to reduce marine fuel consumption 5% Sail have a potential to reduce the marine fuel consumption by approx 10% assuming todays fleet and speed Reduced speed has the potential to reduce marine fuel consumption by 60% Energy recovery, engine and hull optimization, sail and reduced speed have the potential to reduce marine fuel consumption by total 70% Energy recovery, engine and hull optimization, sail, reduced speed and the development of carbon neutral fuel will have the potential to make shipping fossil free
2,50% 2,00% 1,50% 3,50% 1,00% 1,00% 0,50% 0,00% 0,10% 0,005% 0,001%
Where can we find alternatives to HFO? Nuclear 5,06% Solar heat 0,46% Hydro 6,13% Biomass 3,66% Wind 0,27% Global energy use 2008 Total approx 140 000 TWh http://www.bp.com Solar photovoltic Geothermal 0,04% 0,18% Biofuels 0,18% Oil - Marine transport fuel 2,73% Oil - Transport (non marine) fuel 19,68% Coal 27,15% Oil - Industry consumption 2,96% Gas 21,97% Oil - Other sectors 5,40% Oil - Non energy use 4,12%
North Europe SECA (Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel) Estimated Marine Fuel Market 2015 Without SECA rules HFO 18 000 000 7 200 000 MDO/MGO 2 000 000 7 400 000 With SECA rules Best guess 2010 Assuming 40% of the ships will fit a scrubber Assuming 30% of the ships will change to 0.1% MGO Alternative fuel (LNG, Methanol) 5 400 000 Assuming 30% of the ships will change to a clean fuel that is cheaper than MGO Metric Tons fuel oil equivalents
North Europe SECA (Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel) Estimated Marine Fuel Market 2015 Without SECA rules HFO 18 000 000 100 000 MDO/MGO 2 000 000 19 820 000 With SECA rules Best guess 2013 Approx 10-15 ships will fit a scrubber Assuming 99% of the ships will change to 0.1% MGO Alternative fuel (LNG, Methanol) 80 000 Metric Tons fuel oil equivalents 5 ships outside norway will operate on LNG 3 ships will operate on methanol
North Europe SECA (Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel) Estimated Marine Fuel Market 2025 Without SECA rules HFO 18 000 000 7 200 000 MDO/MGO 2 000 000 7 400 000 With SECA rules Best guess 2013 Assuming 40% of the ships will fit a scrubber Assuming 30% of the ships will change to 0.1% MGO Alternative fuel (LNG, Methanol) 5 400 000 Assuming 30% of the ships will change to a clean fuel that is cheaper than MGO Metric Tons fuel oil equivalents
Consequensies of SECA requirements (for Sweden) Cost for bunker fuel in Sweden 2014 (domestic and international) Cost for bunker fuel in Sweden 2015 (domestic and international) Cost increase due to SECA rules For comparison, Swedish budget for environment and nature conservation 18 000 000 000 kr 11 600 000 000 kr 6 400 000 000 kr 4 900 000 000 kr
Consequensies of SECA requirements (in SECA area) Cost for bunker fuel in SECA 2014 (domestic and international) Cost for bunker fuel in SECA 2015 (domestic and international) Cost increase due to SECA rules EU budget for environment and climate change 16 200 000 000 10 500 000 000 5 700 000 000 400 000 000
Consequensies of SECA requirements for a typical short sea roro vessel Conversion cost LNG; 165 600 000 kr Annual fuel cost MGO (2015); 101 600 000 kr Annual fuel cost HFO (2014); 66 000 000 kr Fuel cost diff 2015-2014; 35 600 000 kr Conversion cost scrubber; 55 200 000 kr Conversion cost methanol; 50 600 000 kr
Sjöfartstidningens nyhetsbrev #13 Finnish fund for investments in exhaust gas cleaning and alternative fuel 30 000 000 for 2013 Max 50% government finance
Sustainable and successful maritime transport industry one which is energy efficient and has a minimal environmental impact Sail Energy recovery Alternative fuels Exhaust gas cleaning
Final Seminar, Gothenburg, March 21, 2013
Thank you