USE OF MDO BY SHIPS PART OF A HOLISTIC APPROACH

Similar documents
USE OF MDO BY SHIPS THE RATIONAL BEHIND THE PROPOSAL

Residual Fuel Market Issues

Challenges for sustainable freight transport Maritime transport. Elena Seco Gª Valdecasas Director Spanish Shipowners Association - ANAVE

Outlook for Marine Bunkers and Fuel Oil to A key to understanding the future of marine bunkers and fuel oil markets

IEA Bioenergy ExCo78 workshop Biofuel supply to Interislander

Tier III considerations

Implications Across the Supply Chain. Prepared for Sustainableshipping Conference San Francisco 30 September 2009

SOx scrubbers Engine Makers view MDT points, markets and Tier III combinations. Greener Shipping Summit Jesper Arvidsson

MDT TIER III options with low sulphur fuels

"Exhaust Gas Scrubbers Abatement System as an Alternative under IMO MARPOL Annex VI''

Ship Energy Efficiency and Air Pollution. Ernestos Tzannatos Department of Maritime Studies University of Piraeus

Europe's approach to tackling shipping emissions The Mediterranean and beyond

Low sulphur bunker fuel oil : what are the options?

MARTOB Application of low sulphur marine fuels New challenges for the Marine Industry. Kjell Olav Skjølsvik MARINTEK

Changes in Bunker Fuel Quality Impact on European and Russian Refiners

ECA Compliance & PM. Thomas Kirk Director of Environmental Programs. Ottawa, Canada 9 September 2014

EURONAV TALKS IMO 2020 FROM THE VIEW OF A SHIPOWNER JUNE

Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference. MARPOL Annex VI TECHNOLOGY & COMPLIANCE. Ramona Zettelmaier Lloyd s Register

IMPACTS OF THE IMO SULPHUR REGULATIONS ON THE CANADIAN CRUDE OIL MARKET

Mitigation measures for air emissions

SOLVANG ASA. Emission reduction technologies---advantages and disadvantages Fleet director Tor Øyvind Ask

Background, structure and objectives of the EffShip project

EEDI. SOx PM2.5. The importance of enforcement. Partnerskab for grøn Skibsfart

NOx Reduction Technologies for 2-stroke Diesel Engines to Meet IMO Tier III

Cost-effective ship NOx control

Assessing Ship Emissions Reduction Strategies. Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative Conference March 2018 San Pedro, California

Trends for Refining Residual Fuel Oil. Prepared for Bunker Asia Forum 2011 Singapore 7 September 2011

Outlook for Marine Bunkers and Fuel Oil to 2025 Sourcing Lower Sulphur Products

LNG as an alternative fuel for the Italian market Alessandro Gaeta SVP Primary Logistics eni r&mc. Rome, 11 June 2015

Global Sulfur Cap

L.A. Maritime describes the operation of Aquametro Fuel-Switching Devices

METHANOL AS A MARINE FUEL A SAFE, COST EFFECTIVE, CLEAN-BURNING, WIDELY AVAILABLE MARINE FUEL FOR TODAY AND THE FUTURE

Development future marine fuels: what has been achieved what needs to be done

Module 5 Propulsion and Power Generation of LNG driven Vessels (23 th November to 27 th November University of Piraeus, Greece)

FURTHER TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL MEASURES FOR ENHANCING ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING

Emission control at marine terminals

WÄRTSILÄ 2-STROKE LOW PRESSURE DUAL-FUEL ENGINES

Case study -MARPOL emission standards ECA Compliance. Your Trusted Partner

Marine Insurance day 2018

Abatement of emissions from ships A Baltic perspective

Challenges and Opportunities in Managing CO 2 in Petroleum Refining

Global Greenship, September 2009 Low Sulfur Fuel and Emissions Advances

EMISSION ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

The price of sulphur reductions in the Baltic Sea and North Sea shipping

Bunkers - pricing outlook

Consistent implementation of the 2020 sulphur limit and work to further address GHG emissions from international shipping

Workshop on GHG Emission On Ships Co-organised by CIL and MPA

Dr Diamantis Andriotis, Technical Manager, Stealth Maritime Corporation SA

Capital Link's 4th Annual Invest in International Shipping Forum. Dr Hermann J. Klein, Member of Executive Board of GL

Emerging Environmental Rules & ECA Compliance

EU Ship Emissions Time to Act. Bill Hemmings Transport and Environment

Assessment of Fuel Oil Availability. Jasper Faber, The Hague, 3 October 2016

The European Fuels Conference

2020 SULPHUR CAP INTRODUCING MSC S BUNKER CHARGE MECHANISM FOR December 2018

Methodologies for emission inventories for shipping. Jana Moldanová IVL, Swedish Environmental Research Institute

2020? Lars Robert Pedersen. Deputy Secretary General. EGCSA Conference London 22 May 2017

Future Marine Fuel Quality Changes: How might terminals prepare?

Effect of SOx and NOx Regulation Implementation, ECA s and NOx Tier III Current Developments in General

MARITIME GLOBAL SULPHUR CAP. Know the different choices and challenges for on-time compliance SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

Shipping and Environmental Challenges MARINTEK 1

Bunker Fuel Quality: 2020 Outlook North of England P&I Athens, November

Reducing Exhaust Emissions from Wärtsilä Marine Engines Moottoritekniikan seminaari Teknologiateollisuus ry 18 May 2010 Göran Hellén

Clean Marine one fuel, all sources, all 1me! Tuzla Jan Fredrik Gulbrandsen

A vision for clean shipping and clean air in marine environments

Removing High Sulphur Bunker from the Refineries: Eni s case study

Environmental Retrofits: Costs and Supply Chain Constraints

The road leading to the 0.50% sulphur limit and IMO s role moving forward

NOx Tier III SELECTION, CERTIFICATION & OPERATIONS SHIPOWNERS PERSPECTIVE INTERTANKO TRIPARTITE 2016 TOKYO

End users perspective

Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems. (Scrubber / SCR) Dual Fuel Engines

HYBRID & LNG SOLUTIONS FOR FERRIES

Philip Padfield, CEO. Sustainable shipping. 22nd October

Internationaler Congress für Schiffstechnik

Methanol a marine fuel for the future. International Methanol Conference Copenhagen May 8-10

The low sulphur fuel starting from the bottom of the barrel: EST a novel and industrial proven technology

VTTI placing Cyprus on the Oil Trading Map 19 June 2018

Changes on the Horizon

Wave Power Generating Ships

ECO optimization with NOx equipment

Putting the Right Foot Forward: Strategies for Reducing Costs and Carbon Footprints

IMPLEMENTATION OF TIER II AND III

Gas Fuelled Container Ship

MARPOL Annex VI: the Club s perspective

Alternative fuels and abatement technology for future shipping an overview

Enforcement of the North European SECA (and NECA)

The Evolution of the World Oil Tanker Industry and its Key Challenges Stephen Van Dyck Chairman, INTERTANKO

Marine Division. Peter Leifland Alfa Laval Group

Approaches to control air pollution from ports and ships

INDUSTRY'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE LOW SULPHUR REQUIREMENTS. Pulp and paper industries' views and assessment

Availability of Low Sulphur Marine Fuels: Prospects & Issues

Marine fuels - Today and Tomorrow What has been achieved What needs to be done

New Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel and new engines and vehicles with advanced emissions control systems offer significant air quality improvement.

A vision for a zero emission container feeder vessel

Competitive Edge through Environmental Performance

Nine months experience with LSF in ECA/SECA Zones

Regulatory Update what s hot?

The Nautical Institute

Marine Bunkers 2020 & Beyond

Your proven route to competitive SOx compliance

Preliminary Report of MEPC 70

Transcription:

USE OF MDO BY SHIPS PART OF A HOLISTIC APPROACH BUNKER SUMMIT GREECE 2007 dragos.rauta@intertanko.com

WHAT DID INTERTANKO SUGGEST 1. Include one Fuel Oil specification in Annex VI 2. Simplify monitoring of compliance 3. Switch to MDO with a 2-tiered global S cap program: a. Tier I - 1.00% S content b. Tier II - for new engines, 0.50% S content 4. Removal of SECA provisions

REASONS FOR SWITCH TO MDO Type/quality of fuel is the KEY to control all exhaust gas emissions from ships MDO applies to ALL existing engines With no other measure, immediate significant reductions on SOx, PM emissions and measurable reduction of NOx emissions Facilitates further NOx reductions by inengine modifications for IMO s Tier II & III MDO provides a much better platform for reducing air pollution from ships

WHAT INTERTANKO DID NOT SUGGEST INTERTANKO did NOT suggest to remove provisions for use of technologies. INTERTANKO believes innovation is required for more efficient in-engine clean exhaust gas systems than some of the current proposed after treatment systems Delivery of HFO means waste disposal and it works against emission reductions

WHAT S IN IT FOR SHIP OPERATORS Engines designed for use of low S MDO will tolerate further emission reductions Further emission reductions function of: fuel quality in-engine exhaust cleaning systems Fuel specification = Ships would not need to take responsibility of compliance of fuels they order as per Annex VI

WHAT S IN IT FOR SHIP OPERATORS Solid platform of requirements Long term and significant reduction of air emissions from ships Long term and a predictable regulatory regime Prevents fragmented regulations A global standard for at sea, coastal and at berth operations (no SECAs)

MDO - ADDITIONAL BENEFITS ENVIRONMENTAL: Lower fuel consumption from ALL ships Reduces CO2 emissions from ALL ships No heating and pre-treatment of bunkers = further reduction of CO2 emissions from ALL ships Eliminates fuel generated waste = further reduction of CO2 emissions from ALL ships No heavy metals and PAH in MDO no need to clean up and dispose hazardous PMs Use of in-engine solutions for further exhaust gas cleaning = no further additional waste & no need of further waste disposal Potential bunker spills significantly less harmful

SAFETY: MDO - ADDITIONAL BENEFITS Less incidents with engine breakdowns caused by poorer quality fuels No need of complex fuel change-over operations No risk of incompatibility of blended fuels Safer working environment for crews Ships used to change to MDO in harbour/confined waters for one reason only: SAFETY

MDO AVAILABILITY 31 new refineries (0.9 mt/day) 93 refinery expansions (0.925 mt/day) 33% of it yields into MDO type = 108 mt/year & 111 mt/year respectively Total of 218 mt/year > 150-200 mt /year expected to be needed IEA forecasted the same rise (14%) over the end-2005 capacity (i.e. 660 m tons) No CO2 to be accounted for

MDO AVAILABILITY ADO mixed with 10% bio-component = more of existing capacity for MDO efficiency of conversion 2005 average utilisation of refinery capacity: World wide - 86.3% EU - 92.4% Asia-Paific - 91.5% and North America - 89.4%

AVAILABILITY - SCRUBBERS How many scrubbers are needed: 10,000 ships = 40,000 scrubbers 20,000 ships = 80,000 scrubbers When would scrubbers and installations for all sizes of engines be available? How fast can a large number be manufactured and delivered? Duration of a phase-in period for scrubber installation Manufacturing & operating scrubbers would result in high CO2 emissions

AVAILABILITY - SCRUBBERS ASSUMPTIONS: 4 scrubbers/ship time to retrofit at least 30 days/ship 100 shipyards (ships over 30,000 dwt) RETROFIT ( 1 ship/shipyard every day): for 10,000 ships: 8+ years for 15,000 ships: 12.5 years RETROFIT ( 2 ships/shipyard every day): for 10,00O ships: 4 years for 15,000 ships: 6+ years

MDO - COSTS IMPACT USD 200/t premium for MDO Total price USD 40 bill Tankers use 30% of fuels = USD 12 bill Tankers transport over 3 bill tons of oil and oil products/year Increased cost = USD 4/t or 0.4 US cents/liter (0.3 Euro cents/liter) Or 0.3% of the retail price of gasoline in Europe 0.16% of the retail price of gasoline in US

COST ASSESSMENT- TECHOLOGIES ASSUMPTIONS (based on Fairplay database) Fleet size: 46,340 ships Average main engine size: 5.6 MW Three auxiliaries: 750 kw/each Main engine usage: 300 days/year Auxiliary usage: 365 days/year CAPITAL COST ONLY Scrubber main engine: $46 billions Scrubber aux. (3): $39 billions SCR main engine: $13 billions SCR aux. (3): $5 billions TOTAL $103 billions TOTAL (37% of fleet to install) $38 billions Alternative: COSTS FOR REFINERIES $38 billions* * IPIECA document BLG 11/5/14

COST ASSESSMENT IMPACT Oil industry can provide MDO for ALL ships at a cost equivalent to retrofit 37% of the current fleet Increase in # of SECAs and sea areas under SECA would demand more ships to have the flexibility to trade with low S fuels From and environmental point of view, the cost impact justifies a global solution

COSTS ESTIMATED ON A SCR Urea consumption 25 l / MWh* NOx reduction 90% @ 2 g/kwh* Investment costs 40,000-60,000 USD / MW* Running costs (urea) 3.75 USD / MWh* Maintenance costs 0.9 USD / MWh* For a 20 MW onboard installed power, the costs will be Investment 800,000-1,200,000 USD Running costs 1800 USD/day for 50 days/year 90,000 USD/year Maintenance 432 USD/day 21,600 USD/year TOTAL 111,600 USD/year * Data provided by WÄRTSILÄ for Sulzer 6RTA52U with SCR system

OPERATIONAL & OTHER COSTS Estimate capital cost for complete set of scrubbers to be retrofitted on medium & large ships at USD 8-10 mill Any redundancy for the main engine? Provided there would be a shortage of scrubbers, what would be their price? The operational costs is not known Cost of waste disposal comes in addition Important to discuss all these costs instead of focus on the MDO price only

USE OF MDO - CONCLUSIONS Significant step for emission reductions Long term/predictable regulatory regime Simpler monitoring & control procedures Safer & simpler ship operations technical modifications simpler than retrofitting after treatment equipment Facilitates innovative in-engine solutions Better work environment for crews

USE OF MDO - CONCLUSIONS New production and refinery expansion indicate capacity to for additional MDO Not easy & not cheap but realistic & feasible Other alternatives - equivalent costly Ship operators would have lower liability to demonstrate compliance Low S MDO = Ships aligned with other means of transportation

USE OF MDO - CONCLUSIONS MDO is the right step for a HOLISTIC set of measures that provide significant emission reductions from ships in both near and long term future IMO issues environmental regulations for ships and not for shore waste Who should decide whether ships should be the means of disposal for refinery waste. Who should decided this waste be disposed at sea? If delivered back to shore, why not to do it so in the first place?

USE OF MDO - CONCLUSIONS "The use of vegetable oils for engine fuels may seem insignificant today. But such oils may become in course of time as important as petroleum and the coal tar products of the present time." Rudolf Diesel (early 1900s) Source: Wikipedia INTERTANKO: Better to first deal with the cause of a problem than to concentrate on the effects only!

www.intertanko.com