Tier III considerations

Tier III considerations

IMO Tier III Regulations NECA IMO Tier III Regulation for NOx From 2016 in the North American Emission Control Areas or the US Caribbean Sea Emission Control Areas It is a fact!

ECA: Emission Control Areas

NOx (g/kwh) IMO NO x Limit Curves Tier I, II & III 20 18 16-15 % 1990-1999 engines Tier I 14 12 10 8 6-80 % - 20 % Tier I: (global) Tier II: 2011 (global) 4 2 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 Tier III: 2016 (ECA s) Rated engine speed (rpm)

NOx Reduction Techniques Primary methods ( Process application) Reduction % Expected Proved by test Engine tuning (Tier III or NECA timing)?? Water emulsification? 40? Separate Water injection? 70 (MHI) EGR: Exhaust Gas Recirculation System HP 80 Secondary methods (after treatment) SCR: Selective Catalytic Reduction System HP or LP 95

Engine Design/Builders MAN DIESEL & TURBO MITSUBISHI propose: EGR and SCR WÄRTSILÄ propose: SCR

IMO Tier III for NOx and SOx Emission For 2-stroke engines Tier III NOx levels in ECAs will be met by installation of a Selctive Catalytic Reactor, SCR or installation of an Exhaust Gas Recirculation, EGR system The sulphur content has an influence on the performance and design of both SCR and EGR. If it is decided always to run on low suphur fuels in ECA the design and/or running cost for EGR and SCR can be lowered. SCR and EGR can be designed for operation on HFO with the normal sulphur contents. If HFO is used in ECAs together with either EGR or SCR it is necessary to install a full flow exhaust gas scrubber to reduce the SOx.

State of art Status from ONE of the engine designers

EGR Test Conclusions for MAN engines Conclusion on Extreme EGR Test 2009 at MAN EGR feasible for all engine loads Tier III level feasible with approx. 40% EGR ME technology secures optimized EGR operation

Investments and Operational Costs Can we minimize CAPEX and OPEX for EGR and SCR? Yes High Low Sulphur CAPEX EGR - 30% SCR - 10%

SCR CAPEX SCR CAPEX -16 MW Tier III on High sulphur fuel Excluded: Electric work; Urea tank; EGE by-pass SCR engine equipment (Reactor/Mixer) Engine modification (valves and control system) Auxiliary system (Urea dosing) Installation excl. tanks SCR CAPEX -16 MW Tier III on Low sulphur fuel Excluded: Electric work; Urea tank; EGE by-pass MAN PP MAN Diesel & Turbo MDT IGC Seminar Emission Reduction Technology - Tier III < 11 >

EGR CAPEX EGR CAPEX - 16 MW Tier III on High sulphur fuel Excluded: Electric work; NaOH and sludge tank; EGR engine equipment (scrubber, blower, cooler)) Engine modification (valves and control system) Auxiliary system (WTS) Installation excl. tanks EGR CAPEX - 16 MW Tier III on Low sulphur fuel Excluded: Electric work; NaOH and sludge tank; MAN PP MAN Diesel & Turbo MDT IGC Seminar Emission Reduction Technology - Tier III < 12 >

EGR - SCR capital cost Capital cost: EGR SCR Rough estimatet MAN PP MAN Diesel & Turbo < 13 >

OPEX EGR and SCR Total Cost Note: The LP-SCR OPEX adds to the HP-SCR calculation the extra fuel consumption for LP-SCR burner to decomposition of Urea is show with the green colour. MAN PP MAN. Diesel & Turbo, Low Speed LEE5 / Bent Ørndrup Nielsen 28.09.2015 < 10 >

SFOC Consumption Comparison MAN PP

CIMAC 2010 PAPER NO.: 186 Cutting edge technologies of UE engine for higher efficiency and environment Figure 24 shows the independent fuel water injection system and its test results. The water injection valves were installed separately from the fuel injection valves. Therefore, a large amount of water can be injected without limiting the fuel injection system capacity, and a large amount of NOx can also be reduced. However, since excessive water is still required, the water injection timing and atomizer have to be further optimized

CIMAC 2010 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 95 134 169 0 94 134 Water / fuel amount ratio (%)

STATUS OF INTERESTS Deciding factors of Tier III technology Yard preference First cost (CAPEX) Space requirements Installation flexibility Owner preferences Operation cost (OPEX) Operation simplicity Reliability Maintenance cost Waste disposal cost

Proposal to reduce Emission, Investments and Operational Costs The most effective countermeasures reducing emission in general is to reduce the speed of the vessel.

Proposal to reduce Emission, Investments and Operational Costs Power reduction Speed reduction 0% 0% 10% 3% 20% 6% 30% 10% 40% 14% 50% 18%

Proposal to reduce Emission, Investments and Operational Costs Tier III only for NECA It must be ensured that the motor does not exceed the limited power in Tier III mode. Could be relevant and acceptable for all type of vessels operated only partly at NECA? If Yes then is possible to apply dual certification

Proposal to reduce Emission Investments and Operational Costs Dual Certification Tier II Tier III for open Sea for NECA only

Proposal to reduce Emission, Investments and Operational Costs Adopting a limited speed for the NECA areas for Tier III will be possible of applying a reduced Tier III application i.e. EGR or SCR on engines limited in power output by NECA sailing. In mean time other possibilities and less polluted as: NECA tuning or separate water injection or water emulsification or Combination WITH the proved systems can be selected. The overall efficiency will be better and the absolute level of emission will be minimized simultaneous that the CAPEX and OPEX for the shipping companies will be considerable lower.

Limit Capacity of Tier III NOx control Proposal for dual-no x certificate with reduced Equipment Capacity Outside NECA Tier II Available power NECA Tier III Available power NECA Tier III 60 MW 60 MW Tier II 60 MW 60 MW Tier II EEDI requirement restrictions 60 MW, Same as for Tier II 60 MW Tier III 30 MW, Reduced in Tier III MCR reduced: 30 MW Tier III Minimum power requirements Test cycle loads (% SMCR) Tier II 25 50 75 100 15 MW 30 MW 40 MW 60 MW Tier III 25 50 75 100 15 MW 30 MW 40 MW 60 MW Test cycle loads (% SMCR) Tier II 25 50 75 100 15 MW 30 MW 40 MW 60 MW Tier III 12.5 25 37.5 50 7.5 MW 15 MW 22.5 MW 30 MW Equivalence/NO X rule amendment? 50% power reduction equals ~ 20% ship speed reduction Could be relevant and acceptable for ALL kind of vessels? MAN PP

IMO Tier III Regulations From 2016 in NECA Areas Action must be taken from: Shipyards Engine Designers Engine Builders Classification Societies Shipping Companies

Thank you