special greentech · our planet – shipowners and suppliers cooperate on greener al - ternatives...

Spec

ial G

reen

Tech

www.shipandoffshore.net Edition 2019

Special GreenTechSustainable Global Shipping

Propulsion & Engine Technology

Future Fuels

Operational Optimisation

Ship Design

Ballast Water

© DVV Media Group GmbH Per

sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Optimising your fleet in service. Phone: +49 3991 736 189 | Email: [email protected]://www.efficiency-by-mmg.de/redesign.html

PREPARE YOUR FLEET FOR

2020STOP OVERCONSUMPTION!


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Kathrin Lau Deputy Editor in Chief [email protected]

The necessity of the green wave The recent elections for the European Parliament in Brussels brought some noteworthy results. One of the better ones was that the Greens achieved great acceptance across many of the 28 member states. The reasons behind this may vary. However, one thing is for sure: the appreciation that we will not be able to continue to exploit our planet to the full and utilise resourc-es as if they are endless is growing – not only but of course also in shipping.

No matter what conference we attend and whom we talk to these days – owners, suppliers, classification societies – two topics are prioritising every discussion: the sulphur cap 2020 and the target to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions drastically.

While the former is literally around the corner and every owner and charterer should by now have a strategy about how to comply with the much stricter sulphur limits from January 2020, the latter – though at least equally important – seems very much more distant.

However, there is no shortage of innovative ideas about how to reach the ambitious goals of reducing the total annual GHG emissions by at least 50% by 2050, compared with 2008, in line with the UN Paris Agreement.

While not bringing any ground-breaking results, the recent MEPC session in London saw some 40 suggestions on how to mitigate GHG emissions in the short-term (until 2023), mid-term (until 2030) and long-term (beyond 2030). The 14 cat-egories in which those suggestions were grouped can be found in our MEPC 74 summary on pages 6 and 7. And while – un-derstandably – those categories predominantly address the regulatory frameworks for appropriate measures, the respon-sibility will be on suppliers to come up with adequate research and developments. And to do so, they need the support and

some sort of investment security from politics but also from shipowners and yards.

Without engines that can burn clean fuel, without auxiliary systems that run carbon-free, the regulatory framework alone will not be able to make our industry more sustainable.

And would it be illusionary if – for the sake of the future of our planet – shipowners and suppliers cooperate on greener al-ternatives that go beyond regulatory requirements to contrib-ute to a world, in which our kids and grandchildren can live a healthy and safe life?

However, apart from that, every year, when we work on our GreenTech Special Edition, we are amazed by the continu-ing innovative power of the industry, this year especially with regard to propulsion systems and future fuels. As the imple-mentation of LNG as marine fuel progresses in all segments of the industry, now also for large container vessels (see page 38), we report about ethane, methanol and – as a “new player” – ammonia as a future fuel (page 22).

On the other hand, there is already some irreversible dam-age caused by shipping, such as the transfer of alien species to foreign marine eco-systems through the unrestricted handling of ballast water. The IMO’s Ballast Water Convention took way too long before a sufficient number of member states ratified it, and even now there are too many vessels that do not have to comply with it yet.

So the time frame for the reduction of GHG emission may seem ambitious, but everyone – not only but also those involved in the shipping industry – should do their utmost to prevent pollution, in the broadest sense, to our planet!

Ship & Offshore | GreenTech | 2019 3

SPECIAL GREENTECH COMMENT


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

22

12

06

Propulsion & Engine Technology

12 Flettner rotors reduce fuel consumption and emissions

18 LNG drive for the new Atair 20 Norwegenkai shore-based

ship power plant inaugurated

21 Hybrid system for efficient inshore and manoeuvring operations

Future Fuels

22 Ammonia’s potential as a future marine fuel

24 Operating conditions for the supply chain of compliant fuel

27 Consortium takes off with nine ships

28 GHG emission study on the use of LNG as marine fuel

Sustainable Global Shipping

06 UN agency pushes forward on shipping emissions reduction

08 Considerations for zero emissions at sea

Quality Media for Maritime Experts

Maritime Archives

www.maritime-archives.com

M A R I T I M

SCHIFF & HAFEN

|

SHIP & OFFSHORE

www.shipandoffshore.net

SPECIAL GREENTECH CONTENT


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

44

36

40Regulars

3 Comment 31 Buyer‘s Guide 47 Imprint

Ship Design

40 Zero-emission ships for a sustainable future

42 Harnessing the power of wind

42 Innovative RoRo designs

Ballast Water

44 Recommendations to address the commissioning challenge

Operational Optimisation

36 Managing shipping emissions to reduce carbon impact

38 ULCS converted to LNG 39 Retrofit of icebreaker

demonstrates double-digit benefits

Protecting environment & enhancing efficiency with

REINTJES Hybrid SystemREINTJES GmbH | Eugen-Reintjes-Straße 7 | 31785 Hameln | Phone +49 51 51/104-0 | [email protected]


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

UN agency pushes forward on shipping emissions reductionMEPC 74 The 74th session of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 74) was held in mid-May at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in London. This was the last MEPC meeting before the 0.5% global sulphur limit takes effect on January 1st 2020, and the focus was on the implementation and completion of guidelines to help stakeholders prepare and ensure consistent implementation. Another main objective was the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships, including a follow-up of IMO’s GHG strategy and Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)-related time frames.

I

MO’s Marine Environ-ment Protection Committee (MEPC) pushed forward

with a number of measures aimed at supporting the achievement of the objec-tives set out in the initial IMO strategy on reduction of green-house gas (GHG) emissions from ships, in line with the Par-is Agreement under UNFCCC and the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Devel-opment.

The MEPC 74 session approved amendments to strengthen existing mandatory requirements for new ships to be more energy efficient; ini-tiated the Fourth IMO GHG Study; adopted a resolution encouraging cooperation with ports to reduce emission from shipping; approved a proce-dure for the impact assessment of new measures proposed; agreed to establish a multi- donor trust fund for GHG; and agreed terms of reference for

the sixth and seventh interses-sional working groups to be held in November 2019 and in March 2020, respectively, in or-der to expedite the work. Also discussed were possible candidate measures, covering short-term (up until 2023), mid-term (2023 – 2030) and long-term (beyond 2030) pe-riods, aiming at reducing GHG emissions from ships, to be further considered at next ses-sions.

In total 40 different ap-proaches were submitted which can be subdivided into 14 categories. Torsten Mundt, principal research engineer – Emissions to Air, Regulatory Affairs, Maritime, at the classi-fication society DNV GL, who observed the session in Lon-don, provided Ship&Offshore with a summary of the pro-posed measures:

> Improve the energy ef-ficiency of existing ships building on the Energy

Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) framework;

> Further develop the EEDI framework for new ships;

> Improve the energy ef-ficiency of existing ships building on the Ship Energy Efficiency Man-agement Plan (SEEMP) framework;

> Identify appropriate op-erational energy efficien-cy indicators;

> Develop a speed optimi-sation and speed reduc-tion mechanism;

> Develop regulatory meas-ures to reduce methane slip;

> Develop regulatory meas-ures to reduce emissions of volatile organic com-pounds (VOCs);

> Encourage the develop-ment of national action plans (NAPs);

> Encourage port develop-ments and activities to fa-

cilitate reduction of GHG emissions from shipping;

> Initiate and support re-search and development activities;

> Encourage incentive schemes for first movers;

> Develop lifecycle GHG/carbon intensity guide-lines for all types of fuels;

> Implement programme for the effective uptake of alternative low-carbon and zero-carbon fuels;

> Establish new/innova-tive emission reduction mechanism.

EEDI phases

The MEPC approved, for adop-tion at the next session in April 2020, amendments to MAR-POL Annex VI to strengthen significantly the EEDI Phase 3 requirements.

The draft amendments bring forward the entry into force date of phase 3 to 2022, from 2025, for several ship

6 Ship & Offshore | GreenTech | 2019

SPECIAL GREENTECH SUSTAINABLE GLOBAL SHIPPING


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

types, including gas carriers, and general cargo ships. This means that new ships built from that date must be signifi-cantly more energy efficient than the baseline. For contain-er ships, the EEDI reduction rate is enhanced significantly for larger ship sizes, as follows:

> For a container ship of 200,000dwt and above, the EEDI reduction rate is set at 50% from 2022;

> For a container ship of 120,000dwt and above, but less than 200,000dwt, 45% from 2022;



> For a container ship of 15,000dwt and above but less than 40,000dwt, 30% from 2022.

The MEPC also agreed terms of reference for a correspond-ence group to look into the in-troduction of a possible Phase 4 of EEDI requirements.

Additional guidelines for the sulphur cap 2020The IMO further approved and adopted a comprehensive set of guidance and guidelines to support the consistent im-plementation of the 0.5% limit on sulphur in ships’ fuel oil, which will enter into effect

from January 1st 2020. Related draft MARPOL amendments were also approved.

The stricter limit will be ap-plicable globally under IMO’s MARPOL Convention. In des-ignated emission control areas (ECAs), the sulphur limit will remain at 0.1%.

The January 1st 2020 im-plementation date was adopted in 2008 and confirmed in 2016. The IMO has been working with member states and the in-dustry to support implementa-tion of the new limit, including the preparation of amendments to MARPOL Annex VI and development of guidance and guidelines.

Enforcement, compliance with and monitoring of the 2020 sulphur limit is the re-mit and responsibility of states party to MARPOL Annex VI. Most ships are expected to uti-lise new blends of fuel oil which will be produced to meet the 0.5% limit on sulphur in fuel oil or compliant marine gas/diesel oil.

The MEPC adopted 2019 Guidelines for consistent imple-mentation of the 0.5% sulphur limit under MARPOL Annex VI – with sections on the impact on fuel and machinery systems resulting from new fuel blends or fuel types; verification issues and control mechanism and ac-tions, including port state con-trol and samples of fuel oil used on board; a standard reporting format for fuel oil non-availabil-ity (fuel oil non-availability re-

port – FONAR); and possible safety implications relating to fuel oils meeting the 0.5% sul-phur limit, among other things. It also approved guidance for best practice for member and coastal states. This includes best practices intended to as-sist member states in carrying out their responsibilities under MARPOL Annex VI, to en-sure effective implementation and enforcement of statutory requirements. The guidance says that member and coastal states should consider actions deemed appropriate, under domestic legal arrangements, with respect to promoting the availability of compliant fuel oils, consistent with regulation 18.1 of MARPOL Annex VI; and member states or other rel-evant authorities desiring to do so may decide to establish or promote a licensing scheme for bunker suppliers.

Carriage ban

A related MARPOL Annex VI amendment to prohibit the car-riage of non-compliant fuel oil used by ships, which was adopt-ed last year, is expected to enter into force on March 1st 2020.

Ballast water management (BWM)The main focus for the Con-vention now is on its effective and uniform implementation, and on an experience-building phase, with a focus on gather-ing data on application of the BWM Convention.

The MEPC approved BWM.2/Circ.67/Rev.1 on the revised data gathering and analysis plan for the experience-build-ing phase associated with the BWM Convention, to incorpo-rate a link to standard operat-ing procedures.

The MEPC approved amendments to the BWM Convention concerning com-missioning testing of ballast water management systems and the form of the Interna-tional Ballast Water Manage-ment Certificate. The amend-ments will be circulated with a view to adoption at MEPC 75. The Committee endorsed the view that commissioning testing should begin as soon as possible, in accordance with the already approved Guid-ance for the Commissioning Testing of Ballast Water Man-agement Systems.

Marine litter Following the IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships adopted at the last session, a working group met during the session to dis-cuss how to move forward. For upcoming meetings, a cat-egorisation of measures and follow-up responsibilities were discussed.

The IMO will conduct a study on plastic litter including the analysis of the contribution of all vessels, storage, delivery and reception options, and re-porting of accidental loss or discarded fishing gear.

Ship & Offshore | GreenTech | 2019 7© DVV Media Group GmbH Per

sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

>

Considerations for zero emissions at sea

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION There has been much talk over recent years of the ‘zero-emission’ ship. Air pollution and global warming are of great concern to environmentalists. Although marine transportation is a relatively clean and fuel-efficient way of moving both raw materials and finished goods around the globe, shipping still has a fair amount to do to improve its image. The following considerations are from Thordon Bearings’ Craig Carter, director of Marketing & Customer Service.

I

MO 2020 aims to cut sul-phur oxide pollution drasti-cally, while IMO Tier III and

EPA Tier 4 will further reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. Car-bon emissions, greenhouse gases in particular, are another focus. Moves towards alterna-tive fuels and harnessing re-newable energy will all help achieve these aims.

All of these add up to the current ‘zero-emission ship’. A

study by Lloyd’s Register and University Maritime Advisory Services (UMAS) suggests seven ways to achieve such a concept, but all are focused solely on the propulsion sys-tem: combinations of battery, synthetic fuels and biofuel for the onboard storage of energy, coupled with either a fuel cell and motor, internal combus-tion engine, or other means of converting that stored energy

into mechanical and electrical energy.

Wallenius has produced the Orcelle concept design, NYK has its Super Eco Ship concept, Futureship’s Scandlines zero-emission ferry, Yara Birkeland autonomous zero-emission container feeder – all con-centrate on renewable energy sources to eliminate, as far as possible, emissions to the at-mosphere.

But these and other pro-posals forget that emissions to the ocean are also extremely harmful to the eco-system. True, there have been success-ful moves to reduce transfer of invasive species in ships’ ballast water. And one of the systems for reducing air pollu-tion – the exhaust gas scrubber – has come under the micro-scope because of fears that rather than emitting sul-

There are various options for shipping to become more sustainable in the future




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Future-proof your

investments

New MAN B&W ME-LGIP engine

The 2020 SOX regulations throw the world of ocean transport into uncertainty. Our innovative dual-fuel LPG engine lets you de-risk shipbuilding investments and take back control.

By switching to LPG, you stay compliant while retaining the flexibility to take advantage of optimal fuel prices in the future. LPG also offers lower total cost of ownership, giving you a valuable edge in a competitive market.

Power into the future with confidence.

www.man-es.com/lgip


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

phur oxides into the air, they are being discharged into the sea through the systems’ wash water. Sewage and other black and grey waste water is regulat-ed in many seas, and tin-based toxins in anti-fouling coatings have been banned. Discharge overboard of oily bilge water is prohibited. Yet a serious ocean pollution problem remains.

In the US, the Environmen-tal Protection Agency (EPA) has highlighted non-accidental oil pollution, but other au-thorities are yet to catch up. Oil spills resulting from ac-cidents are well-documented. The Exxon Valdez spill off Alaska is one of the most infa-mous of such incidents when 37,000 tonnes of oil were re-leased into the ocean, with catastrophic consequences. Yet well-maintained and well-nav-igated ships, carrying out their normal operations, leak two or three times as much oil into the sea, worldwide, every year – merely as leakage of lubricant from sterntube seals.

Most ships use oil for lu-brication of propeller shafts

and podded propulsion. Seals cannot function efficiently un-less there is a thin film of lu-bricant between the shaft and the seal lip. So even in normal operation, a small amount of oil will escape into the sea. As seals wear, or suffer damage through grounding or objects caught around propellers, the leakage increases. Conservative estimates based on classifica-tion society seal approval data suggested that the global fleet leaks almost 80 million litres of oil per year into the oceans. A report by Dr Dagmar Schmidt Etkin, principal of Environ-mental Research Consulting, put the likely figure even high-er, at 130 to 244 million litres per year. That study was pub-lished in 2010, and since then, it is more likely than not that the numbers have continued to increase.

The US EPA has attempted to reduce the problem through mandating the use of environ-mentally acceptable lubricants (EALs). These must be bio-degradable, minimally toxic, and not bio-accumulative.

Even so, if large quantities are released, as in the case of a se-verely damaged seal, they can be harmful and result in sub-stantial penalties for the ship operator. EALs carry a cost premium over conventional lu-bricants; some may absorb wa-ter, becoming emulsified, and may shorten seal life, requiring frequent seal replacement or use of special materials. Many shipowners have reported problems using EALs.

So, can environmental pol-lution from propeller shafts be eliminated, leading to a true ‘ze-ro-emission’ ship? The answer is yes. Modern polymer bearing materials, such as Thordon’s COMPAC, make sea water lu-brication of propeller shafts perfectly feasible. Because the lubricant used – sea water – is 100% environmentally accept-able, there can be no harm re-sulting from discharge.Any zero-emission ship will cost more to build than its con-ventional equivalent – that is a given fact. And the same is true for installation of sea wa-ter lubricated propeller shafts.

Bronze shaft liners and anti-corrosion propeller shaft coat-ings will add to the initial cost. The sea water used as lubricant must be clean and free from abrasive solids to ensure a long bearing life, so a water quality package is required to supply clean sea water to the bearings.

But once the sea water-lubricated system is installed – and it can easily be retrofit-ted to existing ships as well as specified for newbuilds – own-ers can actually enjoy cost sav-ings. Not only do they save on the significant cost of mineral and synthetic-based sterntube lubricants, particularly when EALs must be used, they avoid costly aft seal replacements ath consequent drydockings and loss of revenue. And the stern-tube assemblies have a much longer useful life.

So, the zero-emission ship is not only possible, but can be achieved today – as long as we are talking about emissions to the ocean, of course. Emissions to the air – they will take a little longer to be eliminated, but the industry is getting there.

Propeller shaft seals are the only separation between the oil and the ocean Source: Shutterstock




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

ALTERNATIVE FUELS INSIGHTThe Alternative Fuels Insight (AFI) platform provides a

complete overview of alternative fuels and technologies,

covering both investments on ships and in bunkering

infrastructure. Access reliable and up to date data

for free.

Visit dnvgl.com/AFIInteractive Fuel Finder connects ship owners with alternative fuel suppliers.


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Flettner rotors reduce fuel consumption and emissionsRETROFIT PROJECT In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping, a renaissance of wind energy for ship propulsion seems to be obvious. Retrofitting the multi-purpose freighter Fehn Pollux with a Flettner rotor showed significant CO2 reductions. The following report by scientists from the Hochschule Emden/Leer, University of Applied Sciences, Germany, Professor Capt Michael Vahs, Professor Dr Jann Strybny, Thomas Peetz, Moritz Götting, Sascha Strasser and Marcel Müller, reveals information on important aspects of planning retrofits or newbuildings with Flettner rotors and is based on the results of the sea trials and the first phase of testing under normal operating conditions.

Figure 1: Fehn Pollux on sea trials Source: MariGREEN

I

n June 2018, a German-Dutch project consortium under the scientific direction

of the Emden/Leer University of Applied Sciences retrofitted and commissioned the latest rotor development of the Eco-Flettner type on the test ship Fehn Pollux of the Leer-based shipping company Fehn Ship Management. The retrofitting concept is groundbreaking in terms of easy transferability to other ships. Upscaling to a sig-

nificant share of the world mer-chant fleet could make a sub-stantial contribution to climate protection.

The most frequently asked question in connection with modern sail drives, is about the performance potential and the associated fuel savings. Trans-parent performance data is re-quired to enable an economic prognosis for the use of Flettner rotors on ships. The Faculty of Maritime Sciences at Emden/

Leer University of Applied Sci-ences has developed an auto-matic control and monitoring system for Flettner rotors that also records extensive operat-ing and environmental data.

The data shows that all pre-vious assumptions and model calculations are basically cor-rect. With regard to the perfor-mance potential, the first series of measurements show even higher rotor forces compared with model calculations. This

is a further benefit for Flettner rotor efficiency and could help the technology achieve a break-through as a building block for low-emission shipping.

Retrofit conceptAn important development objective for the Eco-Flettner within the framework of the “MariGreen” [1] project is the transferability of the retrofitting concept to a larger share of the existing world merchant fleet


SPECIAL GREENTECH PROPULSION & ENGINE TECHNOLOGY


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

in order to achieve significant reductions in fuel consumption and emissions. The structural features of the multi-purpose freighter Fehn Pollux provide an ideal basis for this, as there are a large number of ships world-wide with a similar arrangement of holds and superstructures.

The installation of a wind propulsion system supporting the main engine demonstrated average fuel savings of about 10% to 15% on the test ship. In previous analyses, the Flettner rotor was technologically fa-voured because it combines high sailing performance with minimum space requirements and the advantages of a fully au-tomated system. Furthermore, the construction is robust and insensitive to wear, offering further advantages compared with other sailing systems, e.g., based on textile sails adapted from the field of yachting.

The central question of the choice of the installation loca-tion on the ship was preceded by a detailed analysis of all rel-evant factors. To avoid any im-pairment to existing operating procedures, a rotor position outside the cargo area had to be found. The only installation site available was the foreship in front of the cargo holds.

The aerodynamic and hydro dynamic conditions were investigated using computation-al fluid dynamics (CFD) flow simulations and model tests. The installation on a raised foundation and the use of a low-er end-plate not provided for in previous Flettner rotors ensure very favourable flow conditions around the rotor. The introduc-tion of the sail forces on the fore-castle deck leads to a reduction of yaw moments caused by side forces of the sail, yielding good steering characteristics during

rotor operation. It is therefore advantageous over a midship or aft installation.

The rotor was reinforced in accordance with existing classi-fication regulations to counter-act the effects of wave impact, which led to a slight increase in its weight. DNV GL checked and approved the compliance with the regulations regarding the visibility from the bridge and the radar visibility in ad-vance. Further investigations by the Department of Maritime Sciences of the University of Applied Sciences Emden/Leer included simulations on the full mission ship-handling simula-tor, the results of which were validated during sea trials.

View from the bridge and radar detectionDuring early stages of the pro-ject, plans had to be submitted to demonstrate that both the

view from the bridge and the operating conditions of the radar met the requirements of relevant regulations [2]. The rotor causes a visually blind sector of 2° in the area of the midship line, well below the limit value of 5°. To check the blind spot, the officer of the watch must change posi-tion on the bridge at regular intervals. During the installa-tion works, a special training programme was conducted for the staff including exercises on a full mission ship-handling simulator.

The effect of the rotor on bridge visibility was not per-ceived as significant by the nau-tical experts involved in the test and is similar to that on ships with cranes on the midship line (Figure 3). Changing posi-tion on the bridge by just a few metres allowed an unrestricted field of vision.

Figure 2: Arrangement drawing for retrofitting the Fehn Pollux Source: ABH Ingenieurtechnik GmbH, Emden

>


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

During planning of the rotor installation, a 1° radar blind spot behind the rotor had been assumed. Due to the different locations of the two radar antennas, however, there is an unrestricted radar view when both antennas are used simultaneously. However, the blind spot could not be ob-served during sea trials.

A radar detection test was carried out with a small vessel.Figure 4 shows that the vessel could be observed on the radar at close distance in front of the ship, although it was complete-ly covered by the rotor. Pos-sible causes for the detection of the target in the blind sec-tor of the rotor are its material properties (GRP) with respect

to the transmission of radar waves and diffraction effects in the shadow area.

Steering performanceThe influence on the steering characteristics was tested with maximum transverse forces of the rotor on courses in the wind. During the test runs, a side force of approximately 40 kN was achieved with mod-erate winds equivalent to Beau-fort force 4, which corresponds to approximately 50% of the maximum possible side force. The ship could easily be kept on course with autopilot con-trol, therefore. The required rudder angles were below 5° at a ship speed of about ten knots, and below 10° at a slower speed of about five knots. The small effect on the steering capability of the test ship can be attribut-ed to good rudder performance values and, in particular, to the foreship installation close to the hydrodynamic centre of the hull.

Testing the stop function of the rotor In order to stop the effect of the rotor forces on the ship as quickly as possible, an elec-tric brake was installed. After pressing the stop button on the bridge console, the rotor stopped within approximately five minutes (Figure 7). The stop curve has a linear charac-teristic. The rotor should be

stopped prior to port manoeu-vres to prevent any adverse in-terference.

Validation of rotor performanceFor the prediction of the rotor’s propulsion power and associat-ed fuel savings, numerous model tests and simulations were per-formed using the wind tunnel of TU Hamburg-Harburg and numerical CFD methods at the Center for Modelling and Simu-lation at the Emden/Leer Uni-versity of Applied Sciences. The rotor’s control and monitoring system displays the rotor forces and propulsion power in real time and comprises additional functions for performance op-timisation. In addition to values from model calculation, force measurements are displayed in real time. The rotor force is measured in two axes (longitu-dinal and side force) by sensors specially adapted for onboard application.

The force measurement sen-sors were calibrated by means of a tensile test with load cells. Since certain inaccuracies can-not be excluded during the cali-bration, an additional measuring method for validating the rotor forces under real operating con-ditions was tested. For this pur-pose, a high-resolution measure-ment of the ship’s heeling angle resulting from rotor side forces was carried out during the sea trials.

Figure 3: View from the bridge of the test ship Fehn Pollux Source: Hochschule Emden/Leer, University of Applied Sciences

Figure 7: Rotor speed (rpm) after the stop function has been activated. After four minutes and 57 seconds the rotor is stopped.

Figure 4: Radar image during a detection test with a small vehicle (circled in red) in the area of the rotor shadow Source: Hochschule Emden/Leer, University of Applied Sciences

Figures 5/6:The “Rotor Control” display (left) shows a rotor side force of 39.1 kN (circled in red) acting on the ship. The rudder angle indicator (right) shows that a rudder position of only about 3° to starboard is required to keep the ship on course with autopilot control. Source: Hochschule Emden/Leer, University of Applied Sciences




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

As shown in Figure 8, the ro-tor forces recalculated from the heeling angle show a high cor-relation with the measured val-ues of the force sensors and the values of the model calculation. The values of the rotor force both from the sensors (red) and from the heeling measurement (blue), however, are on aver-

age about 10% to 40% above the values of the model calcula-tion (yellow). From this it can be concluded that a full scale Flettner rotor generates higher aerodynamic forces under real conditions than predicted by model calculations based on small-scale wind tunnel test-ing. This may be caused by the

influence of the ship structures on the air flow, surface effects on the rotor as well as errors from upscaling the model test results. Since this project was the first to perform precise force measure-ments on Flettner rotors in real ship operation, no comparative results from other projects were available.

Performance measure-ment in real ship operationThe additional thrust gener-ated by the Flettner rotor can be used either to increase the ship’s speed for saving voyage time or to reduce power and fuel consumption at constant speed. Therefore, in addition to the force measurement on the rotor, the ship’s speed was measured with GPS and the fuel quantity was measured by a signal trans-mitter to record the fuel rack set-ting on the main engine.

Since the electric drive of the Flettner rotor is fed from the shaft generator and thus directly from the main engine, the fuel measurement provides the cor-rect total consumption includ-ing rotor operation. To evaluate the rotor performance, the ship’s speed and engine power as well as fuel consumption with and without rotor was compared. However, as the ship’s speed at a given propulsion power

Figure 8: High correlation of rotor force values from force measurement (red), heel angle measurement (blue) and model calculation in real time (yellow). The rotor speed (green) can be used to control the rotor force. The measurements show significantly higher values than the model calculation.

>


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

depends on many other factors, it is difficult to evaluate the data. To solve the problem, measure-ments were carried out over short periods under constant environmental conditions, during which the Flettner ro-tor was first switched on and then switched off again. If the main engine setting remained constant, the increase in ship’s speed could be measured and a backward calculation of the ro-tor power could be made. If the vessel achieved the same speed when the rotor was switched off, the influence of environmental factors on the ship’s speed dur-ing the measurement could be excluded. Similarly, after switch-ing on the Flettner rotor, the fuel rack setting of the main engine could be reduced and measured while maintaining a constant ship speed. The measurement results were used to validate the previous model calculations.

The following example shows the increase and decrease of the ship’s speed by switch-ing the rotor on and off with a constant main engine setting. Figure 9 shows the relationship between rotor speed (rpm), ro-tor thrust (Fx) and ship speed over ground (SOG). The fuel rack setting of the main engine

is initially constant and then reduced at the end of the meas-urement. The fluctuating fuel rack filling values result from the engine controller keeping constant propeller pitch and rpm under changing load con-ditions in rough sea. The ship steers a south course (180°) with easterly winds of Force 7 on the Beaufort scale (about 30 knots), so the wind direction is

from port abeam (approximate-ly 90° ).

The measured values in the diagram show a clear correlation of the rotor thrust curve (Fx, red and yellow) and the ship speed (SOG, blue) with the rotor speed (green). When the rotor accelerates to 260 rpm (100%), the measured rotor thrust values (Fx measured, red) go up to a maximum of approximately 70

kN (70%). The ship’s speed in-creases by 2.5 knots – from 7.6 to 10.1 knots – with almost con-stant main engine filling (fuel rack, brown).

At full rotor speed the filling is then reduced by approximately 15% with only a minor influence on the ship’s speed. When the rotor is switched off, the rotor speed and rotor thrust go back to zero within approximately five minutes, correlating with the re-duction of the ship’s speed. The measured rotor thrust (Fx meas-ured, red) is significantly higher than the model calculation (Fx model calc, yellow), confirming the results of the sea trials.

To evaluate the rotor power, it can be compared with power from the main engine. In the test, the rotor was used to in-crease the ship’s speed and com-pared with the equivalent power required for the main engine to achieve the same speed increase. This is based on model tests carried out in the towing tank of the DST research institute at the University of Duisburg-Essen in order to determine the required main engine power as a function of ship’s speed. The resulting function curve must be

Figure 9: Graph showing the measured values of a performance test during regular service of the Eco-Flettner rotor on the Fehn Pollux

Figure 10: Rotor power and main engine power in relation to ship speed




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

corrected for added resistance and deviating draught/trim that occur under real conditions (ser-vice conditions). The measured ship’s speed over ground must be corrected for the influence of the prevailing ocean current (here approximately +0.3 knots).

Figure 10 shows the red speed-power curve for sailing under service conditions. The function curve is laid through the measuring point of the initial situation “Ship without rotor” (Rotor Off). The equivalent power of the main engine for the same speed increase as produced by the rotor (Rotor On) can be estimated by the red curve. The resulting propulsive power of the rotor is in order of 700 kW of power provided by the main engine, taking efficiencies of gearbox, shaft and propeller into account. This is above the main engine power of approximately 600 kW. In normal charter ser-vice of Fehn Pollux, the main engine power is limited to about 650 kW (Eco-Speed).In summary, the following per-formance figures were recorded from the test:

> Rotor thrust approximately 70 kN

> Rotor propulsion power ap-proximately 700 kW equiva-lent to the main engine

For assessment purposes, it should be pointed out that these are high performance values that are close to the per-formance maximum. However, they are significantly higher than the previous assumptions based on model tests.

OutlookThe first test results of the Fehn Pollux showed that the retrofit concept of a Flettner rotor on the forecastle deck has advan-tages in terms of aerodynamic behaviour which have a positive effect on the manoeuvring char-acteristics and the propulsion performance. The disadvan-tages in terms of visibility from the bridge and radar limitations are within acceptable limits and fulfil all legal requirements. For the forthcoming transition of the world merchant fleet to-wards sustainable and low car-bon marine propulsion, it is im-portant that a rotor installation on the foreship is transferable to a significant number of other vessels.

According to validated per-formance models and route simulations, the annual aver-age power potential of the Flettner rotor installed on the Fehn Pollux is in the range of ap-proximately 100 kW to 150 kW

in addition to the main engine power. These values naturally depend on the wind conditions along the route.

Depending on the required ship speed and the actual power of the main engine, fuel sav-ings of approximately 10% to 20% can be expected on the Fehn Pollux. A reduction in speed leads to higher percent-age savings, so a combination with slow steaming could lead to higher overall percentage savings. The previous data and results from the project already allow a relatively reliable prog-nosis of the achievable savings.

Clear data transparency was provided during the project

by validated measurements. This is essential to reassure shipowners, shipbuilders and investors about the validity of this new technology and to enable them to carry out eco-nomic appraisals of their own. The project can also be used as proof that converting fleets in this way can reduce CO2 emis-sions, but that the process must be supported by appropriate measures in order to achieve important climate policy goals in good time.

References[1] www.marigreen.eu[2] e.g., SOLAS Chapter V, Regulation 22[3] http://marigreen.eu/projects/wind-

windship-engineering-and-design/

Rotor Data

Type Eco-FlettnerHeight of the cylinder 18.00m

Diameter of the cylinder 3.00m

Diameter of end plates 6.00m

Projected area 54m²Speed 263 rpm max

Drive Electric motor, 75 kW max, average power depending on wind conditions, e.g., 30 kW

Thrust approximately 80 kN max, depending on wind conditions

Propulsive power

The savings potential depends on the wind conditions along the route and other factors. Under medium-to-good wind conditions, an annual average of approximately 2 kW main engine equivalent power can be saved per 1m² of projected rotor area (for guidance). Precise predictions are made by route simulations for a specific ship.

Vessel Data Fehn Pollux

Type Multi-purpose cargo ship suit-able for containers and grains

Built 1996

LOA 89.77m

Beam 13.17m

Draught 5.68m

Deadweight capacity 4,211 tonnes

Tonnage 2,844gt

Main engine MWM Deutz SBV 9M 628, 930 kW

Speed approximately 10 knots

Rudder Becker type flap rudder

> TECHNICAL DATA

> PROJECT DETAILS

The development and testing of the “Eco-Flettner” wind drive is part of the MariGreen project, funded within the framework of the INTERREG V A programme Germany-Netherlands with funds from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and through national co-financing from Germany and the Netherlands.Lead partner of the project is MARIKO GmbH in Leer. The aim of the MariGreen project is to prepare the maritime industry, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, for the future requirements of environmental protection, climate protection and resource and energy efficiency in shipping through cooperation with universities and research institutions. An essential prerequisite for the realisation of the project is the cooperation in the German-Dutch border region in the field of green shipping that has developed in recent years. Thirteen companies and research institutions from Germany and the Netherlands worked together to develop the Eco-Flettner [3].


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

LNG drive for the new Atair

FASSMER SHIPYARD The replacement for Atair, the 30+ year old survey, wreck search and research vessel, by the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH), which is currently under construction at the Fassmer shipyard, will mark the first use of LNG in the Agency’s shipping operation

A

t 31 years of age, the survey, wreck search and research vessel Atair is the oldest ship in the BSH fleet.

LNG for energy generation will be imple-mented in its replacement which is current-ly under construction at Germany’s Fass-mer Shipyard. LNG as a fuel is also being assessed for other vessels in the BSH fleet.

Tasks of the AtairThe Atair (old and new) performs tasks for the BSH in the German waters of the North and Baltic Seas, but is also used for individual research trips outside the Ger-man Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the north-eastern Atlantic. Its main tasks involve sea surveys, wreck searches, depth measurements of the seabed as well as the investigation of other underwater obstacles.

Research focuses on the monitoring of the marine environment and the condition of the North and Baltic Seas including the

measurement of nutrient content and pol-lutants. In addition, innovative systems for ship safety are examined, tests for the ap-proval of nautical installations are carried out and the seabed is geologically surveyed.

BSH strategy for environmentally friendly ship operationWhen it is commissioned in 2020, the new Atair will be the first ship of its kind to be powered predominantly by LNG. The BSH broke new ground in the environmentally friendly operation of its own ships at a very early stage, and not just when planning to renew its fleet.

Since 2017, the current diesel-electric drives have been operated exclusively with GTL (gas-to-liquid) fuel as a replacement for marine gas oil (MGO). However, this first use of LNG in the special-purpose vessel segment is a pioneering initative not without challenges, but it is an important

step and one which BSH will also take for the two other multi-purpose vessels Wega and Deneb. The two survey ships Komet and Capella are still too young to be replaced, and converting the two ships to LNG is not structurally feasible without significantly increasing their size.

LNG greatly reduces ship emissions. Compared with diesel, sulphur oxides and particulate matter emissions are negligible whilst most nitrogen oxide emissions are also reduced. CO2 emissions are also cut significantly and noise emissions are also markedly lower than with a conventional diesel engine.

Main requirements for the new vesselBSH only specified the functions required of the new vessel when detailed shipbuild-ing plans were put out to tender to ship-yards. The main requirements were:

Illustration of the new Atair




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

> Overall length: max. 75m; > Overall width: max. 18m; > Draught: max. 5m; > Freeboard: max. 2m; > Test journey speed: 13 knots; > Optimised cruising speed: 11 knots; > Used in Baltic Sea, North Sea and

north-eastern Atlantic; > Has capacity to remain at sea for at

least 20 days with an average speed of 11 knots over a 24-hour period;

> Diesel / gas-electric drive system; > Auxiliary drives: 360° bow jet and

possibly bow and stern thrusters; > Environmental standards for innova-

tive ship design (“Blue Angel”); > Optimised sea and manoeuvring

charac teristics; > Controlled roll-damping tank; > Dynamic, GNSS-controlled, auto-

matic positioning system for use in currents of up to 1.5 knots and a 30° wind up to Beaufort Force 6.

These conditions mean that LNG fuel ca-pacity must be carefully coordinated both with the size of the vessel and its opera-tional requirements. During the planning phase, the aim was to enable the vessel to function entirely on LNG. However, it was found that the requirements for the size of the vessel make it impossible to install a 300m³ LNG tank, the size that would have been necessary.

The new ship would have become a “researching gas tanker with limited use”. As the propulsion concept – regardless of whether the ship is operating on diesel fuel or natural gas – uses an electric drive motor for the main drive, the internal combustion engines are used with appropriate genera-tors for producing electrical energy.

This makes it possible to use either LNG or diesel fuel for energy production.

As the different driving profiles (cruising to the area of operation, surveying profiles with reduced speed, wreck searches at low speed, anchor operation) also require dif-ferent amounts of electrical energy, three separate generators were provided.

The shipyards were asked in the ten-dering process to develop a drive concept which allowed maximum use of LNG.

The Fassmer shipyard LNG concept plans to use two dual-fuel (DF) engines and a diesel engine for power generation. One of the two DF motors will be used in gas mode, i.e., only a small amount of diesel fuel is used as pilot oil. Exhaust gas purifi-cation is not required.

The second dual-fuel engine is de-signed as a true dual-fuel engine, as this engine can also be used in gas mode when using two engines. If the voyage is too long for the vessel’s LNG capacity, then two

engines with diesel power can be used for power generation. For the two engines used in diesel mode, an emission control system (SCR, particulate filter) is required.

With this mix of LNG and diesel fuel, it is possible to operate the vessel continu-ously with LNG for up to ten days provided that the ship’s operation consists predomi-nantly of surveying trips. When the ship is surveying, typically at speeds of between eight and ten knots, one generator can pro-vide sufficient power.

At 130m³, the LNG tank was designed to be as large as possible without affecting the other parameters for vessel size and op-eration.

Current construction progressThe hull of the newbuilding is currently be-ing subcontracted to German Naval Yard Kiel. Due to the sectional construction, the large construction elements are initially manufactured in halls. The large compo-nents are then assembled in the drydock. This system makes it possible for large components such as engines and fuel tanks, to be incorporated within the structure at an early stage.

The vessel has now been transferred to Berne where it will be completed prior to commissioning in 2020.Arrangement of the LNG tank

The vessel in drydock

Installed LNG tank

Technical implementation by Fassmer GmbH & Co KGThe following specification is based on the above requirements: Overall length 75m

Max. width 16.8mDraught 5m

Classification DNVGL 1A, SPS, BWM (T), Dynpos (Aut), E0 Gas fuelled, Ice (1C), Naut (Nav), Silent (R)

Drive and manoeuvring facilities:Drive motor 1 x 1,600 kWPropeller 1 x FPP, 7 blades

Thruster 2 x Schottel STT (bow thrust-er, stern thruster)

Pump jet 1 x Schottel SPJ220

Diesel / gas-electric power generation:Diesel motor: 1 x 6L20 WärtsilaDF motors: 2 x 6L20 DF Wärtsila


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Norwegenkai shore-based ship power plant inaugurated

COLOR LINE | The Port of Kiel’s first shore-based power sup-ply plant for shipping has been officially inaugurated at the Norwegenkai. With immedi-ate effect, Color Line’s cruise ferries can be supplied with emission-free electricity from shore.The Siemens onshore power plant is specifically tailored to the needs of shipping compa-nies and the port. It has a max-imum connection capacity of 4.5 MW at 10 kV and a mains frequency of 50 Hz.The power generation dur-ing loading and unloading (PLUG) shore-to-ship trans-fer station comes from French manufacturer NG3 and is equipped with a programmed logic control (PLC) unit which communicates with the land station’s switching gear. All the necessary switching commands from the ship are sent automatically, but be-fore power is transferred from shore, the system first checks for correct plug and cable con-nections. Once this has taken place, the connection to shore is switched on and the ship

synchronises itself with the shore plant, which then han-dles supply.

BackgroundAs part of its general and con-tinuous efforts to reduce the environmental footprint of its activity, Color Line decided in 2010 to implement a shore power connection together with Port of Oslo for the Color Magic and Color Fantasy Ro-Pax vessels. For the ferry company, the classification society DNV GL and Norwegian Department of Transport authorities, the pri-mary requirement was safety of the system, especially as this shore power connection oper-ation is very repetitive and in-volves heavy and cumbersome high voltage and high amper-age cables and contacts. As such, direct manual handling by the crew was not considered sufficiently reliable, and a fully mechanised system, if techni-cally available, was preferable, especially if it allowed extra margins to be made available in terms of current exchange capability.

Another safety requirement was the ability to perform an emergency release, without power blackout, in circum-stances where the vessel drift-ed away from the quay. From a power exchange point of view, the requirement was to pro-vide a 4.5 MVA capability, un-der no less than 11 kV. Based on this, the PLUG technology was selected.

Technical features One feature of the PLUG tech-nology is a self-mating / de-mating high-voltage connector which allows a cost-effective and safe connection. As soon as the vessel is secured alongside, the crew slide out a beam above the quay to which the ship side power socket is attached and lowered down a chain towards the quay side connector.The chain is equipped with a ”shuttle bar”, which is inserted into the quay side connector. Iinside the connector, the shut-tle bar fits into a mechanism which locks it in place. The quay side connector and the power cables can now be hoist-ed towards the ship side socket

and attached. When the con-nector reaches the right height, the socket’s electrical contacts push open the quayside con-nector contacts and the con-nection is established.PLUG’s fully mechanised op-erations are insensitive to the mass and (lack of) flexibility of the connectors and cables. The power exchange capabil-ity can be optimised to meet most ships’ requirements, up to 11,000 V, with the same design, and a single PLUG unit.On the ship side, the PLUG in-terface consists of a steel struc-ture supporting a sliding beam to which a high voltage socket, a chain hoist as well as the wa-tertight door are attached. On the terminal side, the interface comprises a steel structure sup-porting a sliding basket which receives the high-voltage con-nector and cables which are attached. Although simple, this is a very cost-effective, safe and reliable cable storage and man-agement system. To protect the connector from adverse weath-er conditions when not in use, a dedicated “winterised” shel-ter is provided.

The shore-based power supply plant is now in operation Source: Bindemann




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Hybrid system for efficient inshore and manoeuvring operations

ELECTRIC DRIVE | Germany’s Reintjes Powertrain Solutions provides a variety of electrically driven hybrid drive systems which offer significant efficiency gains when vessels are operating at low speeds or manoeuvring in port. The flexible Reintjes pack-age, which can be used for vari-ous applications, comprises the gearbox, an electric motor/gen-erator, and power electronics.The hybrid system ensures more efficient low-speed operation because many conventional ma-rine engines are not well-suited to running at low loads. Not only does the electrical drive provide an efficient option for reduced speed operation, Reintjes said, but it also ensures smooth op-eration and low noise. The sys-tems are particularly suitable for vessels that are frequently manoeuvring in port and/or operating in areas which require reduced emissions from ships. The company’s electric drive systems have been developed against a backdrop of increas-ing concern over air quality in coastal regions, notably in busy ports. More regulations are to be expected in these areas, experts

believe. Norway, for example, aims to ensure that its fjords are emission-free by 2026.In the power take-in (PTI) mode of operation, the hybrid system’s electric motor takes over from the main engine, ena-bling emissions-free, low-speed cruising, manoeuvring and re-versing. Energy consumption and noise levels are reduced to a minimum when operating in this way. Dynamic positioning

without the energy losses asso-ciated with a slipping clutch can also be provided, Reintjes said.In the flexible PTI operational mode, the electric motor can be combined with the main engine.

This provides maximum propel-ler thrust and extra acceleration, with the motor supporting the main engine in different load conditions.In power take-off (PTO) mode, the electric motor operates as a generator, supplying power to the ship’s grid and supporting existing generator sets. Other options include using energy generated in this way, or any surplus that may be available, to

charge battery packs.In addition to the company’s classic hybrid systems, Reintjes also offers a hybrid step-up gear-box for retrofit. The front-engine mounted gearbox, combined

with a permanent magnetic elec-tric generator of up to 300 kWe, cuts maintenance and operating costs, and reduces emissions, the company said. With high torque, this electric motor/gen-erator can be used as a starter to substitute the air-starting system and, by using the PTO, other gensets can be turned off. In the BAE HybriGen® Zero sys-tem which is supplied with an electric motor and gearbox from

BAE Systems, Reintjes provides an integrated multi-disc clutch, a flexible coupling on the input side, a bell housing for the direct generator mount, and a shaft for direct engine connection.

PTI Mode – Electric propulsion only. Blue: Devices in operation. Grey: Devices out of operation.

Hybrid step-up gearbox

PTO Mode – Diesel propulsion plus generator use of hybrid package

Sour

ce: R

eint

jes


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Ammonia’s potential as a future marine fuel

DECARBONISATION MAN Energy Solutions set to add carbon-free ammonia to the list of alternative fuels that its two-stroke, dual-fuel engine portfolio can use

W

ithin the last decade and the re-lease of its two-stroke, dual-fuel ME-GI and ME-LGI engines,

MAN Energy Solutions has researched – and brought into being – marine propul-sion based on environmentally-friendly, low-carbon gaseous and liquid fuels. In the search for zero-carbon fuels to meet the IMO’s 2050 emissions targets, it has

now begun to assess the potential of am-monia, citing interest from shipowners.

The company reports that there are already some 170 ships in operation that can carry ammonia, with around 40 of these doing so regularly, making it relatively simple to upscale existing infra-structure to provide appropriate bunker-ing facilities.

Ammonia burns in engines without producing any CO2 or carbon and can be stored as a liquid at about -34°C, or at normal temperatures at a pressure of around 10 bar.

Compared with other, carbon-neutral marine fuels such as hydrogen, which is being touted as an alternative option for meeting the IMO’s 2050 carbon-reduction

Picture from the September 2018 official unveiling of MAN Energy Solutions’ ME-LGIP engine in Copenhagen. The LPG-burning engine is the latest addition to the company’s dual-fuel, two-stroke portfolio. Source: MAN Energy Solutions


SPECIAL GREENTECH FUTURE FUELS


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

targets, ammonia has a relatively low risk of combustion. However, it is also highly toxic and corrosive and accordingly requires stainless-steel tanks, pipework and special-ised sealants during handling, which is a key concern when it comes to how it could be safely used as a fuel. Like LNG, it also needs more storage space than convention-al fuels and is heavier.

MAN Energy Solutions has stated that it will begin its ammonia project by us-ing the same concept as for its recently launched ME-LGIP engine – developed to run on LPG fuel – failing which, it will de-velop a dedicated, ammonia-fuelled engine.

The ME-GI/-LGI enginesRevealed at a ceremony in Copenhagen in September 2018, MAN Energy Solu-tions’ latest two-stroke engine type, the ME-LGIP (liquid gas injection propane) engine, builds on the success the company has had with its ME-GI (gas injection) and ME-LGI (liquid gas injection) dual-fuel engines, which have won over 250 orders since their introduction to the market. The ME-LGIP variant adds LPG to the expand-ing list of non-HFO and alternative fuels that MAN Energy Solutions’ two-stroke technology can use. These include LNG, ethane, methanol, ethanol, and VOCs (vol-atile organic compounds), among others.The diesel principle provides ME-GI/-LGI engines with high operational stability and efficiency, including during load changes and fuel change-over when no fuel penal-ties are incurred. Their negligible fuel slip also makes them the most environmentally friendly, two-stroke technology available.

René Sejer Laursen, promotion man-ager for dual-fuel engines, MAN Energy Solutions, said: “Regulation is a driving fac-tor for engine development and the future will inevitably bring a growing focus on CO2, methane slip and VOCs. Carbon-free fuels will be mandatory to meet 2050 emis-sion limits and the ME-LGI engine is well-placed to meet this coming demand.” MAN Energy Solutions states that – potentially – 3,000 MAN B&W-branded two-stroke en-gines could be converted to operation using ammonia.

About ammoniaAmmonia (NH3) is a compound of nitro-gen and hydrogen and a common nitro-genous waste, particularly among aquatic organisms. It is also prominent in the synthesis of many pharmaceutical prod-ucts and commercial cleaning products.

Though common in nature and in wide use, ammonia is both caustic and hazardous in its concentrated form.

As a fuel, ammonia has a high octane rating of 120 and a low flame temperature that encourages the use of high compres-sion ratios without incurring a penalty of high NOx production. Since it contains no carbon, ammonia’s combustion does not produce carbon monoxide or dioxide, hydro carbons or soot.

Green ammoniaThere is also potential to procure a greener form of ammonia by using wind farms to supply ‘green electricity’ for carbon-free ammonia production.

Ammonia as a green fuel produced with renewable energy has a number of advan-tages, including:

> clean combustion without CO2 or car-bon emissions;,

> can be produced 100% by electrical energy;

> can easily be reformed to hydrogen and nitrogen;,

> can be stored with high energy density at < 20 bar;

> has a low risk of spontaneous combus-tion;

> has a better power density than hydro-gen and does not have to be kept at extremely low temperatures or under high pressure for storage or transpor-tation.

MAN Energy Solutions reports that it has already encountered particular interest in its proposed ammonia engine from wind turbine manufacturers.

Such interest fits well with the com-pany’s pioneering, Power-to-X energy-transformation technology. This con-verts the surplus electricity produced by renewable resources into carbon-neutral synthetic fuels, such as ammonia, which can be stored and later used by the trans-port, heating and electricity sectors. By coupling these major sectors in this way, Power-to-X is set to play a major role in creating a truly carbon-neutral energy sys-tem and reaching the world’s ambitious climate protection goals.Among other advantages, the production of ammonia with wind power allows it to decouple wind turbine build-out from grid availability; function as a hedge against fu-ture, low electricity prices; and, at scale, solve the variability issue of wind-power electricity generation.

Ammonia is a long-term, viable, green fuel that does not require a carbon source and its production is only dependent on ap-propriate facilities and wind turbines. It can also be moved in pipes at about a fifth of the price of moving electricity by powerline.

Ammonia engine developmentLaursen commented: “In respect to ship-ping, ammonia is primarily being consid-ered as a potential fuel source for gas car-riers, but this will probably spread to other ship types in the future. I believe that MAN Energy Solutions is the first to see its poten-tial as a fuel.”

Laursen said that his company has al-ready successfully undertaken a hazard identification (HAZID) study in coopera-tion with classification society DNV GL, manufacturer of fuel-gas supply systems Babcock LGE, and shipowner Navigator Gas to identify any safety issues that need to be addressed.

MAN Energy Solutions’ next step is to seek approval from a flag state – likely Nor-way – to use ammonia as a marine fuel, a move that is not viewed as problematic con-sidering that the company has done so suc-cessfully with methanol, ethane and LNG. Such a flag-state approval for ammonia could be in place by mid-2019.

Laursen said: “Ammonia has been used as a refrigerant in the engine room for many years so codes already exist on how to handle it even though it is toxic. However, there are still certain issues we need to address.”

Here, he is referring to the 2016 Interna-tional Code of the Construction and Equip-ment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk – also referred to as the IGC Code – that prohibits the use of toxic products as fuel. However, a probable solution is for flag acceptance to be requested and to make an amendment proposal for the Code.

Laursen noted that studies of the heat release and combustion characteristics of ammonia have revealed that the gas has a comparatively slow flame-velocity, unlike hydrogen, for example. However, this does not represent any obstacle to adoption in the two-stroke market.

He estimated the development time for the engine at two to three years, at a cost of some EUR 5 million, and stated that, in the long term, two-stroke engines will continue to be the leading type of marine propulsion. However, he believes that carbon-free fuels such as methanol, ammonia and biofuels will become more and more relevant for the market.


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Operating conditions for the supply chain of compliant fuel REFINING INDUSTRY The upcoming IMO’s sulphur cap 2020 means that shipowners need to cut their sulphur emissions dramatically by January 1st 2020. What this means for the refining industry is described here by Mark Cudmore, manager, Asset Consultancy at Wood, a multinational energy services company.

T

here has been much wrangling in oil prod-ucts circles since the In-

ternational Maritime Organi-zation (IMO) announced the updated regulation regard-ing sulphur emissions in late 2016. To ensure compliance, the marine sector will have to use fuels with a maximum sulphur content of 0.5% com-pared with 3.5% today.

At the time, research stat-ed that by 2020 there would be enough compliant fuel to supply the global fleet. Latest figures suggest this may now be a challenge.

One of the primary as-sumptions behind this fore-cast was that by the end of 2019, just under 4,000 scrub-bers, systems designed to remove sulphur from vessel emissions, would be installed across the world’s vessels. Al-though initially deemed an obvious option, many organi-sations have resisted scrubber installation due to the capital investment required and the cost of docking ships while this work is carried out. By the end of May 2018, it was thought that less than 1,000 units had been installed, sig-nificantly less than some ex-perts had predicted earlier.

So now, as the deadline for change approaches, with just months until enforcement, the focus has shifted towards the supply chain to make sure that sufficient volumes of compliant fuel are avail-able when and where they are needed.

Status quo of the refining industryWith limited time left, and with potentially huge investment required in order to modify its product qualities, the industry has found itself at a crossroads in terms of what comes next.

The onus is now firmly on refiners to evolve their outputs to low-sulphur fuels. However, with no convergence on how the industry is to adapt, the risk for any investment is still deemed to be very high. High-sulphur fuel oil has tradition-ally been used by the shipping industry as bunker fuel. It has become a convenient way in which high-sulphur material, often residues from the produc-tion of higher value products, can be cost-effectively sold by refineries. In 2017, global de-mand for high-sulphur fuel oil stood at over 70% of overall bunker fuels.

Shipping companies will also have the option to switch to alternative fuels, such as very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) or marine gas oil (MGO). Both of these are more complex and more expensive to produce.

Refineries are now faced with how to adapt, survive and thrive in the new operating conditions. This likely means upgrading, reconfiguring or adapting their current opera-tions, and there are three main ways in which they can choose to do this, in order of descend-ing time and capital require-ment:

> reconfiguration; > debottlenecking / repur-

posing; > rapid, low cost preparation.

Major reconfigurationA further complicating factor is the impact that the 2020 sul-phur cap will have on feed and

product prices. For major pro-jects, investors require a clear projection of likely future eco-nomics. Unfortunately, even at this late stage, predictions of the impact on pricing remain varied and highly uncertain. This leads to a wide range of scenarios to include in eco-nomic modelling and signifi-cant risk in relying on the sul-phur cap-specific price trends.

The most significant, tar-geted reconfigurations seen so far will cost billions of dollars and involve the construction of whole new complexes, includ-ing the installation of residue destruction and/or treatment technologies (Table 1).

One might have expected that one technology, whether residue hydrocracking, residue hydrotreating, coking or re-sidual fluid catalytic cracking (RFCC), would have started to emerge as the front runner for an accepted view of pricing. However, no clear trend has emerged. Drivers for choos-ing a reconfiguration option are still very much strategic and specific to each facility, as shown in Figure 1.

Strategic planning and po-sitioning are crucial factors in making this decision. One key differentiator is focus on dif-ferent product markets. For example, production of petro-chemicals is favoured by RFCC technology whilst residue hydro cracking investment tends to rely on the market for diesel. Residue hydrotreating is even more specific to demand projec-tions as this relies on a strong

Figure 1: Major reconfiguration technology choice is based on a number of factors Source of images: Wood

Technology Choice

Hydrogen Cost

Schedule

Petchem/ Fuels

Strategy

Residue MarketIntegration

Schedule

>




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Modular water cleaning, optimized for your needsProven in 10 years at sea, Alfa Laval PureSOx gives you the fl exibility to operate in closed loop – either with a fully equipped hybrid system today, or with a hybrid-ready system for an easy future upgrade.

Now, a modular PureSOx water cleaning system offers more fl exibility than ever. Combining our proven high-speed separation technology with fl occulator and membrane options for higher demands, the upgradeable system handles both Mg(OH)2 and NaOH as alkali, and lets you choose between seawater or fresh water. In short, you get the most cost-effective solution for both present and future needs.

Find smart possibilities for closed-loop operation at www.alfalaval.com/puresox

Closed loop with open possibilities


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

low sulphur bunker premium, and the time this will persist for.

Another important differen-tiator driving the decision is the company’s view on the availabil-ity of disposal routes for the re-maining residue, which can vary from standard petroleum coke to high-metal content pitch de-pending on the technology.

The expected return on capital employed (ROCE) has underpinned configuration de-cisions. However, this has been shown to be very close in many cases despite widely varying technology options.

The reality is that current “bottom of the barrel” upgrad-ing projects have selected a vari-ety of technology options glob-ally. Cokers are still a popular choice for new investments, as well as new residue hydrocrack-ers and solvent de-asphalting additions.

There remains a funda-mental barrier to these op-tions, however, which is the availability of time. In terms of major configuration projects, it has not been possible to build much of this upgrading capacity between the IMO’s announce-ment and January 1st 2020.

DebottleneckingMedium-scale projects have been a popular option for many refiners as a means to take ad-vantage of the increased up-grading margin. For the pur-poses of this article, these are classed as ranging in cost from

USD 200 million to around USD 500 million. They provide a less risky option in terms of timescale too, realistically being implemented within two years from start to finish.

There are still opportunities to debottleneck existing units. Hydrotreating of high-sulphur streams is a clear target of de-bottlenecking activities to take advantage of the wide low-high sulphur differential expected.

There can be economic benefits in penalising yields to enable throughput increase in the disrupted market environ-ment. In simple terms, this could mean that refiners end up revamping units or having flexibility to make more marine

gas oil at the expense of diesel. Pushing more through the units could mean that companies might, for example, do more gas oil runs rather than diesel runs through hydrotreaters. If

the shipping industry utilises diesel-range material to replace current high-sulphur bunkers, then the projected price differ-ence between road diesel and marine gas oil could well reduce.

Low-cost debottleneck-ing of primary distillation, i.e., crude distillation, vacuum distillation, as well as sulphur treatment and amine, has been successful across many refin-eries already in support of de-bottlenecking hydrotreating or conversion units.

Repurposing has been shown to be a viable option too. Existing or shutdown units such as visbreakers, thermal crackers and old lubricant hydrotreaters, for example, may facilitate suc-cessful hydrotreatment.

Solvent de-asphalting (SDA) units are also being add-ed for comparatively moderate capital expenditure. Simultane-ously revamping the hydroc-racker can help to reduce HSFO production by almost 50%, in-crease middle distillates yield and improve crude flexibility.

The combination of SDA and de-asphalted oil hydroc-racking, and thermal conver-sion, has an important advan-tage: it retains high levels of crude flexibility. This is becom-ing an increasingly important profitability driver for refiners. In turn, this creates an oppor-tunity to increase margins fur-ther by including lower-priced, opportunity or niche crudes within a refinery’s portfolio.

Low cost preparationRefiners have also been prepar-ing their existing operations. Notable examples so far include investment in flexibility in lo-gistics such as blending, high pour or total acid number.

Leading companies had al-ready implemented their prepa-rations by the end of 2018 for the large market changes ex-pected towards the end of 2019. There is still time as, once de-termined, these measures can be implemented quickly.

Market studies are required to provide a credible range of scenarios on which decisions can be taken. These scenarios must include both limitations on quantity and price changes, and must also be specific to the individual refining asset and the available markets.

Studies to examine how to respond to the market changes have included the following, with the aim of optimising preparations across the sce-narios:

Example

Delayed Coking

Ebullating bed HC

Slurry bed HC

Residue HDS

Residue FCCResidue FCC with pre-treatment

Cost (inc. treatment) Tech risk Pricing risk

Table 1: Comparison between residue upgrading technologies

Debottlenecking

Hydrotreating

Upgrading

Indirect

Repurposing

HSFO Units

Hydrotreating

Figure 2: Debottlenecking in context

Figure 3: Repurposing




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

> new feeds including mi-nor modifications and in-vestigations for enabling new crudes;

> new product grades; > yield and operational

changes including equip-ment rating and perfor-mance prediction;

> logistics flexibility includ-ing assessment of jetty and tank farm operations loading, repurposing and minor modifications;

> compatibility of new com-ponents in residues or crude mixtures.

Implementation of these meas-ures may take the form of minor projects/market-on-close, but also of critical importance is the

preparation of trading and mar-keting functions as well as refin-ery production planning. Up-dates to the planning tools such

as linear programmes (LPs) will be required ahead of the market changes to enable refining eco-nomics to be optimised.

Next stepsSo far, the industry has been observed implementing a range of options, with each facility identifying its own fu-ture opportunities and align-ing any investment according-ly. As well as offering strong payback to any site, the short- and medium-term modifica-tions and preparations have the potential to allow highly exposed and marginal refiners to stay in business past the ini-tial disruptive period, allow-ing time for long-term strate-gic positioning.

What ties each approach together is the need for a firm grasp of risk in the market, particularly relating to the fu-ture price fluctuations of each product. It is this, combined with the strategic flexibility to maximise opportunity and re-silience in an environment of great uncertainty, that will give refiners the best chance of sur-vival once the new regulations come into force.

Figure 4: Mid Term Repurposing example: this example of a delayed coker (DCU) revamp project aimed to increase vacuum residue processing from 3.7 MMTA to 4.6 MMTA. Addition of an SDA resulted in far higher liquid yields versus the standard DCU throughput revamp.

Coke Naphtha LPG Light GasDAO HCGO LCGO

SDA Addition

DCU Revamp

Base case

Yield (MM TPA)

Credible Range of Market Scenarios

Optimisation Scenarios (Studies)

Implement Preparation

> Must be specific to the asset > Quantity & Price

> New feeds > New products > Yield Changes > Equipment > Logistics > Compability

> Trading prep > Marketing prep > LP updates > MoCs > Minor routing/mods

Figure 5: Steps for robust planning


Consortium takes off with nine shipsMETHANOL | The consortium Green Maritime Methanol has selected nine ships for the ap-plication of methanol as a fuel. The selection took place in close cooperation between the consortium partners. Both new designs, newbuildings as well as existing ships of Boskalis, Van Oord, Royal Netherlands Navy and Wagenborg Shipping were selected.The sizes of these ships vary in length from 40m to 160m, in tonnage from 300 to 23,000dwt and in installed power from 1 to 12 MW. Research for these ships starts with determination of the cost for implementation

and use of methanol systems. The results of this research ac-tivities will be compared with low-sulphur marine diesel.Each of the vessels has its own specific operational profile, providing a general insight in the feasibility of methanol for a certain ship type and its sail-ing route and cruising speed. Not only cargo vessels are in-vestigated in this phase. Atten-tion will also be paid to ferries, dredgers and support vessels operating in coastal waters.For each scenario the most at-tractive technical, operational and economical alternatives will be determined. The par-

ties plan to share and exchange knowledge within the con-sortium and opportunities to develop methanol further as a transport fuel for in the mari-time sector.Recently, the consortium wel-comed three new entrants that provide extra knowledge, power and skills to the consortium i.e., Royal Netherlands Shipowners’ Association (KVNR), Bureau Veritas and Lloyd’s Register.Green Maritime Methanol now has the following partners: Bio MCN, Royal Boskalis, Bureau Veritas, C-job Naval Architects, Damen Shipyards, Defence Material Organisation, Fead-

ship, Helm Proman, Royal IHC, Royal Netherlands Naval Institute (KIM/FMW), Royal Netherlands Shipowners’ Asso-ciation (KVNR), Lloyd’s Reg-ister, Marin, Maritime Knowl-edge Centre (MKC), Marine Service Noord (MSN), Metha-nol Institute, Port of Amster-dam, Port of Rotterdam, Pon Power, TNO, TU Delft, Van Oord, Netherlands Association of Importers of Combustion Engines (VIV), Wagenborg Shipping and Wärtsilä.The project is supported by TKI Maritiem and the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and lasts until December 2020.


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

GHG emission study on the use of LNG as marine fuel

SEA\LNG A study commissioned by the UK-registered non-profit collaborative industry foundation SEA\LNG and the non-governmental Society for Gas as a Marine Fuel (SGMF), shows that LNG provides a significant advantage in terms of improving air quality by reducing harmful pollutants. The following article summarises its findings.

T

he SEA\LNG study analyses the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from the use of

liquefied natural gas (LNG) as marine fuel compared with current and post-2020 con-ventional oil-based fuels. In addition, air quality is assessed by comparing local pol-lutants generated by vessels using different fuels.

The study shows that LNG provides a significant advantage in terms of improving air quality which is particularly important in ports and coastal areas. Beyond the bene-fits associated with reducing air pollutants, LNG is a viable means of reducing GHG emissions from international shipping and of contributing to the International Mari-time Organization’s (IMO) GHG reduc-tion targets. However, methane emission from the supply chain and engine slip need to be reduced further to maximise the posi-tive impact on both air quality and GHG emissions.

The key messages are: > The use of LNG as marine fuel shows

a GHG reduction of up to 21% com-pared with current oil-based marine fuels over the entire lifecycle from well-to-wake (WtW). The benefit is highly dependent on the engine technology installed and, to a certain extent, on the type of reference fuel (distillate or residual);

> On an engine technology basis, the WtW GHG emission reduction for gas-fuelled engines compared with HFO-fuelled engines is between 14% and 21% for two-stroke slow speed engines, and between 7% and 15% for four-stroke medium-speed engines;

> On a tank-to-wake (TtW) basis, the combustion process for LNG as a ma-rine fuel shows GHG benefits of up to 28% compared with current oil-based marine fuels. On an engine technolo-gy basis, the TtW emissions reduction

benefits for gas-fuelled engines com-pared with HFO-fuelled engines are between 18% and 28 % for two-stroke slow speed engines and between 12% and 22% for four-stroke medium-speed engines;

> Local pollutants, such as sulphur ox-ides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), are re-duced when using LNG compared with current conventional marine fu-els. Due to the negligible amount of sulphur in LNG, SOx emissions are reduced close to zero. NOx emissions are reduced by up to 95% to meet the IMO Tier III limits without NOx reduction technologies when using Otto cycle engines. Limited data on PM emissions is available; however reductions of up to 99% are normal compared with HFO.

> For post-2020 oil-based marine fuels (low-sulphur fuel oil – LSFO – or the

LNG is a viable means to make shipping more environmentally friendly



sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

use of HFO in combination with an exhaust gas cleaning system) there is no significant difference in the WtW GHG emissions compared with cur-rent oil-based fuels. Post-2020 gas-fuelled two-stroke engines have ad-vantages in the range of 14% to 22 %, and four-stroke engines between 6% and 16% compared with HFO-fuelled engines;

> As a direct comparison, if the global marine transport fleet for 2015 were to switch completely to LNG then there would be a GHG emission reduction of 15% marine GHG emissions based on engine technology alone;

> GHG emissions are reduced depend-ing on the degree of methane slip incurred during the combustion pro-cess. High-pressure two-stroke diesel cycle engines and marine gas turbine propulsion units incur methane slip less than 1% of the overall WtW GHG emissions. Low-pressure two-stroke and four-stroke Otto cycle reciprocat-ing engines are sensitive to methane slip with 10% to 17% of the WtW GHG emissions resulting from un-burned methane in the combustion process;

> The study presents the current status of the industry; ongoing optimisation in supply chain and engine technol-ogy developments will further en-hance the benefits of LNG as a marine fuel. Methane slip reduction during combustion in the engines and meth-ane emission reduction in the supply chain as well as further improving en-ergy efficiency in combination with other measures such as enhanced op-erational methods and speed optimi-sation will make a major contribution to meeting the IMO’s GHG emissions reduction target 2050 for shipping;

> An indicative analysis showed that bioLNG and synthetic LNG can pro-vide an additional significant (up to 90 %) benefit in terms of WtW GHG intensity. Bio and synthetic LNG are completely fungible with LNG de-rived from fossil feedstocks. For ex-ample, a blend of 20% bioLNG as a drop-in fuel can reduce GHG emis-sions by a further 13% compared with 100% fossil fuel LNG;

> GHG emissions of fuel supply chains differ from region to region due to a large number of variables. Therefore, specific supply chain analyses as ap-

plied in this study have been impor-tant in obtaining a global average GHG intensity.

Well-to-wake results The total WtW GHG emissions of marine engines are highly dependent on the en-gine technology and fuel type. The overall WtW GHG emissions of engines operat-ing on current oil-based HFO, MGO and LNG have been calculated based on fuel consumption and emission data provided by eight different engine manufacturers and members from SEA\LNG and SGMF. All data is related to compliance with the IMO Tier III NOx limits, and are given in brake power specific units (kWh) per engine technology weighted according to the IMO E2/E3 cycle. The Tables 1 and 2 show the technical parameters (all primary data are provided by engine manufactur-ers) that are used for the calculation of the WtW GHG emissions of the two-stroke slow-speed and the four-stroke medium-speed engines. All energy-related numbers in the study refer to the lower heating value (LHV).

Two-stroke slow-speed engines are the most common engines in shipping and burn more than 70% of the fuel used in the industry. Due to their high efficiency and high power, these engines are mainly used in large ocean-going cargo ships. LNG is

used in two engine technologies which dif-fer in their underlying combustion cycle and gas injection system.

> a) The WtW GHG emissions of the two-stroke slow-speed diesel dual-fuel engine (high-pressure gas injec-tion) are 549g CO2-eq/kWh when us-ing LNG which is 21% less compared with the same engine operating on HFO (697g CO2-eq/kWh) as shown in Figure 1.

> b) The WtW GHG emissions of the two-stroke slow-speed Otto dual-fuel engine (low-pressure gas injection) are 598g CO2-eq/kWh when using LNG which is a reduction of 14% compared with HFO operation.

For these LNG-fuelled engines, the WtT GHG emissions of the supply chain con-tribute about 22% to 24% of the entire life-cycle emissions (WtW). For oil-based fuels, the supply chain accounts for 16% to 18%.

Four-stroke medium-speed engines are the second most common engine used in shipping. They typically have a lower en-gine power and are mainly used in car and passenger ferries as well as cruise ships.

Both engines investigated in the study are Otto cycle engines and can be differentiat-ed according to their ability to run on single (SI) or dual fuel (DF).

> a) The WtW GHG emissions of the four-stroke medium-speed Otto

g/kWh Oil-based fuels Gas-based fuel

HFO2.5 MGO0.1 LNG LNG

Two-stroke slow speed Diesel Diesel-DF Otto-DF

Main fuel consumption 184.8 174.0 141.3 145.1

Pilot fuel consumption - - 6.4 1.5

Urea solution consumption 20.7 20.7 - -

Methane slip - - 0.1 % 1.5 %

g/kWh Oil-based fuels Gas-based fuel


Four-stroke medium speed Diesel Diesel-DF Otto-DF

Main fuel consumption 197.5 184.7 155.8 156.5

Pilot fuel consumption - - - 2.8

Urea solution consumption 15.7 15.7 - -

Methane slip - - 1.3 % 2.5 %

Tables 1 and 2: Technical paramenters used for the WtW calculations

>




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

cycle DF engine are 692g CO2- eq/kWh running on LNG which is a 7% reduction compared with operation on HFO (741g CO2-eq/kWh).

> b) The WtW GHG emissions of the four-stroke medium-speed Otto-SI engine which is a single-fuel, pure gas engine, are 629g CO2-eq/kWh result-ing in a 15% reduction compared with HFO.

Four-stroke high-speed engines only ac-count for 6% of the fuel burned in shipping, with gas turbines in simple and combined cycle operation having a minor share of 2%. Nonetheless, these engines are also ana-lysed in the study and described in detail in the report. The high-speed engines and gas turbines only run on MGO0.1 and LNG. Four-stroke high-speed engines show a potential GHG reduction of 5% compared with MGO0.1.

Gas turbines in simple and combined cycle have a methane slip during combus-tion accounting for only 0.3% of the overall WtW GHG emissions. Simple operation gas turbines using LNG give a benefit of 16% compared with MGO0.1, or 20% in combined cycle operation.

The comparison of LNG-fuelled en-gines with post-2020 oil-based fuelled en-gines shows similar GHG results as for the current situation, depending on the post-2020 fuel type and engine technology. For two-stroke engines the advantages of gas-fuelled engines are calculated to be 14% to 22% and for four-stroke engines 6% to 16%. The main reason for the high range of GHG reduction potential is methane slip during

the combustion phase which is mainly de-pendent on the combustion cycle of the engine.

Methane emissions contribution analysis Methane emissions can have a significant impact on the total WtW GHG emissions of marine engines. For oil-based marine fuels, methane emissions are limited to the supply chain of the fuel. In LNG operation, methane slip in the engine (combustion) plays an important role in addition to the emission from the supply chain. Tables 3 and 4 show an analysis along the lifecycle

of the fuel and the contribution of supply and combustion. GHG emissions result-ing from methane account for around 3% of the total WtW GHG emissions of oil-based fuels (HFO2.5 and MGO0.1 in the following tables) and can be considered as insignificant whereas this goes up to 22% for certain engines burning LNG.

Methane emissions in the supply chain are mainly fugitive emissions. Methane emissions from the combustion of the fuel are highly dependent on the combustion cycle.

Due to the high gas injection pressure and combustion process in a diesel cycle, methane emission in the combustion of the two-stroke slow-speed diesel dual-fuel en-gine are about 4g CO2-eq/kWh represent-ing less than 1% of the total WtW GHG emissions. The data of the two-stroke slow-speed Otto cycle engine shows that meth-ane slip accounts for 63g CO2-eq/kWh which is equal to 11% of the total WtW GHG emissions.

The same characteristics apply to four-stroke medium-speed engines with the two engine technologies investigated using an Otto combustion cycle. The data indicates that pure gas engines (Otto-SI) are less sensitive to methane slip. It accounts for 10% (60g CO2-eq/kWh) of the total WtW GHG emissions of the Otto-SI engine. The dual-fuel engines covered in the study show GHG emissions resulting from methane slip of 115g CO2-eq/kWh which is equal to 17% of the total WtW GHG emissions.

2-stroke speed engines: WtW - GHG IPCC - AR5 [g CO₂-eq/kWh eingine output]

2-strokeSS-Diesel2-stroke

SS-Diesel2-stroke

SS-Diesel-DF

2-strokeSS-Otto-DF

HFO 2.5

MG

O0.

1LN

GLN

G

Supply

144

121

132

133

583

565

417

465

583

686

549

598

0 200 400 600 800 1.000

Combustion

g CO2-eq/kWh Oil-based fuels Gas-based fuel


Two-stroke slow speed Diesel Diesel-DF Otto-DF

Total WtW GHG emissions 697 686 549 598

- of which methane 23 24 37 96

- supply 23 24 33 33

- combustion - - 4 63

g CO2-eq/kWh Oil-based fuels Gas-based fuel


Four-stroke medium speed Diesel Diesel-DF Otto-DF

Total WtW GHG emissions 741 714 629 692

- of which methane 24 25 96 151

- supply 24 25 36 36

- combustion - - 60 115

Figure 1: WtW GHG emssions of the two-stroke slow-speed diesel DF engine

Tables 3 and 4: Analysis of the fuel and the contribution of supply and combustion




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

I

Buye

rs G

uide

1 Shipyards Ship’s operation systems

2 Propulsion plants 1 110

Deck equipment

3 Engine components 12 Construction + consulting

4 Corrosion protection 13 Cargo handling technology

5 Ship’s equipment 14 Alarm + safety equipment

6 Hydraulic + pneumatic 15 Port construction

7 Onboard power supplies 16 Offshore + ocean technology

89

Measurement + control devices

Navigation + communication

1718

Maritime services

Buyer’s Guide Information

Page Page

Page Page

Page Page

Page

Page

Page Page

The Buyer’s Guide serves as market review and source of supply listing. Clearly arranged according to references, you find the offers of international shipbuilding and supporting industry in the following 17 columns.

II III

II IV

II IV

III

III

III V

Buyer’s Guide


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

II

Buye

rs G

uide

2 Propulsion plants

2.02 GEARS

Propulsion systems with power ratings from 250 up to 30,000 kW

REINTJES GmbH

Eugen-Reintjes-Str. 7D-31785 HamelnTel. +49 (0)5151 104-0 Fax +49 (0)5151 [email protected] • www.reintjes-gears.com

2.06 RUDDERS + RUDDER SYSTEMS

Wendenstraße 130 • D-20537 HamburgTel.: +49-40 711 80 20 • Fax: +49-40 711 80 221

e-mail: [email protected]

Rudders and Steering Gear •Nozzles • Winches • Energy Saving Devices

2.09 EXHAUST SYSTEMS

Exhaust Gas Purifi cation SystemsDiesel Particulate Filters / SCR Catalysts

Hug Engineering AGIm Geren 14 • CH 8352 Elsau

Phone +41 52 368 20 [email protected] • www.hug-engineering.com

A FAURECIA COMPANY

3 Engine components

3.05 STARTERS

DÜSTERLOH Fluidtechnik GmbHAbteilung Pneumatik Starter

Im Vogelsang 105D-45527 HattingenTel. +49 2324 709 - 0 • Fax +49 2324 709 -110E-mail: [email protected] • www.duesterloh.de

Air Starters for Diesel andGas Engines up to 9.000 kW

www.nk-air.comNeuenhauser Kompressorenbau GmbHSpangenbergstraße 20 | D-49824 Ringe/Neugnadenfeld Tel: +49(0)5944 9301-200 | Fax: +49(0)5944 9301-202E-mail: [email protected]

TDI Compressed Air Starter for Diesel and Gas engines up to 300l displacement

3.07 FILTERS

Boll & Kirch Filterbau GmbHSiemensstraße 10-14 • 50170 D-Kerpen Phone +49 2273 562-0 • Fax: +49 2273 562-223E-mail: [email protected] • www.bollfilter.com

Automatic, Duplex and Simplex Filters for Lubricating Oil, Fuel and Sea Water

Fluid management for heavy diesel engines

HYDAC INTERNATIONAL GMBHIndustriestraße • D-66280 Sulzbach/Saar

Telefon +49 (0) 6897 509-01Fax +49 (0) 6897 509-454

E-Mail: [email protected] • www.hydac.com

3.10 INJECTION SYSTEMS

High pressure fuel injection systems up to 2.500 barfor diesel engines from 1.000 to 40.000 kW

Porschestrasse 8 • D-70435 StuttgartTel. +49 711 / 8 26 09 - 0Fax +49 711 / 8 26 09 - 61

[email protected] • www.lorange.com

5 Ships‘ equipment

5.09 WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

Kloska Energie- und Motorentechnik GmbHIndustriestraße 7 · D- 49716 MeppenTel.: +49(0)5931 - 9844-0 · Fax: -44

Email: [email protected] · www.kloska.com





Kloska Technical Marine Sales GmbHMarlowring 24 · 22525 Hamburg

Tel.:+49(0)40 - 219060 - 0 · Fax: - 20Email: [email protected] · www.kloska.com

Ocean Clean GmbHZum Kühlhaus 5 · D-18069 Rostock

Tel.: +49(0)381 - 811-2930 · Fax: - 2939Email: [email protected] · www.oceanclean.de

Gas/Diesel Engines andCombined Heating Plants (CHP) Service

Diesel- and Gas Engines,Combined Heating Plants (CHP), Service

Guide Bearing Stock and Production

Spare Parts and Components forAuxiliary and Main Engines

Membrane SupportedBiological Sewage Treatment Plants

BIO-SEA by BIO-UVBallast Water Treatment Systems

Oily Water Separator

KTMSKloska Technical

Marine Sales GmbH

WaterTreatment

WaterTreatment

WaterTreatment

EC-CONFORMITYMARINE EQUIPMENT

DIRECTIVE

2.01 Rubrik:Propulsion plants(Engines)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore


5.09 Rubrik:Ship´s Equipment(Waste Disposal Systems)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore4 Ausgaben (China, Greece, Greentech, China)

5.10 Rubrik:Ship´s Equipment(Oil Separation)

2.13 Rubrik:Propulsion plants(Service and Spare Parts)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore

3.02 Rubrik:Engines and Engines Components(Guide and Roller Bearings)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore



Oil / Water / Fuel Test KitsEngine Diagnostic

Partner of

8.09 Rubrik:Measurement + pneumatic(Test Kits)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore

5.10 OIL SEPARATION














WaterTreatment

WaterTreatment


DIRECTIVE


DIRECTIVE

5.11 BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT

Boll & Kirch Filterbau GmbHSiemensstraße 10-14 • 50170 D-Kerpen Tel.: +49 2273 562-0 • Fax: +49 2273 562-223E-Mail: [email protected] • www.bollfilter.de

Ballastwasseraufbereitung | Ballast Water Treatment

Ballast Water Management

HYDAC INTERNATIONAL GMBHIndustriestraße • D-66280 Sulzbach/Saar

Telefon +49 (0) 6897 509-01Fax +49 (0) 6897 509-454

E-Mail: [email protected] • www.hydac.com

Kloska Technical Marine Sales GmbHMarlowring 24 · 22525 Hamburg

Tel.:+49(0)40 - 219060 - 0 · Fax: - 20Email: [email protected] · www.kloska.com














KTMSKloska Technical

Marine Sales GmbH

WaterTreatment

WaterTreatment

WaterTreatment


DIRECTIVE


DIRECTIVE


DIRECTIVE



Oil / Water / Fuel Test KitsEngine Diagnostic

Partner of

5.16 REFUELLING SYSTEMS

On board helicopter and boat refuellingsystems for aviation fuel, petrol and diesel

Alfons Haar Maschinenbau GmbH & Co. KGFangdieckstraße 67D-22547 HamburgTel. +49 (40) 83391-0Fax +49 (40) [email protected]

www.alfons-haar.de

Make sure your ad counts

Your representative for Germany / Austria / Switzerland:

Florian VisserPhone: +49 (0) 40 237 14 - [email protected]

For further information please visit: www.shipando� shore.net

Make sure your Make sure your

Your representative for Austria / Switzerland:

Phone: +49 (0) 40 237 14 - [email protected]

Make sure your

Your representative for




Your representative forSingapore / Indonesia / Malaysia / Vietnam:

John BodillPhone: +65 / 6719 8022 • Mobile: +65 / 9622 0669

[email protected]


Place your ad campaign with confidence


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore4 Ausgaben (China, Greece, Greentech, China)

3.02 Rubrik:Engines and Engines Components(Guide and Roller Bearings)


5.10 Rubrik:Ship´s Equipment(Oil Separation)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore4 Ausgaben (China, Greece, Greentech, China)

5.11 Rubrik:

(Ballast Water Management)Ship´s Equipment



5.09 Rubrik:Ship´s Equipment(Waste Disposal Systems)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore4 Ausgaben (China, Greece, Greentech, China)

5.10 Rubrik:Ship´s Equipment(Oil Separation)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore4 Ausgaben (China, Greece, Greentech, China)

5.11 Rubrik:

(Ballast Water Management)Ship´s Equipment


8.09 Rubrik:Measurement + pneumatic(Test Kits)6 Ausgaben Schiff & Hafen8 Ausgaben Ship & Offshore

III

Buye

rs G

uide

6 Hydraulic+ pneumatic

6.01 PUMPS

KRACHT GmbHGewerbestr. 20 • D-58791 Werdohl

Tel. +49(0)2392.935 0 • Fax +49(0)2392.935 [email protected] • www.kracht.eu

Gear Pumps – Flow Measurement – Hydraulics

Bilge and ballast ejectors/eductors

Körting Hannover AG +49 511 2129-446

[email protected]

www.koerting.de

↗Leistritz Pumpen GmbH | Markgrafenstr. 36-39 D 90459 Nuremberg | Phone: +49 911 4306 - 0 [email protected] | www.leistritz.com

Screwpumps & Systems

anzeige_de.indd 1 20.10.16 16:146.02 COMPRESSORS

Neuenhauser Kompressorenbau GmbHSpangenbergstraße 20D-49824 Ringe/NeugnadenfeldTel: +49(0)5944 9301-200 Fax: +49(0)5944 9301-202E-mail: [email protected]

www.nk-air.comStarting Air, Working Air and Control Air Compressors,

Air Receivers with Valve Head, Compressed Air Treatment

J.P. Sauer & Sohn Maschinenbau GmbH P.O. Box 92 13, 24157 Kiel/Germany

P H O N E +49 431 3940-0 F A X +49 431 3940-24 E - M A I L [email protected]

www.sauercompressors.comwww.sauercompressors.com

Air- and water-cooled compressors, air receivers, compressed air dryers and accessories

6.05 PIPING SYSTEMS

STRAUB Werke AGpipe couplingsStraubstrasse 13CH - 7323 Wangs

Tel. +41 81 725 41 00 [email protected] +41 81 725 41 01 www.straub.ch

STRAUB pipe couplingsand pipe system solutions

8 Measurement + control devices

8.04 LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS

Barksdale GmbHDorn-Assenheimer Strasse 27 • D-61203 ReichelsheimTel: +49 (0) 6035 - 949 - 0 • Fax: +49 (0) 6035 - 949 - 111

e-mail: [email protected] • www.barksdale.de

Sensors & Switches to controlPressure, Temperature, Level, Flow

8.05 FLOW MEASUREMENT

KRACHT GmbHGewerbestr. 20 • D-58791 Werdohl

Tel. +49(0)2392.935 0 • Fax +49(0)2392.935 [email protected] • www.kracht.eu

Gear Pumps – Flow Measurement – Hydraulics

8.09 TEST KITS

Test kits, autom. monitoring systems,sampling devices, ultrasonic cleaning

Martechnic GmbHAdlerhorst 4D-22459 HamburgTel. +49 (0)40 85 31 28-0Fax +49 (0)40 85 31 28-16E-mail: [email protected]: www.martechnic.com

8.12 AUTOMATION EQUIPMENT

NORIS Group GmbHMuggenhofer Str. 9590429 Nuremberg / GermanyPhone: +49 (0)911 3201 - 0Fax: +49 (0)911 3201 - 150Mail: [email protected]

Monitoring & remote control of propulsion machinery, sensors, control devices, indicators

9 Navigation + communication

9.04 NAVIGATION SYSTEMS

Am Lunedeich 131 D- 27572 BremerhavenTel.+49 471-483 9990 Fax +49 471-483 99910

E-Mail: [email protected]

Professional Compasses/ Electronic CompassesNMEA Heading/ Anemometer/ Sextants

repair - compass adjustment - on-board service

Manufacturer of finest marine chronometers,clocks and electrical clock systems

Gerhard D. WEMPE KGGeschäftsbereich Chronometerwerke Steinstraße 23 • D-20095 HamburgTel.: + 49 (0)40 334 48-899Fax: + 49 (0)40 334 48-676E-mail: [email protected]

11Deckequipment

11.01 CRANES

d-i davit international-hische GmbhSandstr. 20D-27232 SulingenTel. +49 (0) 4271 93 44 0e-mail: [email protected]: www.di-hische.de

Cranes, davits and free-fall systems

Global Davit GmbH Graf-Zeppelin-Ring 2 D-27211 BassumTel. +49 (0)4241 93 35 0 Fax +49 (0)4241 93 35 25e-mail: [email protected]: www.global-davit.de

Survival- and Deck Equipment

Your representative for UK / Ireland: Bernard SteelPhone: +44 / 14 44 / 41 42 [email protected]


Make sure your ad counts




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

IV

Buye

rs G

uide

12Construction + consulting

12.01 CONSULTING ENGINEERS

Design – Construction – ConsultancyStability calculation – Project management

Naval architectsMarine engineers

[email protected] · www.shipdesign.de · Hamburg

SHIP DESIGN & CONSULT

14 Alarm + safety equipment

14.01 LIFEBOATS + DAVITS

d-i davit international-hische GmbhSandstr. 20D-27232 SulingenTel. +49 (0) 4271 93 44 0e-mail: [email protected]: www.di-hische.de

Cranes, davits and free-fall systems

Boats & Davits - Safety is our mission

Industriestr. 2D-27804 Berne/GermanyTel. +49 (0) 4406/942-582Fax +49 (0) 4406/942-4582e-mail: [email protected]

Fr. Fassmer GmbH & Co. KG

Global Davit GmbH Graf-Zeppelin-Ring 2 D-27211 BassumTel. +49 (0)4241 93 35 0 Fax +49 (0)4241 93 35 25e-mail: [email protected]: www.global-davit.de

Survival- and Deck Equipment

Test now!

Get the news of the

week with the

Newsletter!

9272_anz_spi_newsletter_SPI_BA_1901_210x140.indd 1 15.02.2019 13:56:15

Place your ad campaign with confidence


Your representative: Lisanne Groß


Place your ad campaign Place your ad campaign

with confidence

Your representative for Scandinavia:

Roland PerssonPhone: +46 / 411 184 00

[email protected]




sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Select

Target regions Central Europe Worldwide China, GreenTech,

SmartShip, Russia, China

Issues

January – –– January / February –

March March –– April April / China Edition

May May –– – June / GreenTech

July – July / SmartShip– August August / Russia Edition

September September / October –– – –

November November –– December December / China Edition

18 Buyer’s GuideInformation

Size IH 30 / B 58 mm

Size IIH 40 / B 58 mm

1 Keyword € 95,– € 125,–

2 Keywords each € 90,– each € 120,–




from 6 Keywords each € 70,– each € 100,–

Minimum time span for your booking is one year in one target region. Each target region can be booked individually. For bookings in several regions, we offer the following rebate off the total price:

Two target regions/year: 10%Three target regions/year: 20%

The premium online entry, including an active link, logo and email, is free of charge for all customers of the Buyer’s Guide print issue.

The Buyer’s Guide provides a market overview and an index of supply sources. Every entry in the Buyer’s Guide includes your company logo (4 colour), address and communications data plus a concise description of products or services offered.

Buyer’s Guide

For further information please contact:Lisanne GroßPhone: +49/40/23714 - 248e-mail: [email protected]

Publishing Price per keyword per issue

Buyer’s Guide OnlineBuye

rs G

uide

1 Shipyards

1.06 REPAIRS + CONVERSIONS

Repairs and Conversions

Bredo Dockgesellschaft mbhDockstraße 19 • D-27572 Bremerhaven

Phone +49 (471)7997-10 • Fax +49 (471)[email protected] • www.bredo.de

2 Propulsion plants

2.01 ENGINES




Couplings, seawater resistent

R+W Antriebselemente GmbH Alexander Wiegand Straße 8D-63911 Klingenberg / GermanyFon: +49 (0)9372-9864-0Fax: +49 (0)9372-9864-20email: [email protected]

2.04 SHAFT + SHAFT SYSTEMS

Fixed and Controlable Pitch Propellers,Shaft Gears, Gearboxes

Am Altendeich 83 • D-25348 GlückstadtTel. +49(0)4124 91 68-0 • Fax +49(0)4124) 37 16e-mail: [email protected]: www.piening-propeller.de




Rudders and Steering Gears- High-Tech Manoeuvring Equipment -

2.07 MANOEUVRING AIDS

Jastram GmbH & CO. KG

Billwerder Billdeich 603 • D-21033 HamburgTel. +49 40 725 601-0 • Fax +49 40 725 601-28e-mail: [email protected]:





MITSUBISHI DIESEL/TURBOCHARGERsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

After Sales Service . Spare PartsLaser Cladding . Technical Assistance

Our reliability. Your move.

NIPP NDIESEL SERVICE GMBH

Nippon Diesel Service GmbHHermann-Blohm-Str. 120457 Hamburg/Germany

Phone: +49 40 317 710 - 0Fax: +49 40 311 598E-Mail: [email protected]

www.nds-marine.com

NDS_BG_58x30mm_final_neu.indd 1 26.02.15 11:23

Crankshaftrepair (max. length 12 m), Repair of Engine- and Industrial parts, Connectingrods and

Camshafts, In Situ Machining, Laser Cladding

Nieuwe Waterwegstraat 7

3115 HE Schiedam, Netherlands

Harbourno. 535

Port of Rotterdam

Tel. +31-10-4090599

Fax +31-10-4090590

[email protected] • www.markvanschaick.com

MARK VAN SCHAICK MARINE SERVICES

TAIKO KIKAI INDUSTRIES CO., LTDsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

YANMAR DIESELsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

Buyer‘s Guide Premium online entry + Buyer‘s Guide

print entry

V

Buye

rs G

uide

Select

Target regions Central Europe Worldwide China, GreenTech,

SmartShip, Russia, China

Issues

January – –– January / February –

March March –– April April / China Edition

May May –– – June / GreenTech

July – July / SmartShip– August August / Russia Edition

September September / October –– – –

November November –– December December / China Edition

18 Buyer’s GuideInformation

Size IH 30 / B 58 mm

Size IIH 40 / B 58 mm

1 Keyword € 95,– € 125,–





from 6 Keywords each € 70,– each € 100,–

Minimum time span for your booking is one year in one target region. Each target region can be booked individually. For bookings in several regions, we offer the following rebate off the total price:

Two target regions/year: 10%Three target regions/year: 20%

The premium online entry, including an active link, logo and email, is free of charge for all customers of the Buyer’s Guide print issue.

The Buyer’s Guide provides a market overview and an index of supply sources. Every entry in the Buyer’s Guide includes your company logo (4 colour), address and communications data plus a concise description of products or services offered.

Buyer’s Guide

For further information please contact:Lisanne GroßPhone: +49/40/23714 - 248e-mail: [email protected]

Publishing Price per keyword per issue

Buyer’s Guide OnlineBuye

rs G

uide

1 Shipyards

1.06 REPAIRS + CONVERSIONS

Repairs and Conversions

Bredo Dockgesellschaft mbhDockstraße 19 • D-27572 Bremerhaven

Phone +49 (471)7997-10 • Fax +49 (471)[email protected] • www.bredo.de

2 Propulsion plants

2.01 ENGINES




Couplings, seawater resistent

R+W Antriebselemente GmbH Alexander Wiegand Straße 8D-63911 Klingenberg / GermanyFon: +49 (0)9372-9864-0Fax: +49 (0)9372-9864-20email: [email protected]

2.04 SHAFT + SHAFT SYSTEMS

Fixed and Controlable Pitch Propellers,Shaft Gears, Gearboxes

Am Altendeich 83 • D-25348 GlückstadtTel. +49(0)4124 91 68-0 • Fax +49(0)4124) 37 16e-mail: [email protected]: www.piening-propeller.de




Rudders and Steering Gears- High-Tech Manoeuvring Equipment -

2.07 MANOEUVRING AIDS

Jastram GmbH & CO. KG

Billwerder Billdeich 603 • D-21033 HamburgTel. +49 40 725 601-0 • Fax +49 40 725 601-28e-mail: [email protected]:





MITSUBISHI DIESEL/TURBOCHARGERsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

After Sales Service . Spare PartsLaser Cladding . Technical Assistance

Our reliability. Your move.

NIPP NDIESEL SERVICE GMBH

Nippon Diesel Service GmbHHermann-Blohm-Str. 120457 Hamburg/Germany

Phone: +49 40 317 710 - 0Fax: +49 40 311 598E-Mail: [email protected]

www.nds-marine.com

NDS_BG_58x30mm_final_neu.indd 1 26.02.15 11:23

Crankshaftrepair (max. length 12 m), Repair of Engine- and Industrial parts, Connectingrods and

Camshafts, In Situ Machining, Laser Cladding

Nieuwe Waterwegstraat 7

3115 HE Schiedam, Netherlands

Harbourno. 535

Port of Rotterdam

Tel. +31-10-4090599

Fax +31-10-4090590

[email protected] • www.markvanschaick.com

MARK VAN SCHAICK MARINE SERVICES

TAIKO KIKAI INDUSTRIES CO., LTDsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

YANMAR DIESELsee Nippon Diesel Service GmbH

Buyer‘s Guide Premium online entry + Buyer‘s Guide

print entry


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Managing shipping emissions to reduce carbon impactGHG INITIATIVE As the maritime industry explores ways to meet the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of cargo carried by 40% by 2030 compared with 2008 levels, and the IMO environmental committee meets to agree on short-term measures towards this goal, more and more companies are looking to reduce their carbon emissions and enhance the overall efficiency of their shipping operations. In the following article, Kris Fumberger, Sustainability manager at RightShip, a maritime risk management and environmental assessment organisation, presents a tool for establishing a benchmark and reducing emissions.

R

ightShip’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rating (GHG Rating) is housed

in the organisation’s online risk management platform Right-Ship Qi. It was launched in 2011 and offers a tool for shipowners, charterers, banks and ports to establish a benchmark and take action to reduce CO2 emissions. The tool contains information on more than 76,000 ocean-go-ing vessels, comparing a ship’s theoretical CO2 emissions with other vessels of a similar size and type, giving each ship a rat-ing on an A-G scale, with ‘A’ in-dicating the most efficient ves-sels and ‘G’ the least.

The core measure for com-paring the relative efficiency of the world’s fleet is grams of CO2 per tonne nautical mile. Right-Ship uses one of two sources when determining an indi-vidual vessel’s efficiency: the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), which is a regulatory requirement developed by the IMO for new ships (and applied on an ad-hoc basis to existing vessels); or the Existing Vessel Design Index (EVDI), which is based on the EEDI, and has been developed by RightShip. The EVDI can be applied to existing vessels as well as new-builds (where EEDI is not available/applicable). As the two methods compare relative efficiency on the same basis, a like-for-like comparison of effi-ciency is possible.

The GHG Rating allows charterers to exclude inefficient vessels – those with an F or G rating – from their business operations. Several charterers have recently taken this a step further and are also excluding E-rated vessels from those eligi-ble for timecharters – a further sign that the market is moving faster than regulators in efforts to reduce CO2 from supply chains.

As of December 2018, 114 organisations use the GHG Rating, which includes 62 char-

terers who use it to select the most efficient ship for a voyage. This equates to approximately one in five charters, or 20% of all vessel movements. Banks are also using the GHG Rating as a consideration in their lend-ing criteria, as lower fuel costs and better chartering potential often generates a greater return on investment over the lifetime of a vessel.

Along with using the GHG Rating to select more sustain-able vessels and enhance op-erational efficiency, blue-chip

companies increasingly want to measure their supply chain emissions to manage and re-duce their emissions effectively through every step of the pro-cess – from production to deliv-ery and consumption.

To help them do this, Right-Ship has created a verified Car-bon Accounting tool to meas-ure three emission scopes from shipping, which can then easily be incorporated into a corpo-rate climate change strategy.

Carbon emissions can be divided into three groups. Scope one emissions come from a company’s vehicles and equipment, stationary com-bustion, waste water treatment and on-site landfill. Scope two emissions are from the genera-tion of electricity, heat or steam purchased by a company, while scope three come from sources not owned or directly con-trolled by a company, but relat-ed to its operations. These are more difficult to identify and quantify, and include the emis-sions associated with a logistics chain, such as shipping.

Using specific information such as the vessel name and IMO number, fuel-type, cargo and voyage details from the charterer, and the environmen-tal information from the GHG Rating, RightShip can now cal-culate the theoretical fuel con-sumption and the equivalent carbon emissions for each indi-vidual ship voyage.

Reducing GHG emissions is a major goal for the industry


SPECIAL GREENTECH OPERATIONAL OPTIMISATION


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

These carbon accounting calculations are robust and verifiable, and RightShip is working to widen the scope of the measurement to include the emissions from time spent in port, the time spent engaged in cargo handling activities, as well as calculating and attribut-ing emissions to part-cargoes or even individual boxes car-ried on large containerships.

Overall, the GHG Rating gives owners, operators and charterers vital information allowing them to make more sustainable choices in their ves-sel selection. Reducing emis-sions makes good economic sense, simply because the less fuel a vessel burns, the cheaper it is to run. Supporting this, a study completed by the Tyn-dall Centre for Climate Change Research found that organisa-

tions which substituted ineffi-cient vessels with more sustain-able ones saved around 6-9% a year in CO2 emissions and fuel costs.

But it is not just ship op-erators and charterers using RightShip’s GHG Rating – ports are finding it a valuable measure to benchmark emis-sions for reporting purposes, as well as to evaluate and reward efficient vessels through port incentive programmes. Such programmes offer financial in-centives for vessels calling at the port that have a low CO2 output.

Earlier this year, Puerto Buenos Aires became the first Latin American port to reward more environmentally friendly vessels through this Right-Ship initiative. Vessels visiting the port which are identified

as being more sustainable and efficient are rewarded with tariff rebates, which can mean discounts of between 5% and 10%.

This initiative forms part of a range of measures be-ing implemented by the port to optimise its logistics and port processes while minimis-ing its impact on the environ-ment. Puerto Buenos Aires also signed up to the Environ-mental Ship Index (ESI) pro-gramme and the Green Award in 2017, which promotes this system of bonuses for ships that care for the environment. Since its implementation, USD 5,634,685.87 has been granted in discounts for 230 landings.

Several Canadian ports have led the way across North America, with the Port of Van-couver and Prince Rupert Port

Authority using the RightShip GHG Rating to offer reduced port fees to incentivise the use of sustainable vessels, while the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma in the United States are also using the rating for annual bench-marking.

RightShip was established in 2001 with the clear goal of improving the safety and envi-ronmental sustainability of the maritime industry. In each and every case – whether in a port or as a ship operator, charterer or blue-chip company – the first step in reducing emis-sions is effective measurement. RightShip’s GHG Rating and carbon accounting process helps identify the crucial emis-sions baseline, which is the vi-tal start point in determining which actions are necessary to reduce emissions further.

hempaguard.hempel.com

How will younavigate the 2020 SOx regulations?Most fl eets will face major costs and uncertainty in meeting the requirements of the new sulphur cap. But with a Hempel high performance hull coating, you could achieve fuel cost savings that deliver ROI in just 3 months*. Find out more online.

*Based on a VLCC with activity level of 70 per cent and low sulphur fuel costing 50 per cent more than bunker fuel over a 5 year life cycle, Hempaguard X7 deliversan annual saving equal to a ROI in 3.1 months.


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

ULCS converted to LNG

SAJIR | Hapag-Lloyd’s 14,993-TEU container ship, Sajir, is due to dock in Shanghai’s Huaran Dadong Dockyard in May 2020 to undergo one of the most complex engine and fuel conversions to date. The project will enable the ultra-large container ship (ULCS) to burn LNG whilst deployed in the German company’s Far East Loop 4 service between Asia and Europe. If, as expected, the converted container ship proves to be a success, the pro-ject paves the way for a string of similar conversions over the next few years.At a projected cost of USD 30 million and about 105 days out of service, the ship’s conversion is a major capital investment, but it comes as the world’s liner companies, which pay for their own fuel, face the prospect of more expensive bunkers run-ning into billions of dollars. How much of this vast cost in-crease can be passed on to ship-pers remains to be seen. Anthony Firmin, Hapag-Lloyd’s COO, has revealed that main board directors gave the go-ahead for the pioneering project in 2018. Such is its com-plexity, however, that the com-pany has had a team, headed by Captain Richard von Berlepsch, working full time on the project since then.

The list of partners engaged in different aspects of the conver-sion includes, beside the owner, the classification society, DNV GL, the shipyard in China, en-gine and fuel supply specialist MAN Energy Solutions, LNG tank technology company GTT, cargo specialist MacGregor, data and electronic pressure expert Technolog, and other stakehold-ers including Alfa Laval, HHI-Himsen, Kongsberg, Mitsubishi and Siemens. Firmin said that approval for the project was based not only on the container line’s drive to reduce emissions, but also on the basis of hard economics. Al-though nothing relating to fu-ture LNG prices is certain and the fuel supply chain still pre-sents challenges, LNG is likely to be substantially cheaper than new types of fuels required for compliance with the IMO’s 2020 sulphur cap from January 2020 onwards. Firmin also indicated that newbuilding contracts in the future would be likely to em-brace LNG propulsion. So far, the only major carrier to have contracted LNG-fuelled ULCS is CMA CGM which will start to take delivery of nine 22,000-TEU vessels from 2020.Converting an existing vessel is more complex, however, even if originally built as ‘LNG-ready’

like the Sajir was in 2014. The vessel is one of 17 LNG-ready container ships acquired by Hapag when it took over the Middle East container line UASC in 2017. There were two groups of ves-sels – six 19,870-TEU ships and eleven of about 15,000 TEU. Firmin explained that one of the smaller vessels had been chosen for the pilot project because fuel storage and man-agement, though challenging, is less complex. The Sajir is a two-island vessel, with accom-modation amidships.The fact that the 17 ships were designed with possible conver-sion to LNG in mind means that the conversion should be simpler and less expensive than it otherwise would have been. The dual-fuel MAN 9S90ME-C10.2 main engine is ready for retrofit and the Himsen auxil-iary engines are also designed for possible conversion. The Alfa Laval auxiliary boiler has a dual-fuel burner. The main switchboard has capacity for new LNG systems and space was earmarked in the engine room for gas valve units.However, the 6,700m3 GTT membrane LNG tank, to be located immediately forward of the engine room with a deck-mounted bunkering station above, is one of the conversion’s

most challenging aspects. This will result in the loss of about 300 container slots and the vessel will still have to bunker twice on a round trip between Asia and Europe. In a newbuilding design, the fuel tank and related systems would typically be located under the accommodation, which is not available for cargo anyway. In this respect, the loss of con-tainer carrying capacity, though relatively small, is a disadvantage compared with a new design. A further challenge is the ap-proval of fuelling arrangements. Individual risk assessments are required in each bunkering lo-cation, undertaken jointly with the fuel-supplying partner in that port. These assessments typically take six months each and must have been carried out in the three bunkering hubs of Shanghai, Singapore and Rot-terdam. Although experts agree that LNG as a marine fuel will not provide a means for global ship-ping to meet the IMO’s 2050 greenhouse gas targets, it is a major step forward, nonethe-less. There is more R&D to be done: the greenhouse gas inten-sity of LNG can be significantly reduced by blending synthetic natural gas or bioLNG with conventional LNG developed as a fossil fuel.

After the conversion, the container ship Sajir will run on LNG Photo: Hapag-Lloyd


SPECIAL GREENTECH OPERATIONAL OPTIMISATION


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Retrofit of icebreaker demonstrates double-digit benefitsCOMMON-RAIL TECHNOLOGY | Schönau-based Heinzmann GmbH has demonstrated the significant benefits to be gained from retrofitting diesel engines with common-rail technology. In a pilot project involving the 40-year old icebreaker Ymer, a vessel in the icebreaker fleet op-erated by the Swedish Maritime Administration (SMA), one of the ship’s five main engines was retrofitted with a common rail system to determine the pos-sible benefits to efficiency and emissions. The Pielstick 2.2 unit generating 3.5 MW originally underwent the retrofit in 2013.Since then, the scale of the benefits has become evident. During the pilot project, Heinz mann experts obtained specification data from the

ship’s original drawings, carried out an on-site survey, took on-engine measurements and built a model of the high-pressure fuel piping and rail system. The system was installed and com-missioned without any major modification to the engine itself. The retrofit included re-placement of the fuel system, mounting a local operating pan-el and integrating a Heinzmann control, monitoring and safety set-up into the ship’s existing automation system. One of the other five engines was operated under compa-rable conditions to gauge the improvement. Over a two-year test period, the Heinzmann common rail system demon-strated a fuel-saving benefit of 5%, with ship emissions meet-

ing the expected IMO Tier 1 level. A further 2.5% improve-ment in fuel economy was achieved by installing an ad-ditional turbo charger. Other advantages achieved during the upgrade were the disappear-ance of visible smoke, a 30% reduction in vibration, and a sharp reduction in maintenance costs. The retrofit of the other four main engines was completed by the end of 2016, with further efficiency gains including a re-duction of engine speed in part load from 485 rpm fixed speed to 360 rpm variable speed. This load-dependent speed mode, called ‘Green Drive’, resulted in further fuel savings in excess of 4%. A side benefit was a halving of lube oil consumption.

Upon completion of the com-missioning of all five engines, the successful integration of new systems into the ship’s ex-isting automation set-up was demonstrated during sea tri-als. During the tests at sea, the SMA was able to confirm total fuel savings of 11%. Now, simi-lar retrofits of other icebreakers in the fleet are understood to be under consideration.Heinzmann said that common rail retrofits are particularly recommended for applications with variable load and speed. This, it said, achieves the great-est benefits from advanced elec-tronic fuel injection systems. Typical returns on investment can be two years or less, assum-ing more than 5,000 operating hours a year.

www.chris-marine.com

Innovative engineering since 1962

Ensure reliable engine performance on board Make sure your crew is equipped to perform maintenance at any time!

Cylinder pressure monitoring

Fuel injector testing

Cylinder liner maintenance

Ultrasonic cleaning


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Zero-emission ships for a sustainable futureENERGY TRANSITION A new generation of vessels is being born out of the need to sustain a necessary energy transition that must occur in maritime transport, writes freelance journalist Katerina Kerr

I

n recent years the industry has witnessed countless de-bates and discussions over

sustainability in shipping and the importance of reducing CO2 emissions as the world has reached critical greenhouse gas emissions levels. The shipping industry has begun to imple-ment its own GHG reduction plans, propelled by the Interna-tional Maritime Organization’s global target of a 50% cut in ves-sel emissions by 2050 compared with levels prevailing in 2008.

Meeting these targets and transforming the shipping in-dustry is a formidable task, but it has been widely accept-ed that in order for change to take place, moving away from hydro carbons as marine fuels is a necessary step to take.

Different zero-emission ship designs are being developed and

are under consideration, includ-ing battery-powered vessels, sail designs and carbon neutral-powered ships that use fuels such as methanol and hydrogen.

Wind propulsionWindship Technology Ltd, a sail power concept that is being developed by a consortium of five experienced players in the global shipping industry, could well revolutionise the way to-morrow’s vessels carry goods across the world’s oceans.

Windship Technology-equipped ships could reduce a vessel’s annual fuel consump-tion by as much as 30%, it is claimed. That means 30% less particulates, reduced NOx and SOx, and massive CO2 savings.

The new concept, known as the Auxiliary Sail Propul-sion System (ASPS), uses

fixed-wing sail technology, whereby two 35m-high masts installed on the deck of a ves-sel will each have three aerody-namic wings fitted.

The masts rotate automati-cally to exploit the power of the prevailing wind and, as the speeds and angles of the wind change, the system develops more power, allowing less engine power to achieve the same speed and maximise fuel savings.

Seven years ago, the con-sortium approached Lloyd’s Register to give an independ-ent assessment of the ASPS. LR’s Technical Investigation Department (TID) carried out computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis on a Supramax bulk carrier in varying wind di-rections and speeds.

The results showed that ASPS has the potential to pro-

vide more than 50% of the re-quired propulsive thrust a vessel needs in the right conditions. This would mean that a typi-cal bulk carrier could save up to 30% of its fuel costs on a voyage.

Since then the company has taken on a manufacturer and is well down the line on the final structural design with one of the largest composite engineering suppliers in the world.

Windship has also per-formed further testing and completed a verification test for (an undisclosed) client, said Si-mon Rogers, an award-winning super-yacht designer and one of the people behind Windship. “We have a number of clients interested in what we are doing and are currently in discussions with various groups, but what has been exciting is we’ve been able to demonstrate that on an

Concept of the Windship vessel Source: Windship Technology Ltd


SPECIAL GREENTECH SHIP DESIGN


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

MR2 tanker travelling in 20 knots of wind at 90 degrees wind angle, we are able to sail at 100%. That means no engine thrust is required.”

The CFD analysis also found that at 25 knots from 60° through to 135°, the tanker could also sail in excess of the engine requirement. More inter-estingly, in only 10 knots of wind speed, the system produced more than 20% of the power. In ballast condition, the ship can do 9 knots ship speed on average per year with 100% sail power, which will be of particular inter-est to shipowners.

The 30% saving in average fuel consumption for a Handy/Panamax type could equate to savings of at least USD 2.5 to USD 3 million per annum which could allow the ships to return to their estimated pre-built/pre-purchased profitability, and repay investment, loans and mortgages, says Windship, not-ing that a return on investment of three years can be achieved.

“Our philosophy from day one has always been to under-promise and overdeliver,” said Rogers. “A 30% saving is our minimum and is likely to be con-siderably more depending on the route and the wind. However, on average throughout the year, you would expect to see in excess of 30% of the power generated from the wind,” said Rogers.

2018 was already a very sig-nificant year for wind propulsion and the shipping industry in gen-eral. However, major changes to vessel design using wind energy is not the only technology to be explored when eyeing sustain-able propulsion. One company is looking at developing a zero-fuel ship. That is a vessel that gener-ates its own fuel as it sails.

Hydrogen could be the answerMadadh MacLaine, CEO of Zero Emissions Maritime Tech-nology Limited, believes that hydrogen could be the answer. MacLaine is also a founding

member of the Zero Emissions Ship Technology Association, which was established in 2018 to accelerate the transition from fossil fuels.

“Here at Zero Emissions Maritime Technology we only design zero-emissions ships. To do anything else would be irre-sponsible,” she said, and this has been concurred by Windship. The company is working with several clients on designs for zero-fuel ships. The concept is fairly simple. The primary mode of propulsion is using wind as a direct renewable and then cap-turing any excess energy. The concept includes battery stor-age and hydrogen production through PEM (proton exchange membrane) electrolyser tech-nology to generate electrical propulsion power.

PEM electrolysis converts excess stored energy from bat-teries into hydrogen by separat-ing hydrogen atoms from oxy-gen in water molecules. When this hydrogen is burned it pro-duces water as exhaust, so it is green hydrogen in production and consumption. Some of the power will be used by an on-board desalination plant.

“All of the technologies used in the zero-fuel ship design are evolved, market-ready and al-ready in use in some form. Some are not to scale and some of them have never been used in shipping,” said Mac Laine.

“For example, electrolysis has been used in shipping on the Energy Observer but not to the scale required in commercial shipping. However, land-based PEM electrolysis has reached 10 MW, a scale much greater than that which would be required for on board hydrogen production in commercial shipping.”

She said that it is the same case with low temperature PEM fuel cells. “1 MW fuel cells have been used in station-ery applications for some time. This is why we need research and development funding and a regulatory environment

that will level the playing field enough so that this technology can upsize and begin to reach economies of scale.”

However, one of the biggest issues with hydrogen is cost and volume. MacLaine explained that a speed limit would reduce the amount of fuel required for a voyage. Reducing the amount of fuel required for a voyage di-rectly affects volume and cost, thereby allowing the uptake of hydrogen as a fuel.

“If you add wind propul-sion to that, you then decrease even further your need for fuel, reducing all of the issues around cost, demand, volume of storage on the ship, bringing us closer to a zero-emissions fleet. I know that the speed reduction issue is much more complex than that, but this is how it could impact the uptake of zero-emissions ship technologies.

“By only designing zero-emissions ships at ZEM Tech

we’re pushing the edge on it. We don’t allow ourselves to look at any other option than the zero option and by looking at only the zero option we begin to see all of the possibilities for bring-ing together zero-emission ship technologies into turnkey solu-tions. This is the reason why I have founded the Zero Emis-sions Ship Technology Associa-tion. Zero plus zero equals zero.”

It is no secret that regula-tions will be required to create a level playing field for any tech-nology competing with HFO. Demand for green fuels will in-crease and regulation from the EU and IMO is already playing a part in that.

Some expect to see market measures that will see the big polluters receive penalties for emissions, not only of NOx and SOx, but CO2 as well. Sustain-able ship designs could be the way forward for the shipping in-dustry to clean up.

Zum Kühlhaus 5 · 18069 RostockPhone +49(0)381 - [email protected]

Ocean Clean GmbH

USCG APPROVED

Onboard Waste Handling: Vacuum Food-Waste SystemsBale Compactor · Bag - and Tin Compactor · Glass Crusher · Incineration Systems

Sales - and Servicepartner of


DIRECTIVE


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Innovative RoRo designs KNUD E. HANSEN | The Hels-ingør-based firm of naval archi-tects, Knud E. Hansen, has won two separate contracts for inno-vative large RoRo vessels to be built in China. Wallenius-SOL has ordered up to four ultra-large, LNG-fuelled RoRo ves-sels, built to a Knud E. Hansen design, at Yantai CIMC Raffles Offshore Ltd. Meanwhile, Chi-na’s Nanjing Jinling Shipyard has signed up for the design of three large RoRo vessels based on a modified version of the existing Finnlines/Grimaldi/Knud E. Hansen design. The Wallenius-SOL project will involve the Danish design firm providing the engineering pack-age for the ships’ construction and subsequent approval by the classification society and flag state authorities. The 5,800 lane-metre vessels, with 1A Super ice

class and a speed of 20 knots, have a deadweight of 27,000 tonnes and a length of 242m. Not only will they be the largest in their class, but they will also be the first RoRo ships in this size range to be powered by LNG. During port calls, the ships will use green electricity from shore or LNG, giving them a favour-able carbon footprint whilst also eliminating other harmful emissions. The ships represent the fourth series of ultra-large RoRo vessels designed by Hansen since 2016.Gothenburg-based Wallenius-SOL, a Swe dish company founded by Wallenius and Swed-ish Orient Line early in 2019, transports forestry products and other goods in a network cover-ing the Gulf of Bothnia, the Bal-tic Sea and the North Sea. The company was set up to strength-

en transport infrastructure for Finnish and Swedish industry by way of long-term agreements with cargo customers. Meanwhile, the Finnlines RoRo designs are based on Grimaldi Green 5th Generation vessels and are therefore sister vessels to existing ships but adapted to meet the needs of the Finnish company in terms of the high-est Finnish/Swedish ice class, 1A Super-class, and heavy car-go operation in cold climates. Due for delivery from 2021,

the 238m-long vessels will also have a capacity of 5,800 lane metres, with 5,000m2 of space on the vehicle decks. Innovative features on board these ships will include large lithium batteries ensuring zero emissions in port and charged by shaft generators during navi-gation though a peak-shaving system. Resistance of the ships’ hulls will be reduced by a Silver-stream air lubrication system, which generates a thin layer of bubbles under the hull.

Design of the RoRo vessel for Finnlines Source: Knud E. Hansen

Harnessing the power of wind

SAIL TECHNOLOGY | By expand-ing its broad range of environ-mentally-friendly products and systems for the maritime indus-try, Becker Marine Systems is now focusing on wind-operated vessels and has introduced an innovative sail technology that will harness the power of the wind in a car carrier design.

“We will see different hybrid systems on board vessels in the future. There will be ships and services where sailing pro-vides a real option for support-ing propulsion,“ said Henning Kuhlmann, managing director of Becker Marine Systems.The company is developing the highly efficient Becker Wing Sail

which will generate significant forward thrust on commercial vessels. Becker believes that a ship’s operating profile may well have to be adapted to harness wind power and weather rout-ing will play an important role. However, there is, nevertheless, significant potential for reduc-ing a vessel‘s fuel consumption.The key partner for this develop ment is Stockholm-based Wallenius Marine. The latest design of a modern car carrier contains four large Becker Wing Sails each with an area of more than 1,000m2. In optimal conditions, the sails will be able to propel the ves-sel at speeds of up to ten knots without engine support, the company claims.The Becker Wing Sail will con-sist of two vertical sections, forming an aerodynamic foil.

According to the company, it is a great advantage that the wing sails can be operated at a small angle towards the apparent wind, enabling the vessel to use the wing sails on most courses. In order to pass under bridges, provide safe operation in port and ‘reef ’ the system in harsh conditions, Becker has devel-oped a special lay-down device for the new technology.The company‘s high-end rud-ders and energy-saving devices are a benchmark for efficiency and performance of manoeu-vring and energy-saving sys-tems. As Becker continues to develop emission-reducing initiatives in the maritime in-dustry, the company also offers LNG-based cold-ironing sys-tems (Becker LNG PowerPac®) and Compact Marine Battery Systems (COBRA).

Four wing sails will provide sufficient power to propel the vessel at speeds of up to 10 knots in ideal conditions without engine support

Sour

ce: B

ecke

r Mar

ine

Syst

ems


SPECIAL GREENTECH SHIP DESIGN


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Our IMO type-approved ballast water treatment unit, InvaSave 300, provides port operators, waste-disposal companies and ship owners with a new value-adding service.

The InvaSave can be used to treat ballast water for: contingency measures, unmanned barges, shipyards, FPSOs, older vessels, intermediate solutions.

With InvaSave technology, ballast water only needs treating at the point ofdischarge, in contrast to on-board installations.

DAMEN INVASAVE 300

DAMENGREEN.COM

Sometimes innovation is about thinking inside the box.

InvaSave, Damen's unique, mobile ballast water receptioncontainer is available in more and more ports and from stock.


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Recommendations to address the commissioning challengeUNIT TESTING Since the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments entered into force on September 8th 2017, shipowners have accelerated efforts to purchase and install ballast water management systems as a means of meeting the discharge standard. In order to validate their functionality, the systems have to undergo various testing procedures before they can be type approved. As a given system is installed on as ship, commissioning testing is conducted, as described in the following article by Lisa A. Drake, Peter P. Stehouwer, and Gerd Schneider from SGS Global Marine Services, an international inspection, verification, testing, and certification company.

E

very ballast water management sys-tem (BWMS) design must undergo rigorous land-based, shipboard, and

environmental testing before it is type- approved by an administration. Further-more, when every unit is installed on board, it must undergo commissioning tests, fol-lowing IMO guidance. The stated purpose of commissioning testing is: “to validate the installation of a ballast water management system by demonstrating that its mechani-cal, physical, chemical and biological pro-cesses are working properly” [1]. In general, until now, commissioning testing of BWMS has largely been in the form of functional tests (to confirm hydraulic and electrical in-tegrity) and operational checks (for exam-ple, to test alarms) without a direct evalua-tion of biological performance. A challenge is to ensure that the commissioning yields meaningful results for the shipowner.

SamplingTwo types of samples are stipulated in

the IMO commissioning guidance: intake and discharge. Intake samples may be col-lected using “any means practical (e.g., in-line sample port or direct harbour sample)”. That is, a bucket sample collected from the harbour water adjacent to the ship may be collected and analysed.

This is problematic because, first, the sample will most likely not be obtained at the same water depth that the ship’s sea chest will take in water. If so, the sample will not be similar to the water pumped into the ballast tank. Also, using a bucket sam-ple will not collect a representative sample as compared with an in-line sample probe properly installed in the ship’s intake pip-ing. Most ships, however, do not have an in-line sample port on the uptake piping. Collecting an in-tank sample should not be

Figure 1: SGS Inspector collecting ballast water samples using the portable Ballast Water Sampler (BWS1) designed, developed, and validated by SGS

0003

3

Solutions for water and wastewater engineeringOptimal water quality requires reliable technology. Don‘t accept any compromises when it comes to precise as well as reliable measurement and control technology that is especially customized for hygienically sensitive areas. Count on 70 years of quality,a high level of commitment, and outstanding industry expertise.

www.industry.jumo.info


SPECIAL GREENTECH BALLAST WATER


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

done, as nearly all BWMS treat water upon uptake, so collecting a sample from the tank will be treated to some degree and there-fore not representative of untreated water.

It should be noted that any concentra-tion of organisms in the intake water is ac-ceptable according to the IMO guidance. Intake samples should, however, contain enough organisms to represent a chal-lenge to the BWMS. If intake water already meets the discharge standard, little, if any, information will be gained regarding the BWMS’s biological efficacy.

The discharge sample – treated, dis-charged water – must correspond to the in-take water. This means that the water sam-pled on discharge from the tank(s) must be the same water that was sampled upon intake. Depending on the ship’s operations and the holding time for ballast water treat-ment that is stipulated on the type approval certificate (e.g., 24 hours), the intake and discharge sampling may not be able to oc-cur on the same day or in the same location. Changing the sampling location will not affect the results, but it will affect the cost of commissioning testing, as two sampling events (rather than one) will be necessary.

The discharge samples are to be col-lected according to IMO Guidelines (G2) (2008), which state “…the quantity and quality of samples taken should be suffi-cient to demonstrate whether the ballast water being discharged meets the relevant standard”. In effectively treated water, the largest size class of organisms will be of very low density (<10 organisms/m3), so to obtain statistically meaningful results, this means that a relatively large volume of water (1-3m3) needs to be filtered and analysed (Figure 1).

Determining biological efficacyThe recent IMO guidance (BWM.2/Circ.70) includes “indicative” biological evaluations of (1) all three size classes that are (2) consistent with the actions that may occur during Port State Control inspec-tions in the future. In the IMO framework, biological evaluations may be “indicative” or “detailed”. Here, indicative tests are car-ried out relatively quickly, and they can be a first step (before detailed analyses) to determine potentially if a ship is in com-pliance. These tests may be an indirect measure of the organisms (e.g., measuring a fluorescence signal to calculate the density of organisms in a sample), or they may be a direct count of the organisms (with low precision or high detection limits).

Detailed analyses are more compli-cated, typically requiring more expertise, and they yield a precise, direct count of the density of organisms. Because a ship – at some time in the future – may be assessed with detailed analyses, it is prudent to use detailed analyses during commissioning testing. Furthermore, the additional effort and cost of conducting detailed analyses in addition to indicative analyses is relatively modest. Regardless, all analyses – whether indicative or detailed – need to be carried out by an accredited laboratory.

Other considerationsAlso included in the commissioning guid-ance is the evaluation of “self-monitoring parameters” and “System Design Limita-tion (SDL) parameters” of BWMS type-approved according to the BWMS Code (MEPC.300(72), adopted on April 13th 2018). The self-monitoring parameters are measurements collected automatically by the BWMS to ensure it is operating cor-rectly. The SDLs are defined by the BWMS vendor and place limits on its use (e.g., in water of a given salinity).

Finally, during commissioning test-ing, all BWMS sensors must be confirmed to be working correctly. Given the critical importance of these components, though, it is essential that their ongoing function-ality is confirmed, ideally by verifying the sensors’ calibration. Key sensors, for exam-ple, the flow meter, total residual oxidant (TRO) sensor, and the ultraviolet (UV)

light sensor, must work correctly to deliver the appropriate dose of active substance or disinfection to inactivate, kill, or remove organisms effectively.

RecommendationsAs discussed above, a number of decision points exist in the commissioning process (Figure 2). Regarding the type of uptake samples, to obtain meaningful results, it is recommended that the uptake water has densities of organisms in the two largest size classes that are at least ten-fold higher than the discharge standard. Therefore, if results are in compliance (below the dis-charge standard), that result can be attrib-uted to the BWMS, not merely to water that does not present a challenge to the BWMS. Likewise, if possible, the uptake water should be sampled from an in-line sample port rather than a surface sample collected close to the ship.

The IMO guidance stipulates that indic-ative analyses are conducted. However, due to (1) the large added value of the results of detailed analysis, (2) the large effort associat-ed in collecting samples of sufficient volume in the ≥50 µm size class for either indicative or detailed analyses, and (3) the relatively minor cost and effort in adding detailed analysis methods, it is recommended that commissioning samples are analysed using both indicative and detailed analysis meth-ods. In this way, and with not much more effort or cost, owners choosing detailed analyses will have more confidence that >

BALLAST WATER TREATMENTPlanning, Engineering, Sales and Service

[email protected]

USCG TYPE APPROVED


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Uptake Sample:Suitable Ballast Water Sample Port Installed on Intake Line? Yes/No

Yes: Intake sample taken directly from intake line using sample port

No: Intake sample taken from harbour water

Challenge Water:

Minimum Density of Organisms

inconclusive regarding BWMS efficacy

meaningful on BWMS efficacy

Uptake Sample:Mimimum Holding Time of Ballast Water Management System and Ship Operations

same day

on separate days

Analysis Methods:Indicative Methods or Both Indicative and Detailed Methods?Indicative/Both (Indicative and Detailed)

Indicative: Minimum required information on BMWS performance

Both: Full information on BMWS performance

their investment in a BWMS provides the intended result than owners who opt to use only indicative analyses.

As far as the system’s sensors are con-cerned, it is recommended that a verifi-cation of calibration of critical sensors is conducted. This step is warranted because these components are not only part of the BWMS, but they aslo drive the equipment and the outcome of treatment. At a mini-mum, a review of the manufacturer’s cali-bration certificate is a must, and if it is not available, a calibration verification is the minimum requirement to determine if the system works properly.

Reference:[1] MEPC 73/WP.10, 2018

Parameter Limit

Organisms ≥ 50 µm (typically zooplankton) <10 viable organisms/m3

Organisms ≥10 µm and <50 µm (typically phytoplankton) <10 viable organisms/ml

Organisms <10 µm (3 indicator bacteria and pathogens)

Escherichia coli <250 cfu/100-ml

Enterococci <100 cfu/100-ml

Vibrio cholerae*<1 cfu/100 or<1 cfu/1g (wet weight) of zooplankton samples

Within the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Ballast Water Management Conven-tion, Regulation D-2 sets stringent limits on the allowable density of viable organisms that may be discharged in ships’ ballast water (Table 1).

Table 1: IMO Regulation D-2 discharge standard for viable organisms

Figure 2: Options for sampling and analysis during compliance testing of ballast water management systems


SPECIAL GREENTECH BALLAST WATER


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

SUBSCRIPTION/DISTRIBUTIONDirector Sales + MarketingMarkus Kukuk+49 40 23714 291 | [email protected]‘/Subscribers‘ Service+49 40 23714 260 | [email protected]

SUBSCRIPTION TERMSThe minimum subscription period is one year. Subscriptions may be terminated at the end of any subscription period by giving six weeks‘ notice. The publishers accept no liability if it is not possible to publish the magazine due to force majeur or any other cause beyond their control. Additional digital subscriptionsAcquisition on request.

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATESAbonnementGermany EUR 125.00 (plus 7% VAT) per year | outside Germany EUR 159.00 per year; Single copy EUR 26.00 (incl. VAT). GMT members receive the magazine within their membership.

PRINTING HOUSESilber Druck OHG, Lohfelden

COPYRIGHTby DVV Media Group, Hamburg, Germany It is not permitted to publish, distribute or reproduce any part of this magazine without the publishers‘ prior written permission. This prohibition extends, in particular, to any form of commercial copying, inclusion in electronic databases or distribution including electronic databases or distribution in any electronic format, such as CD-ROMs or DVDs.ISSN: 2191-0057

MEMBER

PUBLISHER DVV Media Group GmbH Postbox 10 16 09, D-20038 Hamburg Heidenkampsweg 73-79, D-20097 Hamburg +49 40 237 14 - 02

MANAGING DIRECTORMartin Weber

PUBLISHING DIRECTORManuel Bosch [email protected]

EDITORIAL STAFFEditor-in-ChiefDr.-Ing. Silke Sadowski +49 40 237 14 143 | [email protected] Editor-in-ChiefKathrin Lau +49 40 237 14 237 | [email protected]

ADVERTISINGAdvertising Director Florian Visser +49 40 237 14 117 | [email protected] SalesLisanne-Christin Groß +49 40 23714 248 | [email protected] DepartmentVera Hermanns+49 40 23714 293 | [email protected]

Advertising rate card: No 11 valid from January, the 1st, 2019

ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVESGermany, Austria, Switzerland Florian Visser +49 40 237 14 117 | [email protected] Örn Marketing AB +46 411 18400 | [email protected], Ireland Bernard Steel +44 1444 414293 | [email protected] Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand Alan Ross + 852 28714282 | [email protected] Netherlands, Belgium, Italy Tony Russell Stein +44 1892 512777 | [email protected] Marimark Pte Ltd., John Bodill +65 6719 8022 | [email protected] Sherry Fang Simin, Shanghai +86 21 54256515 | simin [email protected]

Alfa Laval Nijmegen BV, NL-Nijmegen 25

Chris-Marine AB, SE-Malmö 39

Damen Shipyards Group, NL-Gorinchem 43

DNV GL SE, DE-Hamburg 11

DVV Media Group, DE-Hamburg 4

Hempel A/S, DK-KGS. Lyngby 37

IMES GmbH, DE-Kaufbeuren 15

JUMO GmbH & Co.KG, DE-Fulda 44

MAN Energy Solutions SE, DE-Augsburg 9

Mecklenburger Metallguß GmbH, DE-Waren IFC

Ocean Clean GmbH, DE-Rostock 41

Reintjes GmbH, DE-Hameln 5

Shell Eastern Trading, Singapore BC

Zeppelin Power Systems GmbH & Co. KG, DE-Hamburg 45

> IMPRINT

> ADVERTISERS

www.shipandoffshore.net www.schiffundhafen.de

www.dvvmedia.com

Center of Maritime Technologies e. V.

German Association for Marine Technology

SHIP&OFFSHORE IS OFFICIAL ORGAN OF THE ASSOCIATIONS:


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

Shell Marine

IMO 2020 READYWe offer a range of lubricants and a suite of technical solutions to help you comply with IMO 2020 specifications.

www.shell.com/marine


sönl

iche

Aus

gabe

, , D

VV

Med

ia G

roup

Gm

bH B

eleg

exem

plar

, Ham

burg

, Kd.

Nr.

: 910

1010

10, A

bo-N

r. 5

2192

5. W

eite

rgab

e an

Drit

te u

rheb

erre

chtli

ch u

nter

sagt

.

special greentech · our planet – shipowners and suppliers cooperate on greener al - ternatives...

Documents