“Fuels of the future - cimac.com · HAZOP 2007 none DNV DSME Doosan MAN Diesel Burckhardt HAZOP 2007 Nov. BG,APM,SHELL,YLNG,Q-GAS, Teekay,BP ABS SHI Doosan MAN DIESEL Burckhardt

“Fuels of the future –What will come next after HFO?”

Chair Nikolaos Kyrtatos NTUA Introduction

Engine Maker Kjeld Aabo MAN DIESEL&TURBO Trends in emissions regulations

Oil Industry Paul de Hoog SHELL Conventional & alternative fuels production

User / Operator Naoyuki Ohno NYK LINE LSF/MGO: modifications needed, issues

Research Institute

Per Magne Einang

MARINTEK Alternative fuels & power options, LNG

Engine Maker Mikael Troberg WÄRTSILÄ Engine issues with LSF, biofuels, gas…

User / Operator Jorn Kahle A.P. MØLLER Future fuels: Logistics, operation challenges

Panel : “Fuels of the future -What will come next after HFO?”

© MAN Diesel & Turbo < 1 >

Fuels of the Future –What will come next after HFO.

Kjeld AaboMarine Low Speed

Copenhagen

Trends in emission regulation

CIMAC 2010, Bergen

© MAN Diesel & Turbo < 2>

• Safety• Optimum engine layout• High efficiency/low fuel consumption• Low operation cost (MTBO)• Reliability/availability

• Exhaust gas emission considerationTodays driver of development

Marked demand to engine builders

© MAN Diesel & Turbo

IMO NOx Limit Curves Tier I, II & III

Tier I: (global)

Tier II: 2011 (global)

Tier III: 2016 (ECA’s)

- 20 %

- 80 %

1990-1999 enginesTier I

3

- 15 %


MEPC 57 Fuel-Sulfur Content Proposal

4


1. Singapore

5. South Korea, Busan

9. Germany, Hamburg

10. China, Qingdao

6. Netherl., Rotterdam

2. China, Shanghai

8. Taiwan, Kaohsiung

7. UAE, Dubai

3. China, Hong Kong

4. China, Shenzhen

Existing ECAs: Baltic Sea, North Sea

Planned ECAs: Coasts of USA, Hawaii and Canada (2012 )

Top Container Ports :

Discussed ECAs: Coasts of Mexico, Coasts of Alaska and Great Lakes, Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, Australia, Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea (2014), Tokyo Bay (in 2015)

Most used trading routes

Emission TrendEmission Restricted Areas by IMO – ECAs in 07/2009


International ShippingSOx, NOx, CO2 and GHG Emission

IMO emission legislation, the big challenges for international shippingSOx: Regulation decidedNOx : Regulation decidedECAs: Not decidedCO2: Items discussedCO2: Design index EEDICO2: Operational Index EEOIMarket based instruments:Global bunker levy (tax)CO2 credits

6

GHG

CO2

NOx

SOx


Fuel cost versus CO2 emission

7


Low sulphur fuel

Use of low-sulphur crude oil, but limited availability Blending of fuels is a possibility, and is done today Desulphurisation of HFO

According to the major fuel companies :Much better investment to build high-efficient refineries that can produce more valuable products such as gasoline, diesel and LPG than to build desulphurisation plants for HFO.


MAN Investigation in Scrubber Technology

Objectives Participants Scrubber Goals Test results Ship test Ship test

Development and test of

scrubber for after-treatment

Clean Marine

MAN Diesel

PM trapping:

>90%

SOX removal:

>67%

PM trapping:

35%

80% (salts add.)

SOX removal:

73%

95% (salts add.)

M.V. Banasol

7S50MC-C

9MW



Aalborg Industries

Alfa Laval

DFDS

MAN Diesel

PM trapping:

>75%

SOX removal:

>95%

PM trapping:

79%

SOX removal:

100% (NaOH)

Tor Ficaria

9L60MC-C

20MW



and EGR

APM

MAN Diesel

PM trapping:

>75%

SOX removal:

>90%

PM trapping:

73%

SOX removal :

96% (NaOH)

Alexander

7S50MC

9MW

9

© MAN Diesel & Turbo10

Aalborg Industries & DFDSExhaust Gas Scrubber Retrofit Project

RO RO vessel M/V Tor Ficaria

•20MW MAN B&W two-stroke engine•Operating in SECA on MDO•Exhaust gas scrubber permits HFO operation•Expected payback time less than two years


Sources of Bio Fuel Renewable / vegetable Oil

Palm Oil

Castor Bean

Rape Seed

SoyaConsists of 40 – 50% usable Oil

© MAN Diesel & Turbo 12

Brake 7L35MC-S - CHP Plant


Bio fuels are a real alternative !

But you need a lot.


Container ShipsGas as fuel

14

LNG fuel supply system

Main Engine ME-GI

LNG tank HFO tank ( shown only for size comparison)

•IHI type B tanks low pressure tanks, BOR 0,2 %/day

•TGE type C tanks 4-9 barg pressure (up till 50 travelling days) BOR 0,21-0,23 %/day

Containment systems for LNGLNG fuel supply system


Components to be Modified:ME-GI Compared to a ME Engine

Exhaust receiver

Cylinder cover

Valve block

ELGI valve

Double wall gas pipes

FIVA

15

© MAN Diesel & Turbo 16

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Process

L/72695-0.0/0302 (2160/PZS)

Exhaust gasNO2

N2H O2

NO

NN

N N

N

N

N N

N

NN

N

O

O

OO

H

H

H

HH

H

HH

H

H

4NO + 4NH + O = 4N + 6H 03 2 2 26NO + 8NH = 7N + 12H O2 3 2 2

NH3

40% urea solution CO (NH ) 5(H O)2 2 2

.


EGR – Exhaust Gas RecirculationOngoing full scale test 7S50MC.


Future perspective of EGR integration in engine design: 7S50ME-B9

EGR Integration


Safety Investigations

HAZID / HAZOP Engine room explosion study

HAZID / HAZOP

Double Wall Piping

Engine Piping Vibrations

Gas Pressure fluctuations

Gas control simulation

Gas / Fuel injectors reliability

Item Date Owners Class Ship Yard Engine Builder Engine Designer Other Subsuppliers

HAZOP 2006 none DNV HHI HHI EMD MAN Diesel Burckhardt

HAZOP 2007 none DNV DSME Doosan MAN Diesel Burckhardt

HAZOP 2007 Nov. BG,APM,SHELL,YLNG,Q-GAS, Teekay,BP

ABS SHI Doosan MAN DIESEL Burckhardt

HAZOP 2009 Jan. EXXON MOBILE ABS DSME Doosan MAN DIESEL Cryostar Burckhardt

HAZOP 2009 Jan. BG ABS SHI Doosan MAN DIESEL Cryostar Burckhardt

fwd

Ventilation


Natural Gas Supply and Demand

ME-GI for propulsion of LNG Carriers

Source: Exxon Mobile Energy Outlook 2030December 2009


30% Increase of LPG

production is expected

in 2013.

How will this affect the

LPG price?

LPG is a By-product of LNG Production, so LPG Production is not Driven by Demand


Diesel or Alternatives?

< 22 33366965.2010.05.04 (OG/LS)

Fuel cells

Nuclear power

Kite Power

Solar cells

Will take long time to develop , if ever.

Why is Diesel engines selected ?

High efficiency

Low cost fuel used, easy fuel access

High reliability and safety

Low investment cost

Our Diesel will Prevail for many years, with different fuels.


ME-GI Development Plan

3336924.2010.04.28 (KEA/LSP)


Thank you for

your attention

Thank you for

your attention

CIMAC Bergen 2010

We believe that next important fuel in the marine marked, will be LNG and LPG.

Copyright of Shell Global Solution International BV. 1June 2010

Conventional & alternative liquid & gasfuel sources and production to 2030

CIMAC World Congress, Bergen 2010

Panel Session

Paul de Hoog

Shell Global Solutions International BV


Disclaimer statement

This presentation contains forward-looking statements concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Royal Dutch Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Royal Dutch Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘will’’, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘risks’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘should’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in theforward-looking statements included in this Report, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for the Group’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserve estimates; (f) loss of market and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments including potential litigation and regulatory effects arising from recategorisation of reserves;(k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, project delay or advancement, approvals and cost estimates; and (m) changes in trading conditions. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this presentation. Neither Royal Dutch Shell nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this document. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proved reserves that a company has demonstrated by actual production or conclusive formation tests to be economically and legally producible under existing economic and operating conditions. We use certain terms in this presentation, such as “oil in place" that the SEC's guidelines strictly prohibit us from including in filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575 and disclosure in our Forms 6-K file No, 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov. You can also obtain these forms from the SEC by calling 1-800-SEC-0330.

- The Energy Challenge- Legislation will shape future marine fuels- How will the marine energy mix evolve?

Conventional & alternative liquid & gas fuel sources and production to 2030

Outline

3


THE ENERGY CHALLENGE WILL IMPACT MARINE FUELS

� Surge in energy demand

� Supply will struggle to keep pace

� Environmental stressesare increasing


COMPLEX ECONOMIC SIGNALS WILL HELP DEFINE MARINE FUEL EVOLUTION

Will new refinery projects and expansions be delayed to take advantage of an expectation of lower materials costs and to avoid periods where demand growth is low ?

Will Fuel Oil be converted to maximise middle distillate production ?

Will refinery capacity additions and current infrastructure capability outpace demand growth through to 2015 and beyond ?

5


REFINERIES NEED INVESTMENT LEADTIME

We could find that when 2020 arrives much of the refining infrastructure may look as it does today.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Projectimplementation

Turnaroundcycle

Time [years]

Feasibility& Scouting

Engineering&Construction

(see Benchmarking)Refineries operate 4-6 year Turnaround cycles

Minimum lead time for implementation of projects in multiple refineries


INCREASED FOCUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

Climate change is the next big challenge for shipping

New designs & new practices required

There are no “silver bullets”

7


ENERGY DEMAND BY THE SHIPPING INDUSTRYTHE PATH TO THE FUTURE IS NOT STRAIGHTFORWARD

Reduced environmental impact

CatalysisCarbonCapture

?

Scrubbing

Exhaust Cleaning

Efficiency

Routing

Hulldesign

SchedulingEmissions

TradingLNG/CNG

Hi SulphurRFO

Lo SulphurRFO

Gen 1Bio

Gen 2Bio

Nuclear

Wind

Solar

LSGas oil

Hydrogen

Energy Source:

Engine design

Legislation and consensus


FUTURE ENERGY SOLUTIONS WILL DEPEND ON:

Legislation and incentives that encourages investment in technological solutions

Understanding how world energy demand will develop and how refiners will respond.

The shipping industry and stakeholders appetite to tackle environmental stress with a wide range of measures

1

1

Fuels of the Future- Challenges of NYK Line -

Naoyuki OhnoCorporate Officer Technical Headquarters NYK Line

CIMAC Congress 2010 Bergen, 17 June 2010

2

Ｃｏｎｔｅｎｔｓ

Creation of measures for

low-sulfur fuel

Total reduction of emissions- Not only SOx but also CO2 and NOx -

2

3

AssumptionsVessels should have the following:

Both residual fuel at global cap areas and distillate fuel at ECAs until 2020/2025.

Only distillate fuel in all sea areas after 2020/2025.

To establish proper operation procedures

To modify machinery specifications

4

MARPOL

EU, CARB 0.1%S

Low-sulfur-fuel Legislation

Distillate fuelGlobal cap after 2020/25

ECA after 2015

Residual fuelGlobal cap until 2020/25

ECA until 2015

Residual&

DistillateFuel

Phase 1 Phase 2

Global cap

3

5

Residual fuel Distillate fuel

MARPOL

Low-sulfur-fuel Legislation

Residual+

Distillate

Modify spec.

Retrofit

Newbuildings

New design

Phase 1 Phase 2Newbuildings

Global cap

Existing vessels

6

Outlines of Modification Existing vessels

Replace, retrofit and add on:

Pipelines, machinery, tanks, safety & protection devices and instruments, lubricating oils, etc.

Newbuildings

Modify and newly design:

Specifications of machinery, pipelines, arrangement and capacity of tanks, etc.

Additional cost

4

7

For increasing MGO consumption Increase capacity of MGO storage tanks (e.g. Modify existing HFO

storage-tank arrangement)

Separately arrange MGO transfer line to prevent contamination with HFO

Increase capacity of MGO service tank

For properties of MGO Replace/retrofit parts of existing oil pumps

Replace/retrofit boiler burning equipment and instruments

Add on chilling unit for MGO temperature control

Add on safety & protection devices and instruments (e.g., double-shut valves, double-flame detector of boiler)

Change grade of M/E cyl oil and/or G/E system oil

Main Points of Modification

8

G/E

HFOStor. Tk

M/E

MGOStor. Tk

Boiler

Pump

Burning Equipment

Additional MGO Stor.Tk

Cylinder oil

HTR

MGOServ. TK

Pump

Pump Pump

MGO CLR

New trans. line

Modification

HFO Serv. TK

System oil

Additional MGO stor. TK

Capacity up

Outlines of Modification for “Phase 1”

Return

5

9

G/E

MGOStor. Tk

M/E

MGOStor. Tk

Boiler

PumpAdditional

MGO Stor.Tk

MGOServ. TK

Pump

Pump Pump

MGOServ. TK

Outlines of Modification for “Phase 2”

Return

CLR

10

Impacts on Machinery- Caused by properties of MGO -

Low lubricity

- Sticking/wearing down of fuel-injection pump

Low viscosity

- Leakage from fuel-injection pump, oil-pump sealing

Low flashpoint and high volatility

- Risk of an outbreak of a fire

High detergency

- Clogging FO filter with sludge accumulated in pipelines

6

11

“Leakage from pump sealing”

“Serious damage to plunger”

Hard to find due to transparency

12

Correlation of Vis with HFRR*

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

0 1 2 3 4 5

Viscosity （cSt）

HFRR

（μm

）

- OEM recommendation – Less than 460µm (HFRR)

- New ISO 8217 – Less than 520µm (HFRR)

- Engine manuf. recommended Vis– More than 2 cSt @M/E inlet

Above 460µm(6 / 52 samples)

Data : 2010 JAN - APR

*HFRR : High Frequency Reciprocating Rig

7

13

Advantage of MGO Use Engine condition

Maintain combustion chamber of the engine in good condition

Less maintenance work and cost-savings

- Extension of MTBO

- Almost free of waste-oil treatment

- Simple machinery arrangement in the engine room

(HFO purifier, heating steam, waste-oil treatment, etc.)

14

Exhaust Gas Cleanup Technology- Scrubber as an alternative method -

Benefit

- Lower fuel cost compared with MGO

Concern

- Developing system

- Criteria of discharge water

- Extra space in the engine room

Expecting development of scrubberwhich will be matched for our needs.

8

15

Summary1, Proper operation procedures for changeover fuel should be

established.

2, MGO will be mainly used after 2020/25.

3, Machinery specifications should be modified.

4, Stable supply of MGO will be required. (300 mil tons/year?)

5, Modification cost, namely environmental cost, is an essential investment for the company.

6, MGO is partly an advantage for the engines.

7, Development of a practicable scrubber as an alternative method is expected.

8, Gas/dual fuel engines, and the infrastructure of LNG supply, as an alternative method, are also expected.

16Reduction of approximately 50%Reduction of approximately 50%

Ship DesignEnergy Savings

27%

EnginesEnergy Savings

16%

Prompt Handling of Cargo

Energy Savings

8%

Solar PowerGeneration

Energy Savings

1%

Ship Operation Improvement of

Energy Efficiency

5%

OtherEnergy Savings

1%

Total Reduction of Emissions- Not only SOx but also CO2 and NOx -

9

17

SOLAR PANEL

DC

POWER CONVERTER

DC ⇒ AC

AC

MAIN LINE (440VAC)

M/V Auriga Leader


Solar power generation

18

The NYK Group pioneered the development and application of the 6.6 kV AMP system at the port of Los Angeles, ahead of other companies.

Fixed or mobile


AMP: Alternative Maritime Power

10

19

The NYK Group has decided to equip all large container vessels w/ AMP.

This system and method can improve the harbor environment.


AMP: Alternative Maritime Power

20

- NYK Super Eco Ship 2030 -

Our concept ship of the future

Total Reduction of Emissions

11

21

- Load map for zero emission -Total Reduction of Emissions

22

Thank you for your kind attention.

The Earth is Our Home

Fuels of the future – what will come next after HFOFuels of the future – what will come next after HFOAlternative fuels and power sours options

Time span 2010 - 2030Time span 2010 - 2030

Per Magne EinangResearch Director

MARINTEKwww.marintek.com

MARINTEK 1

CIMAC Bergen 2010

Alternative fuelsLong list of alternative fuels:

Bio fuel (fame)( )GTL (synthetic diesel oil)DMEHydrogenGas (LNG, LPG)Gas (LNG, LPG)…

To make a difference the fuel have to be available world wideTo make a difference the fuel have to be available world wideand be economical viable

Based on that and the time frame in question, LNG isconsider to be the only alternative fuel to MGO and HFO

MARINTEK

consider to be the only alternative fuel to MGO and HFO

2

Large LNG terminals in Europe

MARINTEK 3

LNG distributionLNG distribution

Source: Gasnor

Existing ships for distribution of LNG in Norway Capacity of 7500 and 1100 m3 LNG

MARINTEK 4

Ship to ship LNG transferp p

LNG transfer by hoses

MARINTEK 5

Storage of LNG on board the ship

MARINTEK 6

LNG powered RoRo freight ship (gas only)Two ships under construction for delivery in 2011-12

Vacuum isolated pressure storage tanks – a factor 4-5 times HFO

MARINTEK 7

Tailor made LNG Fuel tank systemsStorage factor 2-3 times HFO

Anchor handlers Passenger ferries Container carriers

Ro-Ro vesselsOil TankersCruise ships

MARINTEK

...and many other sectors. Bespoke design. Under development now.

Power source options - LNGPower source options LNG

No obvious candidates to piston engines

Fuel cells? – could be possible as auxiliary power

MARINTEK 9

Gas engine concepts – 4 strokeGas engine concepts 4 stroke

Lean Burn spark ignited (gas only)Lean Burn spark ignited (gas only)Dual Fuel low pressure gas (5 bar)

Both can meet IMO tier III and have a significant potential forBoth can meet IMO tier III and have a significant potential forGHG reduction (methane slip must be reduced)

Dual Fuel high pressure gas (about 350 bar)Maintain diesel engine performance No methane slip NeedMaintain diesel engine performance. No methane slip. Need SCR for NOx reduction to meet IMO tier III

MARINTEK 10

Gas engine concept – 2 strokeGas engine concept 2 stroke

Dual Fuel high pressure gas (about 350 bar)Dual Fuel high pressure gas (about 350 bar)Maintain diesel engine performance.No methane slip, GHG reduction in the range of 30%No methane slip, GHG reduction in the range of 30%Need SCR for NOx reduction to meet IMO tier III

Pumping LNG to 350 bar and evaporate is simple and with low energy requirement

Flexibility in fuel mixy

MARINTEK 11

Is LNG economical competitive to HFO?Natural gas prices (including LNG) has been reduced the last two yearsdue to the introduction of shale gas in the US market

Due to that LNG has improved its competitiveness to HFO

For comparing fuel economy there two cost components forHFO to be considered:

Cost purchase the fuelCost for burning the fuel (levy, tax, operation of exhaust gas cleaning)

and than the big question; what will be the price HFO in the future?

LNG is competitive to HFO today in some areas and we believe that LNGwill improve its competitiveness in the actual time frame considered

MARINTEK

p p

12

Summing upSumming upLNG is available world wideSmall scale distribution by dedicated ships are availableStorage technology for ships are available and under further developmentGas engine technology is available for all types of piston

i t th i i i li it dengines, can meet the coming emissions limits and contributes to a net reduction of GHGLNG has the potential to be economical competitive toLNG has the potential to be economical competitive to HFO

MARINTEK 13

Cimac June 2010 / Mikael Troberg / Fuel impact June 2010 Cimac sw.pptx1 © Wärtsilä

Engine problems and solutions with: LSF, BIOFULES, GAS, DME

Author: Mikael TrobergWartsila Industrial operations / R&DDirector Testing and PerformanceWÄRTSILÄ CORPORATION

Agenda

Engine problems and solutions with:

• LSF• BIOFULES • BIOFULES • GAS• DME

LSF

• In general Wärtsilä engines are flexible for using of different fuel qualities

• Reported field problems related directly to low sulphur operation have not been recorded

Min. viscosity limits for Wärtsilä engine types before FIE:

Engine type Limit [cSt]

Wärtsilä 2 stroke engines 2,0Wärtsilä 2 stroke engines 2,0

Wärtsilä® 20 1,8

Wärtsilä® 26, 32, 38, 46CR, 46F 2,0

Wärtsilä® 46*), 64 2,8

Wärtsilä® 32DF (main and pilot fuel) 1,5

Wärtsilä® 34DF (main and pilot fuel) 2,0

Wärtsilä® 50DF (main fuel / pilot fuel) 2,8 / 2,0

*) Conventional FIE

Distillate fuel operation

• Low flash point: Safety Aspect, the flash point of < 60 °C

• Low viscosity: Leakage in the injection system and cavitations in fuel system

• Compatibility: Poor compatibility with heavy fuel can lead to:• clogging of fuel filters,• increased sludge amount• sticking of fuel injection pumps,• sticking of fuel injection pumps,• deposit formation on the engine components.

• Lubrication oil: 2 stroke engines with a high BN cylinder oil:

• Hard calcium carbonate deposits on the piston crown. • The deposits can be minimised by reducing the cylinder

oil feed rate to the lowest possible safe level.

Field experience, ultra low sulphur diesel fuel

Documented field experience (ULSD), example:

• W 12V32

• 17,500 service hours

• Sulphur content of ~ 10 – 50 mg/kg

• Standard stellite exhaust valves / valve seats designed for distillate fuel operation

Findings:

• No marks of exhaust valve / valve seat brinelling

• No claims about excessive wear in the fuel injection equipment• No claims about excessive wear in the fuel injection equipment

• Lubricity additives can be added if the specified limit value is exceeded.

• Lubricating oil BN recommendation: 10 – 15 mg KOH/g

Agenda


• LSF• BIOFULES• BIOFULES• GAS• DME

Liquid Bio Fuels

Liquid Bio Fuels (LBF)

• So far the experience exists from power plant applications only:– Crude Vegetable Oil– Bio Diesel

Conversion technology

Pressing

Hydrolysis -Fermentation

Pyrolysis

Pressing -Esterification

Oil Palm

Jatropha seed

Willow/poplar

Rape seed

Wheat

Maize

Potato

Crude Vegetable Oil

Bio Diesel

Bio-oil

Ethanol

DME

End FuelResources

Cro

psW

ood

Bio mass

Internal Combustion

engine

Fuel Cell Gasification

Combustion

Pine/Spruce

Waste fats/oils

Straw

Methanol

Bio Methane

Hydrogen

Digestion

Municipal waste

Woo

d R

esid

ues

Fuel Cell Vehicle

Electricity

Battery Vehicle

Train

HydroWindSolar

Marine

Unrefined Vegetable Oil

Refinery

Food industry

Liquid Bio Fuel Power Plant

Straight liquid bio fuel utilization

Refinery process

Refinery by-products

Refined oil

Power & Heat

Waste oil

Power Plant

• Production of fuel; our focus is to require as little refining as possible.

Comparison of fossil liquid fuels and liquid bio fu els

Distillate fuel

(MDO, MGO)

Heavy fuel Straight bio fuels

Biodiesel

Liquid bio fuels

Advantages Disadvantages+ No sulphur oxide emissions

+ Reduction in CO2 emissions

+ Lower particulate emissions

+ Bio diesel mixes well with petroleum diesel

- Slightly increased NOX’s

- Contains ~10% less energy than petroleumdiesel

- Variations in ash content

- High acid number (with some types)

11 © Wärtsilä 19 November 2007 (updated 14 October 2009) Liquid Bio Fuels in Marine Applications - Kai Juoperi11 © Wärtsilä 10 June 2010

diesel+ Good lubrication properties

- Water separate from bio diesel more difficult

- Solvent characteristics may degrade rubberand attack certain metals

- Can foster heightened microbial activity

- Not suitable for long term storage (Acidnumber increases, oxidation takes place)

- Cold flow properties can be a problem

Characteristics of vegetable oils

• Varying characteristics – Ash content

• Can vary significantly in different LBF qualities

• Influence on particulate emissions

– Viscosity is highly temperature dependant• Too cold temperature -> wax formation• Too high temperature -> polymerization

Palm Oil 22°C Palm Oil 60°C

• Too high temperature -> polymerization

– Phosphorus content• Influence on the lifetime of DeNOx &

OxiCat

– Acid number• Influence on fuel oil system wear & tear

Palm Stearin 22°C Palm Stearin 60°C

Mixing of liquid bio fuels and fossil fuels

Straight liquid bio fuel and heavy fuel:

• Straight LBF operating temperature is about 60 – 70 °C• HFO requires about 100 – 140 °C• Blending will mean that straight LBF fraction is heated to a higher

temperature than it should

Result: Risk of polymerization

Straight liquid bio fuel and distillate fuel:Straight liquid bio fuel and distillate fuel:

• LBF operating temperature is about 60 – 70 °C• MDO / MGO requires max. 45 °C temperature• Blending will mean that MDO / MGO fraction is heated to a higher

temperature than it should

Result: Risk of cavitation, since light fractions are evaporating / boiling

Agenda



Gas

Reported field problems on Wärtsilä gas engines have not been experiencedas the engine is optimized by choise of component material and lubricating oil for :

SG engines DF engines

15 © Wärtsilä 10 June 2010 Mikael Troberg NOx reduction technologies.pptx

Exhaust valve Stellit Stellit / Nimonic

Lubricating oil 4-7 TBN 4-7/10-20/30-55 TBN

Agenda



Dimethyl ether (DME)

� Properties:

� Explosion limit: 3,4 – 17%

� High cetane number: 55 – 60

� Energy content about half of diesel fuel (28,8 MJ/kg)

� Good combustion properties

� Viscosity: 0,19 cSt @ 25 °C, 0,17 cSt @ 40 °C

� Poor lubricity properties

17 © Wärtsilä

� Poor lubricity properties

� Corrosive

� Dissolves many rubber and plastic materials

� Liquefies at pretty low pressure

� Poor cold properties

� Sensitive for bacterial growth in fuel system

Dimethylether (DME)

� Manufacturing:

� Fischer-Tropsch process by utilizing methane, black lye, biomass or coal

� Synthetic fuel: Manufacturing decreases energy balance

� Emissions:

� Higher NOx than with fossil fuels

� No particulate emissions

� No SOx emissions

18 © Wärtsilä

� No SOx emissions

� Bio diesel and fossil fuels:

� Bio diesel and fossil diesel fuels (MDO / MGO) are considered to be

compatible

� If bio diesel is mixed with heavy fuel, precipitation of asphaltenes can take

place in case heavy fuel’s stability reserve is low -> compatibility test needed

Thank You!

"Fuels of the future - What will come next after HFO"

Time span 2010-2030

Presented at CIMAC Congress 2010. Bergen.

By Jørn Kahle. Maersk Maritime Technology

Slide no. 2

What will come next after HFO

2010-2030

Future fuels. LSF and alternatives

Slide no. 3

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel LSFO (1,0 % S) is fuel produced from sweet crude.

PRO’s • There will be enough LSFO in the market to cover the increased demand toward 2015.

• Coping with environmental constraints. • Sulphur, • NOx (engine design)

• No imidiate investments required

CON’s • LSFO not in 0,1% S version• Extra requirements 2015-2020 (approx 20 mill tons per year) cannot be covered by LSFO. Will have to covered by MGO.

LogisticsOperation challengesOpportunities

• Limited logistic and operational challenges


Slide no. 4

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel MGO (0,1% S) is fuel supplied from the general distillate pool.

PRO’s • Coping with environmental constraints. • Sulphur, • NOx (engine design)

• No imidiate investments required • Only minor operational issue expected

CON’s • With current split. The extra cost for the shipping industry would be in the order of 50.000.000.000 USD per year from 2020 onwards. (+200 USD/tons)


• Limited logistic and operational challenge• Can MGO be produced cheaper with new yet undiscovered technology?


Slide no. 5

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel LNG. Liquefied Natural Gas.Some view LNG as the “bridge fuel” to a future non fossil fuel society.

PRO’s • Clean fuel. Coping with most environmental constraints.

• Sulphur, • NOx (engine design), future particulate matter.• Lower CO2

• Fuel flexible engine tech. available.

CON’s • CH4 slip (GHG factor 20 higher than CO2)• Space requirement (3X HFO) • Efficiency. Well to funnel.


• Need for infrastructure.• Safety issues (high pressure gas injection)• Bunker process


Slide no. 6

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel FAME: Fatty Acid Methyl Esther.FAME is today used by the oil industry asblending component in automotive diesel. FAME is today produced from vegetable oils like rape seed and palm oil.

PRO’s • ”Drop-in” quality. Currently used in AGO.• Low sulphur• High lubricity• Low CO2

• Potentially produced from algae

CON’s • Sustainability • Availability, • Price,


• Limited logistic challenge• Storage stability Equipment impact • NOx, Particulate matter ?


Slide no. 7

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel CTL: Coal to LiquidGTL: Gas to LiquidHVO: Hydrogenated Vegetable OilBMTL: BioMass to LiquidHydrocarbon synthesized by Fischer-Tropsch. Resembles fossil fuel.

PRO’s • Proven Technology• ”Drop-in” quality• Low sulphur • High cetane number• Lower CO2 for some of the products

CON’s • Cost• Efficiency. Well to funnel?


• Limited logistic and operational challenges• NOx, Particulate matter


Slide no. 8

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel Nuclear power as propulsion for commercial vessels has been parked in the doghouse for decades. The technology however is fully developed for warships.

PRO’s • Clean• No emissions• No infrastructure needed• Technology fully developed

CON’s • Nuclear waste• Safety• Security• Cost


• Political environment


Slide no. 9

• LSFO

• MGO

• LNG

• FAME

• CTL/GTL

HVO/BMTL

• Nuclear

• Wind/Solar

Fuel Sails. Flettner rotorsSolar panels.

PRO’s • Clean• No emissions• No new infrastructure required

CON’s • Cost• Capacity• Reliability


• Technology breakthrough?


Slide no. 10

What will come next after HFO

2010-2030

The most obvious answer:

HFOWith NOx reduction. EGR, SCR or water injection

With SOx scrubber. Wet or dry. Open or closed loop

And an emerging patchwork of the other alternatives

Documents

“Fuels of the future - cimac.com · HAZOP 2007 none DNV DSME Doosan MAN Diesel Burckhardt HAZOP 2007 Nov. BG,APM,SHELL,YLNG,Q-GAS, Teekay,BP ABS SHI Doosan MAN DIESEL Burckhardt