LR - Shipping & Environment

8/3/2019 LR - Shipping & Environment

1/40

An insightful look at the environmental issuesthat are affecting the shipping industry.Issue 02 / Spring 2011

Shipping andthe environment


2/40

Contents

Scenarios and trendsWe may be 800 poundgorillas, but are we runningout of bananas? 03Action now 06Shipping, the environmentand politics 10Making the right decisions in

a more complex world 13

Researching tomorrows shipFurthering research throughglobal collaboration 14

Environmental roadmapWhats on the road ahead?A look ahead at forthcominginternational legislation 18

Weighing up your options 20

Ballast water treatment 22

Fuels and exhaust emissions 26

The Energy Efciency Design Index 30

Inventory of Hazardous Materials 33

Talk to us 37

Staff photographer: Mat CurtisEditor: Becky WaltonMarine Communications Manager: Nick BrownDesign and production: Columns Design

410m kWthe installed powercapacity of todays eet

65,000the estimated numberof ships which willneed ballast watertreatment systemsretrotting

There is no Planet BJos Mara FigueresCEO Concordia 21

Credits


3/40

/0Introduction

Environmental issues remain at the top of the shipping agenda.Forthcoming legislation, rising fuel prices and customer expectationsare all driving change in the industry. Companies are evaluating theinvestment decisions necessary to comply with regulation, to reducetheir fuel bills and to meet their customers demands.

All of these factors are linked and are shaping the developmentof todays shipping industry. It is clear that shippings impact onthe environment is no longer an externalised factor in economicterms. Immediate priorities are MARPOL Annex VI and Ballast WaterManagement Convention compliance. However, a big unknown isthe nature or timing of market-based measures that may put a priceon carbon emissions which goes beyond the rising market price offossil fuels.

Ultimately, the adoption of cleaner practices and greener technologieswill be inuenced by the economic bottom line.

At Lloyds Register, we understand that environmental stewardship isan obligation which the shipping community must meet. Owners andoperators must also provide transparency, corporate responsibilityand maintain protability, all while operating safely. We have been

at the forefront of environmental initiatives in the marine industryfor many years, from world-renowned exhaust emissions research inthe 1990s to involvement in the development of the Energy EfciencyDesign Index (EEDI). Today, we are helping with the evolution of new,more efcient ship designs and technologies.

Our contribution to the development of marine regulations andstandards gives us the expertise to help businesses understandand meet their obligations, while our independence allows us togive impartial advice. At the same time, our global research anddevelopment network equips us to deliver tailored solutions thatenable businesses to operate more safely and sustainably.


4/40

Scenarios and trends


5/40

Scenarios and trends 02/0

We may be 800 poundgorillas, but are werunning out of bananas?

The importance of environmental cost-benet analysis

The challenge of over-developedenergy useSince then wealthy humans have developedan astonishing appetite for energy. The

1.2 billion people in the OECD consumeabout ve tonnes of oil equivalent each peryear, while another six billion in non-OECDcountries consume one tonne per capita.Given that a substantial proportion of theoil reserves have already been consumed;that the major non-OECD countries aspireto consuming at OECD levels; and thatthere is a real possibility that fossil fuels arechanging the climate; there is every reasonto be concerned about future energysupplies.

Figure 1

The shipping industry, a major user of fossfuels, is working on the problem. Todayseet has an installed power capacity of410 million kW (see Figure 1). That is

9% of world electricity generatingcapacity2. Container ships are the mostpower hungry, with a capacity of121 million kW, almost the size ofGermany, followed by non cargo shipsand bulkers with 77 million kW each;and tankers with 63 million kW. So itsa big problem. >

Written by: Martin StopfordDirector of Clarksons andHead of Clarkson Research

Globalisation, climate change, andescalating energy costs are a strategicnightmare for shipping companies andthey all have one thing in common fossil fuels. Shipping companies needthe right tools to navigate through thecommercial and regulatory mineeldthat lies ahead and the solution is not

just technical. Economic analysis has amajor part to play.

For most of history human beings leda frugal and precarious existence. In 1800,

Europe relied on horses and oxen (38million of them) for more than half itsenergy; wood a quarter; water about10%; manpower less than 5%; and thewind only 1%1. Then in the late 19thcentury, machines burning coal turnedthe human race into 800 pound gorillasand in the 20th century oil, a magic liquidpacked with even more energy, turned usinto supermen. Suddenly we could y.

120

140

100

80

60

40

20

0

German

powerstations

Containers

feet

Non

cargo

Bulker

feet

Tanker

feet

Other

dryfeet

Other

specialised

Gas

feet

139.0

121.2

77.4

76.7

63.3

36.2

21.4

14.4

M

illionkWinstalledpower

German power stations Shipping

1 Braudel (1981) Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century:

Structures of Everyday Life v. 1 p. 371.2 The EIA gives a world installed electricity generating capacity

of 4625 million kW in 2008.


6/40


The new IMO and ECA regulationsconcerning emissions above and belowthe water line will help to remove ananomaly under which the shipping industrydissipates the renery industrys residualwaste, while leaving unresolved the issue

of whether the removal and disposal ofsulphur and particular matter is betterdone on board ship or by the reningindustry. But the challenge of reducingthe carbon footprint remains unresolvedbecause fuel conversion is already veryefcient and there is no magic technologylurking on the sidelines. Gas is helpful(a 20% saving?), wind and sun are marginaland nuclear power at sea has potential butis still socially challenging.

The economics of bananasIf technology is short of solutions,what about economics? Here I believethere are many more possibilities.Technology is about applying energy,but economics is about the decisions we

make to extract value for consumers bymaking the most of it3. Put another way,there is no point in technologists labouringto conserve energy if consumers justsquander the savings. Positive economicsdescribes how market economies work butnormative economics deals with how weought to use economic resources.

Lets start with positive economics.How does the shipping industry dealwith energy today? Basically its drivenby the market. For example (simplifyingenormously) the design speed of a ship isa trade off between the cost of fuel, the

time cost of the ship itself, and the timevalue of cargo. If the ship costs $20,000per day to charter and by spending anextra $20,000 on bunkers over the voyageyou can save a day, its worth goingfaster, if only to speed up delivery for theshippers. We work out the optimum speeusing todays bunker price and charterrates. An example is shown in Figure 2.If the ship costs $100,000 per day andbunkers cost $200 per tonne the optimumspeed is about 22 knots. But if the bunkerprice goes up to $1,500 per tonne the

optimum speed is about 11 knots4.

There is no point in technologistslabouring to conserve energy ifconsumers just squander the savings.Martin StopfordClarksons

8

300

350

400

250

200

150

100

50

0

Fuelcostsaving,chartercostincrease$000

24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9

Voyage fuel costsaving $550/tonne

Voyage fuel costsaving $1,550/tonne

Ship cost increase

Speed of ship (knots)

Best speed at

$1,500/tonne bunkers

Best speed at

$200/tonne bunkers Shows the effect on the cost of fuel

(green lines) and the cost of shipping

capacity (yellow line) of changing ship

operating speed in 1 knot increments

(based on a 5,000 mile voyage)

Design consumption

Design speed

Fuel cost

Voyage

Charter rate

Mt/day

Knots

$/Mt

N. Miles

$/day

3

2

1,50

5,00

100,00

350

25

200

5,000

100,000

Unit CaseCase 1Figure 2


7/40


Is this the right way to makedecisions?At todays $600 per tonne, running an11,000 teu container ship with a 109,000horsepower main engine and a cargo of100,000 tonnes at 23 knots incurs dailybunker costs of $160,000. That sounds alot, but it all depends how you look at it.

At full speed this marine engine does thework of about three million 18th centurymen5. The cost per man day works out atve cents. Since in the West a man dayof physical labour costs around $150, oilenergy is still ridiculously cheap. And itgets better. The three million men neededto propel the 11,000 teu containershipat 23 knots (if it were possible) wouldconsume nine billion calories a day, notto mention needing a town the size ofGreater Manchester to accommodatethem!6 So thanks to oil, the 13 crew

of the 11,000 teu ship have the captiveenergy of three million. The numbers aresurreal, but that is what fossil fuels dofor us. It is a precious resource, but it isdirt cheap. For a century, oil companiesdrilled a hole and out owed millionsof barrels of oil, so oil was plentiful andcheap, costing on average only $26 perbarrel in 2009 dollars7.

But that does not mean oil was onlyworth $26 a barrel. As I have argued thetrue value of oil is its opportunity cost.

Is propelling 100,000 tonnes of cargo at25 knots the best use of the nite reservesof this nite commodity? As Figure 2shows, dropping the speed to 11 knotsreduces consumption by about 80%.That only makes sense in terms of thepositive economic model used in preparingFigure 2, if the price goes to $1,500 pertonne. But the positive economics model,which focuses only on the market price ofoil, excludes so much the environment;the future price of oil; the true value ofhaving the goods arrive a little earlier;

and the future needs of mankind.

Costs, benets and the trueprice of bananasSo when designing environmentallyfriendly transport systems we should dustoff old techniques like cost-benet analysis.These would help to re-examine the valueof time and to quantify costs and benetsnot picked up by the market price. Carrying

containers at 25 knots is like producingpineapples in Norway. You can do it butits a rich mans commodity. Markets aregood, but so is common sense.

Martin Stopford, Director of Clarksons and Head of Clarkson Research

3 Economists refer to this as maximising utility.4 This short analysis ignores revenue, but is sufcient

to illustrate the basic point. The curves are based on

the cube rule which species a cubic relationship

between speed and consumption for a diesel engine.

This is not to suggest that individual engines can

operate in the range shown in the graph.

5 This is based on a man generating 0.03-0.04 horsepower

dened as raising 75kg to a height of 1 metre in 1 second

(a horse produces about 27% to 57% of a HP).

Figures from F Braudel (1981) Civilization and Capitalism,

15th-18th Century: Structures of Everyday Life v. 1 p. 337.6 This assumes 3,000 calories a day per man

its hard work!7 Average spot price 1860 to 2000 based on prices in

BP Annual Review of World Energy 2010 at 2009 prices.


8/40


Action now

We talk to three shipping companies with strong viewson the environment and how to make sustainability pay

Zodiac has set up a dedicated team tosupport a strategy of sustainability andthe team has two main elements to itsapproach.

Zodiac is planning to green its eetthrough innovation. This is team leaderTonci Tadics area of expertise and mainarea of work. Tonci is now Director ofEnvironmental Strategy with Zodiac,having previously been with Tanker Pacic(an afliated company) in Singapore. Heis looking at new technologies to improveperformance. Scrubbers to removeexhaust emissions are at the top of thelist of innovations.

Environmental superintendent, and NavalArchitect, Simon Turpin is working onprojects to capture waste heat, and reducesludge and other potential pollutants fromthe main engine. Simons relationshipswith technology companies and researchinstitutes have led to the development andimplementation of projects ranging fromthe difculties involved in ballast watertreatment to innovative new technologiessuch as harnessing renewable energy.

Customer service has always been veryimportant and working with the chartererto nd mutual benets is another keyarea of activity. We try to align and

prioritise our environmental projectswith our customers. This is a win-winsituation where we can all benet, saysTonci. With most of the eet employedon a time charter basis the chartererpaying the bunker bill there is a cleardrive to lower fuel consumption. Theseefciency improvements also have animpact on reducing the carbon footprintacross the supply chain. Zodiac hasstarted a programme of Energy EfciencyOperational Indicator measurement andShip Energy Efciency Management

Plan development with Lloyds RegistersSingapore ofce. This will help themmanage and monitor individual ships fuelconsumption and also develop in-houseefciency monitoring software.

The impending cost of carbon emissionsis an issue that they feel strongly about atZodiac, and they are very much in favourof a levy or fund rather than an emissiontrading scheme. We believe very stronglyin the principle of the polluter pays and alevy or fund scheme is the most effective

way of achieving this. In a trading scheme,while the bunker costs remain with thetime charterer, the carbon liabilities wouldfall on the owner. For our eet, and manyother ship owners this would be a hugeproblem, explains Mark.

We talked to ship operatorswho are working with LloydsRegister to reduce and verify theirenvironmental impact. A growing

trend is the appointment to keypositions of environmental expertsto drive sustainable change in theirbusiness. Regulatory realities, marketrequirements and the bottom line areall driving these developments.

All are looking to measure and reduce theenvironmental impact of their shippingoperations.

Zodiac: looking into the future todayControlling a large eet of 147 bulk

carriers, tankers, car carriers andcontainerships, Zodiac Maritime Agencieshas much at stake in preparing thecompany for the future. Shipping willbe a different business in 10 years timebelieves Mark Rawson, Zodiacs Quality,Safety & Environment Manager. We areworking hard to make our company andits activities more sustainable we feel itsthe right thing to do and our customersare starting to demand a higher levelof environmental performance that isindependently veried.

People matter. A lot of our work will beabout getting our people on board andashore to make the right decisions anddo the right things.Mark RawsonZodiac


9/40


Maersk Lines constant care for theenvironment and sustainable protsWith tailor-made ships, advanced researchinto fuels and technology and a clearstrategy, Maersk Line is looking to use

green performance to put lots of waterbetween it and the competition and createa more sustainable business model.

Jacob Sterling, Head of Climate & theEnvironment at Maersk Line is now oneof their most visible managers. He spentlong periods in the jungles and plains ofBorneo researching a biology MSc and,before joining Maersk Line, worked forWWF, Denmark for seven years, whereone of his specialties was forestry. He is acentral gure in leading Maersks efforts

to be more sustainable.

We are preparing for a new reality inthe shipping markets, says Jacob. Weneed to address environmental issues. Itsthe right thing to do but its not aboutphilanthropy. At WWF I was ghting tosave the planet. And I am still doing that atMaersk Line but here its about makingsustainability pay.

String of rstsWith its 15,500 teu E-Class ships, MaerskLine found massive economy-of-scalebenets by developing big container shipsNow the company has taken the next step

developing an 18,000 teu behemoth.

Recent further conrmed rsts forMaersk Line include CO2 vericationconducted across the eet, a bio-fuelproject (verication and support in bothprojects are provided by the LloydsRegister Group) and an in-depth reviewof the potential for slow steaming to savefuel. The super slow steaming projectmanaged to operate ships at loads wellbelow levels recommended by mainengine manufacturers to the extent

that the engine makers have revised theirguidelines. The resulting fuel savings havebeen substantial. >

Zodiac is also very enthusiastic about thecommitment from senior management to asustainable business strategy. Sustainabilitytargets for environmental performance,safety, security and crew welfare are

being developed for the medium and longterm. Were focusing on data integrityand improving our data managementsystems internally, says Stephanie Moffatt,Environmental Executive at Zodiac.The provision of good quality data withincreased transparency is an important partof our sustainability project. Zodiacs rstpublicly available Environmental Reportwill be available in spring 2011 and willbe independently veried by the LloydsRegister Group.

People matter, says Rawson, motivatingthem is crucial. A lot of our work will beabout getting our people on board andashore to make the right decisions anddo the right things.

The Zodiac team: Mark Rawson, Simon Turpin, Stephanie Moffatt and Tonci Tadic


10/40


The drive for new technologiesTomorrow is going to be a lot morecomplicated than today, says Jacob. Thedevelopment of emissions regulation whicdiffers from region to region is just onereason life will be more complicated. Theintroduction of Emission Control Areas

(ECAs) with strict sulphur and nitrogenoxide emissions limits is a key developmendriving immediate behavioural changes.But longer term it is reducing carbon thatwill become the real concern.

Both have implications for Maersksoperations.

We always believed that a ship shouldbe able to trade anywhere; that it wouldbe able to slot into any service and besuitable for worldwide trading. Such an

approach provides operational exibility Maersk Line could deploy ships anywhereThat ability to trade worldwide, we feel,is going to be challenged as we continueto reduce emissions and make our eetmore efcient.

There will be interim solutions and interimstages of development for many newtechnologies such as liqueed natural gas(LNG) as fuel. Although a long way off, aneven if liqueed natural gas is unlikely to bea major fuel replacement for heavy fuel oil,

the sort of engine systems used with LNGin time might be suitable for biogases fromrenewables in the future. Commerciallyavailable gas from renewables is a long wayoff, but with a signicantly lower carbonfootprint than fossil fuel-sourced gas,low-carbon gas from renewables may bea desirable target.

Environmental trendMaersks customers interest inenvironmental performance is growing.Jacob says: We have 10 to 20 customers

we partner on environmental issues, anda growing number of key customers thatare showing a genuine interest in ourenvironmental prole and our initiativesto further improve it. But Maersk Linecan help create demand for cleaner,greener, shipping. We think its a trend,not just window dressing, and werereally going for it. Customers will wantbetter performance from us and from ourcompetition. We are ready to help them.

Katharine Palmer, BP Shipping Environment Manager.In April 2011, she joined Lloyds Register to head upthe environmental product development team.

Jacob Sterling, Head of Climate & the Environment, Maersk Line


11/40


Maersk Lines HQ in Copenhagen mayseem a long way from the wilds of Borneoand his forestry work at WWF but forJacob Sterling the principles remain thesame as he works for a more sustainableworld. Maersk Line has put its cards andmoney on the table and Jacob Sterling

is clearly making headway in helping hisemployer, and the industry, plant the seedsof a sustainable future for shipping.

A full version of this article appears inIssue 2 of the Lloyds Register Group

magazine, Insight.

BP an open, honest approachWhen BP Shipping wanted to verify itsenvironmental statement it contactedLloyds Register.

Katharine Palmer, BP Shipping EnvironmentManager, said: BP Shipping places greatimportance on its Environmental Statementand, for the business, it is important thereport is an open and honest assessmentof its operations for both employees andexternal stakeholders. It is also importantthe report complements BP ShippingsISO14001 environmental managementsystem a certication which is alsoissued by the Lloyds Register Group.

As part of the verication process, our

team of Marine surveyors and LloydsRegister Quality Assurance (LRQA) auditorsinterviewed the key people involved in thestatement, and reviewed the managementprocesses and supporting documents.

While BP Shipping could have soughtverication from a non-industryorganisation, our marine expertise andknowledge meant we were ideally placedto carry out the work.

Adding value with vericationLloyds Register audited the systems that Maersk Line uses toreport, analyse and aggregate environmental data andundertook a ship audit of MaerskClementine to conrm thatthe information in the ships records matched the data held bythe shore ofce.

During the Maersk Line audit, Mads Stensen, Maersk LinesEnvironmental Manager, said: As we had not previously hadour fuel reporting systems and procedures independentlyassessed we did not know what to expect and what addedvalue this verication would bring. While the verication dididentify several areas for improvement, which havesubsequently been rectied, it was also reassuring to have anindependent expert review the systems and procedures thatMaersk Line uses when making business decisions to optimisethe efciency of our operations.

Mads Stensen, EnvironmentalManager, Maersk Line

It was reassuring to have anindependent expert review thesystems and procedures thatMaersk Line uses when makingbusiness decisionsMads StensenMaersk Line


12/40


Shipping, the environmentand politics

The balance between political agendas and innovation

Shipping is a vital industry, but onethat many connected with it feelis misunderstood. And there is nodoubt that shipping is vulnerable to

reactive policy making most notablyin the past as a result of major oilspills. Some key gures feel that theindustry could be doing moreto inuence political decision makersand agendas.

One of the clearest agendas is the demandfor shipping to reduce its environmentalimpact, and there has been an ongoingdebate about ensuring the industry canmake a speedy, appropriate and effectiveresponse.

The primary body for debating anddeveloping the regulations that governshipping is the International MaritimeOrganization (IMO). In recent years, the

IMO has been concerned with global andlocal management of environmental issuessuch as air and water quality, and thesehave all been addressed most notablythrough MARPOL Annex VI regulating SOx,NOx and particulate matter and the BallastWater Management Convention.

Beyond IMO, at the wider internationallevel, the leading issue for shippingis its contribution to greenhouse gasemissions. The United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)which entered into force in 1994, led tolegally binding carbon reduction goalsfor developed countries, under the KyotoProtocol, from 2005. The Kyoto Protocolsgoals expire in 2012 and it is currentlybeing renegotiated. Meetings of partiesto both the Convention and the Protocoloccur at least every year; the most recentwere COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009 andCOP 16 in Cancun in December 2010.

Shipping has a lot to offerAre we going to see the UNFCCC orIMO mandate an effective regime toreduce CO2 emissions from shipping?We will see. We believe shipownersneed to take more direct control overtheir environmental performance and

set robust and ambitious targets. Oneway could be to agree a new regime ofvoluntary targets in the shipping industryto drive CO2 reductions.

It would be great to see shippingtake more control of its reputation.The industry has a lot to offer a futurelow-carbon global economy, but aslong as it is unregulated, it risks beingseen as a lagging sector. Regulation

of CO2 emissions from shipping willhopefully come at some point. We dontknow exactly when this will happen butwhen it does the industry needs a seatat the global table. We need inuenceto make it fair and to make it work asintended. We also need to accept thatthe political process isnt always fair it just isnt. But we will have much moreinuence if we act rather than talk.

Jacob SterlingHead of Climate & the EnvironMaersk Line


13/40


Shipping, despite much negotiation,has yet to be either directly or materiallyaffected by the UNFCCC process. Although

there are fears within the industry thatIMO may lose control over the process,this looks unlikely. It remains to be seenwhat inuence the UNFCCC will haveon shipping. A bigger impact may bethe eventual decision on how to nancethe Cancun agreement of $100 billion ayear for climate adaptation. If shipping isincluded in the funding, then IMO wouldbe responsible for designing and managingany approach to the collection of themonies due from shipping.

But other bodies have become increasinglyimportant in the drive to inuenceenvironmental behaviour.

We are now seeing the emergenceof pressure from non-governmentalorganisations looking to encourage,stimulate or pressurise the shippingindustry into change. For example, WWF,the Sustainable Shipping Initiative and the

World Ocean Council are organisationsseeking to address the challenges andopportunities faced by shipping.

Many in the industry are affected by thesedevelopments and the associated rise indemand for transparency and vericationof performance at all levels. There is alsothe added pressure of non-regulatorycompliance with customer requirementsand preferences.

In response, the shipping industry isembracing transparency. There are nowmany examples and areas of work. OCIMFhas worked with the tanker sector through

the Tanker Management & Self Assessmentscheme (TMSA). The Clean ShippingProject and Clean Cargo Working Groupand trade associations such as BIMCOand INTERTANKO to name a few areworking on initiatives to promote andsupport more efcient shipping operationswith a reduced environmental impact.There is an increase in the developmentof shipping-related indicators under

the Global Reporting Initiative, andavailability of publicly accessible companyenvironmental, stakeholder, CSR and

sustainability reports.

Although, in general, shipping has waitedto be regulated rather than seizing theinitiative at corporate or sector level, thereis a new sense of urgency. For example,while most ships on order today will belittle different to any ordered in the pastten years, the IMO is currently addressingissues of design efciency.

A tipping point may soon be reachedas shippings ability to inuence the

timing and extent of changes is tested.Against this backdrop it is vital thatthe regulatory bodies understand thelatest technologies.

Vince Jenkins, Lloyds Registers Global Marine Risk Advisor, speaking atthe Global Maritime Environmental Congress in Hamburg in September 2010


14/40



15/40


Making the right decisionsin a more complex world

Integrating people, process and technology

Whether preventing accidents ordesigning more efcient ships,ensuring people make the rightdecisions at the right time is vitalto improving the environmentalperformance of shipping.

There are a number of threats to smoothship operations. They include poor

leadership and communications on board,weak company policies for competencemanagement, and even the usability of theships technology.

The human factorThese issues can all be addressed. The keyis in understanding that everything thatoccurs on board a ship relies on a humanin the loop system. Failures leading to,say, accidental marine pollution often arisewhen the technology and equipment istoo complex or not designed for the task in

hand. For example, in specialist operationssuch as lightering, the ships being usedare often not specically designed forsuch ship-to-ship operations. Its whencompensating for the critical short-comingsin design that ordinarily routine activitiesbecome a risk.

Badly designed procedures, meanwhile,can create unnecessary work, promptingthe crew to ignore them or shortcircuit them. Company policies driven

exclusively by commercial goals create thecircumstances for low staff retention andoverly rapid promotion, and will be likely toresult in an erosion of crew competence.

The consequence is a downward spiral inoperational safety and performance.

Balancing people, process andtechnologyTo make improvements, a shippingoperator must decide on clear and simplegoals for safety and pollution control,

and then commit to implementing aperformance management system thataligns with these goals. The solution isto have a balance of the right people,effective processes and usable technology.This demands a management focus on theinteraction of the people, plant and processelements of the ship system.

Human behaviour can be optimised bythe design of t-for-purpose technologyand equipment. At the same time, theoperational integrity of the ship can be

assured by implementing measures toimprove the management of performanceby the ships staff.

The aspiration to control the inuenceon maritime safety and performance ofhuman and organisational factors is notnew. But the understanding of how this

can be achieved has seen renewed focus iresearch and operational practices in recenyears. The principles of how to achieveorganisational and operational integrity arnow well understood by many shippingorganisations, and their successful practiceare delivering improvements in operationaefciency, safety and pollution control.

Looking to the futureThis insight has been focused at anoperational level but will be vital forfuture design, technology and operationa

behaviour in shipping as the industrysearches for operational efciencies andbetter environmental performance. Forexample, propulsion technologies and fuehave not changed signicantly for decade

As the world does not seem likely to curbeconomic growth, we can expect to seethe world eet continuing to expand. Butdemands for less polluting ships will seethe introduction of new rules and newtechnologies, both of which will enforcechanges in crew competence and the wor

on board.

Finding efciencies in the supply chain, atoperational levels and in new designs andtechnologies, will have to be achieved byhumans in a world of growing complexity.If that sounds challenging it is. But wedo have a greater understanding of whatdrives people; and how to help them makbetter decisions to create better systems.

Written by:Ian HamiltonTechnical Director,Human Engineering

a member of theLloyds RegisterGroup


16/40

Researching tomorrows ship

Furthering research throughglobal collaboration

A look at four Lloyds Register research projects

At Lloyds Register, we share ourclients long-term vision for a greenerindustry and we are workingalongside them to develop our

understanding of the newestenvironmental technologies for ships.Working together this way enables usto benet from each others expertise,build stronger relationships andcapitalise on the best in environmentalthinking.

Green bulk carrier project yieldsbig energy savingsIn October 2010, we successfullycompleted our green bulk carrier joint

industry project with Shanghais BestwayMarine Engineering Co. Ltd. The projectbrief was to develop an environmentallyfriendly 35,000 dwt bulk carrier designwhich had to comply with therequirements of the Common StructuralRules as well as meet the requirements offuture environmental legislation.

A range of design features wasinvestigated, including: hull line optimisation energy saving devices such as wake

adaptable propellers new IMO-approved marine antifouling

coatings improved machinery and systems

designs.

One of the benchmarks for the design wathe IMOs Energy Efciency Design Index(EEDI). By adopting the proposed energysaving and emission reduction measures,

the EEDI value of the resulting Emeralddesign was shown to be 18% lower thanthat of the original ship.

And the design exceeded the targetsfor fuel reduction, with consumptionreduced by 19.5% against the target of15%. The improvements also includeda 3-5% energy efciency gain due tothe optimisation of the aft and forwardparts of the ships hull, and efciencyimprovements of up to 11% because ofthe improved propeller design, the selecte

engine and the incorporation of energy-saving devices.

The project demonstrated andstrengthened our relationship withBestway. It is an excellent example ofeffective co-operation between a localdesign company and a leading classicatiosociety, said Prof. Liu Nan, BestwayChairman and General Manager. >

18%the EEDI reductionachieved through thegreen bulk carrier project

Model testing being carried out by Bestway, Shanghai,for the green bulk carrier project


17/40

Researching tomorrows ship 14/1


18/40

Researching tomorrows ship

Exploring the nuclear ships ofthe futureIn Greece, we have been working withowner Enterprises Shipping and Trading(EST) in a bid to develop the rst nuclear-powered merchant tanker.

Nuclear propulsion is already a wellestablished technology on naval ships andice breakers, but this project is focusing on

an aspect of nuclear technology that hasso far escaped attention in the commercialsector small modular reactors (SMRs).These are small nuclear reactors that arecompact, modular, safe and proliferationfree. They are being developed to be usedon board ships as a plug-in nuclear battery.Each one has a thermal power output ofover 68 megawatts.

The project is investigating the potentialfor using SMRs for ship propulsion. As wellas EST, the work involves Hyperion PowerGeneration, a leading SMR producer, andBMT Nigel Gee, a leading ship designer.

Specically, the project is: investigating the implications of using

SMRs on board tankers developing rules and procedures for

the design, construction, operation,maintenance and eventual disposal oftankers using SMRs

developing commercially viable conceptdesigns of conventional and modulartanker designs which incorporate an SMR.

Special attention is being paid to lifecyclecost analysis, as well as hull-form designand structural layout, including groundingand collision protection.

Focusing on the options forECA complianceIn Denmark, as part of the Green Ship ofthe Future partnership we are working witshipowners (A. P. Mller Maersk A/S andD/S NORDEN) and manufacturers (MANDiesel and Aalborg Industries) to researchexhaust emission control options forexisting ships.

The project is aimed at helping existingships comply with the increasinglydemanding sulphur controls in EmissionControl Areas (ECAs). Equivalent means ocompliance are allowed and consequentlya total of three technologies and methodswill be installed and tested on board a38,500 dwt D/S NORDEN tanker scrubbetechnology, LNG as a fuel and low-sulphufuels or distillates.

Besides evaluating each technology,the study will also investigate cost,

installation and maintenance aspects.The resulting information will be usedto help shipowners make decisions onthe best way to control emissions in theirown eets.

Investigating bio-fuelsIn Europe, we are working withcompanies including A.P. Mller MaerskA/S and Shell to research the advantagesand shortcomings of the bio-fuel FAME(fatty acid methyl esters) when used inmarine diesel engines.

Driven by experience from the automotiveindustry, the project will help us betterunderstand the potential for reducinggreenhouse gas and SOx emissionsfrom shipping to meet EU Directiverequirements.The nuclear ship project signing ceremony: l-r, Theodosis Stamatellos and

Spyros Hirdaris (Lloyds Register), Phil Thomson (BMT), Apostolos Poulovassilis(EMEA Regional Marine Manager, Lloyds Register), Dale Ploughman (Seanergy),Katia Restis and Moli Restis (EST), George Sarris (Director of EST) and RichardSadler (CEO, Lloyds Register)

1.00% m/m*68MWthe current maximum fuel sulphurcontent limit within ECAs*by mass

the thermal poweroutput of a smallmodular reactor (SMR)


19/40

Researching tomorrows ship 16/1

The project is investigating how FAMEand marine gas oil (MGO) blends behavein marine conditions and how they affectengine performance and emissions. It isfocusing on the fuels limitations and howthey might be overcome.

Tests have included running an auxiliaryengine under different climate conditionswith different blends, and storing FAMEand FAME/gas oil blends on board aMaersk Line vessel, Maersk Kalmar,operating between Europe and India.

Selected parameters have been regularlymeasured throughout.

One of the aims of the tests is to establishthe degree to which issues experiencedby the automotive industry in the use ofFAME will be duplicated on board ship,in particular those related to storagestability, handling and its subsequentuse in the engine.

Exploring the behaviour of our enginesand storage tanks and knowing thechange in air emissions by using FAMEblends on board will give us valuableknowledge of the opportunities andchallenges, says Lasse Kragh Andersen,Senior Environmental Specialist in MaerskMaritime Technology.

The engine tests were completed inNovember 2010 and the data is currentlybeing evaluated. The storage of blends isstill ongoing.

The intention is that the results of the studywill make a signicant contribution to thedevelopment of guidelines for the use ofbio-diesel on ships.

For more information on our researchactivities, please email [email protected]

Maersk Kalmars route between Europe and India

The Maersk Line vessel, Maersk Kalmais being used to investigate how bio-

fuels affect engine performance andemissions

BremerhavenRotterdam

Zeebrugge

Felixstowe

Algeciras

Aqaba

JeddahJebel Ali

Pipavav

Jawaharlal Nehru


20/40

Environmental roadmap

Whats on the road ahead?Our roadmap looks at forthcominginternational legislation

During this time, the IMO hassuccessfully adopted a number ofinternational treaties, such as theMARPOL Convention with its sixAnnexes, the Anti-fouling SystemsConvention and the Ballast WaterManagement Convention.

The majority of these are in force todayand contributing to the protection ofthe environment both in water and inair, while others are on a steady coursetowards ratication. In fact, 21 of the51 IMO Conventions relate toenvironmental issues.

Our environmental roadmap outlinesthe key existing and forthcomingenvironmental legislation from theIMO up to the end of 2017, identifyingfuture compliance dates and emergingregulations. While we are only lookingat international legislation here, thereare of course many national and regionalrequirements affecting owners andoperators, such as EU Directives, theCalifornia Air Resources Board (CARB)regulations and other local or port-specic requirements.

Since the 1970s, the answers to the environmental questions facing the maritimeworld have been spearheaded by the International Maritime Organization (IMO),the body which regulates shipping through international consensus.

1948the year the IMO

was established


21/40

18/19

Need the roadmap for apresentation? You can downloada digital version from here:www.lr.org/sate

< See the environmental roadmap overleaf

Environmental roadmap (overleaf)


22/40

ironmental roadmap

y effective/compliance dates. Length of bar does not indicate time-scale

nti-Fouling Systems Convention

o-fuels Guidelines

hip Recycling Convention

nergy Efciency Design Index (EEDI)

nergy Efciency Operational Indicator (EEOI)

hip Energy Efciency Management Plan (SEEMP)

HG market-based measures

o-fouling Guidelines

allast Water Management Convention

ARPOL Convention

nnex I: Oil

nnex III: Prevention of pollution by harmful substancesin packaged form

nnex IV: Prevention of pollution by sewage from ships

nnex V: Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships

nnex VI: Prevention of air pollution from ships

New ECA-SOX

Controls inside ECA-SOX

Controls outside ECA-SOX

Alternative equivalent SOX

controls

NOX

controls new construction

CA-NOX

NOX

controls ships constructed January 1, 1990 December 31, 1999

ODS Record Book

VOC Management Plan

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Se p Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr

Entered into force September 2008.

Voluntary bio-fouling guidelines are likely in July 2011

Prohibition of the use and carriage of heavy grade oil in the Antarctic Sea will come into force August 1, 2011

New chapter on ship-to-ship oil transfer operation (STS Plan) and clearer denition of tanks (regulation 1) entered into force January 1, 2011

Amendments to Annex III (includin g IMDG Code becoming mandatory und er MARPOL) entered into force on January 1, 2010

Revised Annex V expected to enter into force in 2013

Possible entry into force: 2012-2013

Revised Annex VI entered into force July 1, 2010

New special sewage control area for the Baltic Sea expected to be established January 1, 2013

First approved method became available in October 2010

Maximum sulphur content limit reduced to 1.00% m/m on July 1, 2010

Exhaust gas cleaning systems have been able to be approved for use insid e and outside ECA-SOx

since July 1, 2010

ODS Record Book has been required sinc e July 1, 2010

VOC Management Plans have been required since July 1, 2010

Updated Guidelines on the carriage of b io-fuel blends now expected July 1, 2011

Entry into force is now expected between 2013 and 2015

EEDI guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis

EEOI guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis

SEEMP guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis

EEDI could become mandatory on January 1, 2013

SEEMP could become mandatory on January 1, 2013

Discussions ongoing at the IMO

Maximum sulphur content limit reducesto 0.10% m/m on January 1, 2015

Tier III controls come intoeffect from January 1, 2016

North American ECA-NOX

will come into effect in 2016

New Annex V special area to be introduced for wider Caribbean region on May 1, 2011

North American ECA-SOx

will come into force August 1, 2012

US Caribbean ECA proposed to come into force December 2013

Maximum sulphur content limit reduces to 3.50% m/m on January 1, 2012

Tier II controls came into effect from January 1, 2011


23/40

As a shipping company, you will be facing a number of

decisions about how to comply with forthcoming legislation.You may be wondering what method to use to meet AnnexVI exhaust emissions controls, or which treatment system topurchase in order to comply with the Ballast Water ManagementConvention. Or looking to the future, you may be wonderinghow to optimise your ships design to gain a good EnergyEfciency Design Index rating.

In all these cases, there is no single answer. The solution thats

right for you will be shaped by the particular needs of yourbusiness and your assets. In the following pages, we look atthe issues that will inuence your decisions and your optionsto achieve compliance. >

Weighing upyour options

20/2


24/40

Ballast water treatment

Ten steps to selecting a ballastwater treatment system

What you need to know

The Ballast Water ManagementConvention could be in force as earlyas 2012. If you have existing ships,you should be planning for

retrotting a ballast water treatmentsystem (BWTS) now. The good newsis that there are a number alreadyavailable. But how do you decidewhich one is right for you? Here areour top ten things to consider whenselecting a BWTS.

01Is it approved?To install a BWTS on board your ship,it must be type approved by the agadministration or a Recognised

Organisation in accordance with therelevant IMO Guidelines*. If the systemuses an active substance, this will needto have received nal approval fromthe IMO before type approval canbe granted.

02Does it have enough capacity?All BWTS have a total capacity rate(TCR). This indicates how many cubicmetres of ballast water the system canprocess each hour. You will need to

choose a system with a TCR high enoughto handle your ships ballast capacity andoperational pumping rate.

03Is it gas safe?If your ship is a tanker, and the system isgoing to be installed in a gas dangerous

area (i.e., in the cargo area), your systemmust be certied gas safe.

04How much space does it need?System footprints range fromapproximately 0.25 m2 to 145 m2,depending on their TCR. Some aresingle units while others can be installedas separate components. This may beuseful if you do not have a single spaceon board ship which is big enough or ifaccess for bringing a single system on

board is difcult.

05What are the capital andoperating costs?A BWTS is a big investment and couldcost as much as $2,000,000 dependingon the manufacturer. As for operatingcost, it depends on the type of systemand starts from as little as a few dollarsper 1,000 m3 of treated water. Manysystem suppliers quote operating costsbelow $20 per 1,000 m3.

06Do you have enough poweravailable to run the system?Some systems have very high power

requirements as much as 220kW per1,000 m3 of treated water. You shouldcheck whether you will need to runanother generator when the systemis in operation or even install anadditional generator set. Anotherconsideration is whether you have aspare breaker available in the electricaldistribution board to provide powerto the BWTS. If not, you will need tond an alternative solution.

07

Will it integrate with yourexisting systems?It is advantageous to integrate the alarmand controls for the treatment systemwith those for the ballast pumpingsystem, so that both can be operatedfrom all control panels.

08Are consumables, spares andservicing support readily available?It is important to be able to keep yourBWTS operational. If it stops working, yo

will be in contravention of the Conventioand could face nes or detention. Checkthat spares, consumables and servicingare readily available in all the areas whereyour ship is trading.

*These are contained in Resolution MEPC.174 (58) Guidelines for Approval of Ballast WaterManagement Systems (G8)


25/40

Ballast water treatment 22/2

09What are the implications forcrew training?Whatever BWTS youre considering,

training will be required on operatingand maintaining the system, and healthand safety aspects such as chemicalhandling. Training requirements will needto be included in the ballast watermanagement plan required by theConvention.

10How might it affect tank structureand coatings?Corrosion and coating degeneration aretwo potential effects that system

substances and processes may have ontanks. You should get assurance fromthe system manufacturer that tanks willnot be adversely affected.

For more information about selectingtreatment systems, visit www.lr.org/bwm

Legislation:The Ballast Water ManagementConvention

The Ballast Water Convention has been developed to regulatedischarges of ballast water and reduce the risk of introducing

non-native species.

Once in force, it will require ballast water treatment to be used inplace of ballast water exchange. This requirement will be phasedin according to the timescales shown in the table below, and isbased on ships year of construction. 13 treatment systems arefully approved* and more are expected.

*As of 24 January 2011

Ballast Year of ship constructioncapacity

Before 2009* 2009+ 2009-2011 2012+

< 1,500 m3 BWE or BWT BWT onlyuntil 2016;BWT onlyfrom 2016

1,500 BWE or BWT BWT only5,000 m3 until 2014; BWT

only from 2014

> 5,000 m3 BWE or BWT BWE or BWT BWT onlyuntil 2016 until 2016;BWT only BWT onlyfrom 2016 from 2016

*These ships need to comply at the rst intermediate or renewal surveyafter the anniversary of the date of delivery in the year of compliance.

BWE ballast water exchangeBWT ballast water treatment

*At the expected peak year for retrots; 2014.

20the estimated number ofretrots which will needto be carried out per day*

A Chinese Mitten Crab, one of many invasive speciesthought to have been introduced in ships ballast water

Graham Greensmith, Lloyds Registers BallastWater Management Specialist. He has beeninvolved in the development of several of theBallast Water Management Convention guidelines


26/40

Wallenius: the ve stagesof retrotting1. Scheduled drydocking:

ballast and cooling water pipingand the electrical power supplyare prepared, and space for thesystem is cleared.

2. First scheduled visit to Europe:the treatment system equipmentis brought on board.

3. Second visit: the treatment systemis connected to the piping.

4. Third visit: electrical cabling and

control panel work is done.

5. Fourth visit: commissioning andcrew training are carried out.

The Wallenius Lines vessel, Faust.

She will have a treatment systeminstalled during 2011. Her sisterships, Fidelio and Fedora, havealready been retrotted.

PureBallast, the treatment system

being installed on the Wallenius eet

Swedish shipping company, Wallenius,installs ballast water treatment systems onall its newbuilds and has already retrottedsystems on three of its existing ships (the

rst in 2006). The company has plannedahead for installation on its entire eet.Lloyds Register is surveying the installationprocess in accordance with the applicableIMO Guidelines and Rules.

Wallenius rst became aware of theenvironmental problems associated withballast water in the late 1990s and decidedto nd a suitable solution. After sourcingthe right expertise, they developed a systemwhich was tested in early 2000. Walleniusthen partnered with manufacturer Alfa

Laval who in late 2006 were able to launchthe worlds rst chemical-free ballast watertreatment system: PureBallast.

For Per Tunell, Head of EnvironmentalManagement at Wallenius, this early andproactive involvement with ballast watertreatment is simply part of the companys

ethos. He says: We are a family-ownedbusiness, very engaged in sustainabilityissues. It is one of our principles to be wellahead of rules and regulations that concernenvironmental protection.

Planning is a crucial aspect of retrottingand Wallenius prepares very carefully sothat ships are not taken out of service.Instead, they are retrotted in ve stages,in line with their normal schedule. The rststage takes place at the ships scheduleddrydocking and consists of initial

preparation work. The next four stagesare timed to coincide with the shipsscheduled arrivals back in Europe everyfew months. The whole process takesup to one year.

Per explains why Wallenius adopts thisapproach: Besides avoiding downtime,carrying out installation at the shipsscheduled stops in Europe avoids travel

costs for the company tting the systemand makes it easier for us to be involvedand maintain a good level of co-operationAnd even though it is practically possibleto carry out the initial ballast pipepreparations when the vessel is in thewater, we prefer doing it in drydock toreduce the risks.

Aside from the need for careful schedulingWallenius have learned a great deal fromtheir retrotting experiences and canpinpoint several challenges and

considerations.

Crucially, they have learned that space andpower requirements must be establishedvery early in the process. Finding room fora system can be difcult and may involvemoving spare equipment, cutting throughsteel work or even modifying tanks. Theelectrical load balance must also bechecked at the planning stage.

Case study:Retrotting: the owners experience

Ballast water treatment


27/40

Another key learning point has been theadvantage of locating control equipmentin the same places on board their ships.This makes it easier to install the system

and for crews to operate it whenswitching between vessels.

Finally, they have found that it is vitallyimportant to have a reliable companydoing the installation work. Per says:They need to know the systemthoroughly and it takes time to cometo this level of understanding.

Ballast water treatment 24/2

Once you have selected your system,the next step is installation.You will need to decide if you are goingto t the system at sea or in drydock. If

the latter, you may want to combine theretrotting with a scheduled drydocking.

Whether you can will depend on yoursurvey schedule and how it aligns withthe Convention compliance dates. Youwill also need to make sure the systemcan be delivered by your preferred time.

In the examples below, the two shipshad their keels laid before 2009. Ship 1has a ballast water capacity of greaterthan 5,000 m3 and ship 2 has a capacity

of less than 5,000 m3 but more than1,500 m3.

To comply with the Convention, ship 1must install a ballast water treatmentsystem by the rst intermediate orrenewal survey* which occurs after

the anniversary of the ships deliverydate in 2016.

Ship 2 must install a ballast watertreatment system by the rstintermediate or renewal survey*which occurs after the anniversaryof the ships delivery date in 2014.

If the owners wish to retrot duringscheduled drydocking (at renewalsurvey), ship 1 will need to retrot in2015 and ship 2 will need to retrot

in 2011.*whichever occurs earlier

Planning for installation getting the timing right

Per Tunell, Head of Environmental

Management at Wallenius

It is one of our

principles to be wellahead of rules andregulations thatconcern environmentalprotection.Per TunellHead of Environmental Managementat Wallenius

I Intermediate surveyR Renewal survey

Ballast water capacity < 5,000 m3 but > 1,500 m3, keel laid before 2009 = compliance in

Ballast water capacity > 5,000 m3, keel laid before 2009 = compliance in 2016

2015

Ship 1

Ship 2

2011

2010

2010

2012

2012

I

I

R

RR

RI

I

2014

2014

2016

2016

2018

2018

2020

2020

Year of compliance2016


28/40

The impact of the Annex VI SOx controlswill also vary depending on whethera ship is operating in or outside anEmission Control Area. The North

American ECA, extending up to 200miles offshore, will come into effectin August 2012, greatly expandingthe global area covered by ECAs andincreasing the associated quantities ofcontrolled fuel oils. As for NOx ECAs,these will only affect ships constructedon or after January 1, 2016. Currently,the North American area will be theonly NOx ECA.

We must expect that further EmissionControl Areas both for SOx or NOx

will be added over time. Indeed, aUS Caribbean ECA, covering both SOxand NOx emissions, is currently beingconsidered by the IMO.

For both newbuilds and existing ships,one thing is clear; Annex VI hasestablished a new paradigm. While inthe past there was a general consensusas to the compliance routes to beadopted, there will now be a number ofcombinations of solutions that are eitheship-specic or dictated by geography

and trade.

Fuels and exhaust emissions

Air pollution prevention compliance in a changing world

The fuel and technology optionsfor new and existing ships

2010 saw a number of signicantsteps to prevent air pollution fromships: in January the EuropeanUnions at berth requirements

came into force; in March the NorthAmerican Emission Control Area(NAECA) was adopted; in July therevised MARPOL Annex VI, togetherwith the associated NOx TechnicalCode 2008, entered into force; andin October the rst NOx approvedmethod was announced.

While the at berth requirements were thenal stage of EU measures introduced in2005, the revised MARPOL Annex VI, ofwhich the NAECA and approved method

are a part, represents the start of anextensive programme of controls,stretching over the next decade, intendedto substantially reduce air pollution fromships: specically sulphur oxides (SOx),which include some particulate matter,and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions.

For decades, fuel oils from petroleumrening have effectively been the onlysource of power for shipping, and therecent Annex VI fuel sulphur limits have

largely been met within the existingstructures and technical operatingarrangements of the shipping industry.

But complying with the fuel sulphurreduction to 0.10% inside SOx EmissionControl Areas from 2015, and to 0.50%outside these areas from 2020, willrequire change, through the use ofdistillate or alternative fuel oils, LNG orgas-cleaning technologies (scrubbers).In a world where there is alreadyconsiderable pressure on distillates,

and LNG is generally only a real optionfor newbuilds, compliance will not comecheap and, in the case of distillates, theshipping industry will need to competewith other consumers.

...globalisation remains bound to routines thatwere developed by seafarers to master the Oceanicexperiment. After 500 years of such practice, the timehas come to re-assess these established routines andrethink the conditions of the experiment as a whole.Prof. Dr. Peter SloterdijkProfessor of Philosophy and Media Theory, Karlsruhe,speaking at GMEC 2010


29/40

Here, we look at the options fornewbuilds and existing ships.

Newbuilds

NOxFor the current round of newbuilds,the situation regarding NOx emissionsremains quite straightforward. TheTier II limits will continue to be met inprinciple by using the same in-engine,non-consuming methods that havesuccessfully been used since 2000 forTier I compliance albeit, applied witha slightly higher level of severity.

SOx

Where options do exist, they lie indeciding what route to follow to complywith the future SOx reductions insideand outside Emission Control Areas.The question is whether the means ofcompliance, or at least the necessaryinstallation arrangements, areincorporated at construction.

Fuel oil choicesIn terms of fuel, the current alternativesto relying on distillate fuel oil are aswitch to gas, in most cases in the form

of LNG, either totally or in dual fuelapplications, or to non-petroleum basedfuels, although there are considerableissues regarding the availability and useof rst generation bio-diesels in marineapplications. Ongoing research willundoubtedly identify other options,including renewables, which may beapplicable in either fairly general terms >

Fuels and exhaust emissions 26/2

Andy Wright, Lloyds RegistersFuel and Emissions Specialist

Legislation:Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention

MARPOL Annex VI sets limits on NOx and SOx emissions. Underthe Annex, Emission Control Areas (ECAs) can be established.These may be set up to control NOx or SOx emissions, or both.

There are currently two SOx ECAs in force the Baltic Sea and thNorth Sea. A third, the North American ECA, will come into effecon August 1, 2012 and will control both SOx and NOx emissions

NOx emissionsNOx requirements apply only to installed diesel engines over 130kW. The different tiers of control are based on ship constructiondate, with the limit value determined on the basis of enginerated speed. However, in the case of additional or non-identicalreplacement engines the applicable Tier is set by the installationdate. Tier III limits apply only inside NOx Emission Control Areas.

* Depending on the outcome of a review (to be concluded in 2013) as to theavailability of the required technology, this date could be deferred.

Existing engines over 5MW, of 90 litres and above per cylinder,

installed on ships constructed between January 1, 1990 andDecember 31,1999 are required to limit NOx emissions to levelsequivalent to Tier I if a so-called approved method for NOxemission control is commercially available.

SOx and particulate matter emissionsAnnex VI controls SOx and particulate matter emissions by limitinthe maximum allowable sulphur content of fuel oil used bothinside and outside SOx Emission Control Areas. Complianceusing alternative means such as exhaust gas cleaning systemsis also allowed.

* Depending on the outcome of a review (to be concluded in 2018) as to theavailability of the required fuel oil, this date could be deferred to January 1, 2025

Tier Ship Total weighted cycle emission limit (g/kWhconstruction n = engines rated speed (rpm)

date onor after n < 130 n = 1301999 n 2000

I January 1 17.0 45.n-0.2 9.82000

II January 1 14.4 44.n-0.23 7.72011

III January 1 3.4 9.n-0.2 2.0

2016*

Fuel oil sulphur limits outside Fuel oil sulphur limits inside SOX

SOX and particulate matter ECAs and particulate matter ECAs

4.50% m/m before 1.50% m/m before July 1, 2010January 1, 2012

3.50% m/m on and after 1.00% m/m on and afterJanuary 1, 2012 July 1, 2010

0.50% m/m on and after 0.10% m/m on and afterJanuary 1, 2020* January 1, 2015


30/40

Fuels and exhaust emissions

or in specic niche applications. Relatedto this is work within IMO on the wideracceptance of using low ash point fuelswithin duly designed machinery spaces,which would open the door to a rangeof other manufactured fuel types.Underpinning this research is fueleconomy, not just of the engine but of

the ship as a whole. Whichever fueloption is taken, minimising fuel demandfrom the design stage onwards must beseen as an essential prerequisite forcoping with the future.

Gas cleaning systemsExhaust gas cleaning systems offeranother range of options, since Annex VIallows such arrangements to be used toachieve SOx compliance both inside andoutside Emission Control Areas. Thisoption allows the ongoing use of residual

fuel oils since the maximum fuel oilsulphur limit is that certied for thesystem. Opting for a gas cleaning systemopens up a number of possibilities, fromthe range of equipment currently on themarket to the question of whether tot now or to make the provisions whichwill facilitate tting in the future. Whiledeferment can initially appear attractive,tting at newbuild ensures readinessfrom the outset and exibility; only witha ship tted with exhaust gas cleaningsystems will you have a choice when the

time comes.

Existing ships

NOxFor those ships tted with NOx certiedengines currently about 50% of theworld eet the key issue is to remainwithin the bounds set by thatcertication. For those using theParameter Check method, replacementNOx critical components must be markedup as required, Record Books of Engine

Parameters must be completed, even forlike-for-like changes, and these and theapproved Technical Files must be onboard and available for inspection.

For these ships there is, however, thealternative option of demonstratingcompliance using the DirectMeasurement and Monitoring method.Although this still requires a Technical Filetogether with an approved system, itpotentially allows much greater exibilityover the sourcing of NOx critical

components and the engine settingswhich are adopted, since the engineitself is reduced to a black box with fueloil and air coming in and power andexhaust gases going out.

Although ships built before 2000 wereinitially outside the NOx certicationrequirement, except where certainreplacement engines were installed, theintroduction of the approved methodconcept has changed this for enginesover 5MW and of 90 litre/cylinder or

more displacement on ships constructedon or after January 1, 1990, but beforeJanuary 1, 2000. In these instances, if anapproved method exists it is required tobe tted within a given time period.Owners of such ships need to remainvigilant for announcements from theIMO as to their availability.

One NOx certication issue common toall existing ships is the requirement in therevised Annex concerning any non-identical replacement or additional

engines installed on board. All suchengines are now required to be certiedto the Tier applicable to their date ofinstallation, currently Tier II, irrespectiveof the keel laying date of the ship itself.

SOxFor existing ships the future, in terms ofSOx emission controls, has some parallelwith the future for newbuilds, but theoptions will be restricted by the existingfuel oil bunker tank arrangements andmachinery systems, together with theships remaining service life. Furthermore

although 2015 may seem far off, it is noin terms of the number of scheduleddockings over that period if anysubstantial modications are to be madeor new machinery systems, such asexhaust gas cleaning systems, are to beinstalled. In the more immediate futureit must be ensured that bunker clausesor nominations are such that any fuels tobe used on board from January 1, 2012will not exceed the 3.50% maximumsulphur limit which will be in force fromthat date.


31/40

Case study:LNG as fuel: classing the rst of a kindwith Viking Line and STX

Fuels and exhaust emissions 28/2

Viking Lines new 56,850 gt ferry, to be constructed at STX Turku in Finland andclassed by Lloyds Register for delivery in 2013, is a notable LNG-as-fuel initiative

Our LNG-as-fuel expertise is being appliedto a rst of its kind dual fuel ferry for

Viking Line. The 56,850 gt ropax ship willbe the rst deep sea international ferry touse LNG as its primary fuel and is beingdesigned and built to Lloyds Register classat STX Finland. She will also be the rst shipto comply with our provisional Rules forLNG propulsion.

Viking Lines decision to opt for LNG hasbeen based on a desire to be at theforefront of environmental management aswell as to mitigate anticipated fuel costs.

We have been involved with the projectfrom the pre-contract stage, working withViking and STX to help assess and developthe design. And since the contract hasbeen awarded, we have provided the STXtechnical team with assistance on issuessuch as developing LNG storage facilitiesand process piping.

We have also carried out a detailed riskanalysis for Viking Line on the bunkeringprocess to identify and minimise risksassociated with movement of the bunker

barge and ship within the connes of theport and with the simultaneous loading ofpassengers, cars and LNG, and to helpensure compatibility between bunker bargecapacity and the ships systems.

As usual, we are providing a tailoredcombination of global and local support

to Viking and STX: the Passenger ShipSupport Centre in London, our London andCopenhagen design support ofces, andcolleagues in Finland are working togetherto make sure every aspect of the designand build is covered. We have visited theyard on several occasions and will maintainthis contact throughout the project.

Richard Goodwin, Manager of the LondonPassenger Ship Support Centre comments:This project reects the breadth of workwe have done on the issues and challenges

associated with LNG as fuel. It will providea number of technical challenges forViking, STX and Lloyds Register. Carefulteamwork will help to ensure that theseare resolved satisfactorily. In addition toensuring the safety of the LNG system,a key issue will be the integration ofboth LNG and fuel oil installations andcompliance with the new IMO Safe Returnto Port requirements.

Delivery is scheduled for the beginning of2013 and the ship will operate between

Stockholm and Turku, Finland.

50%the percentage of theworld eet currentlytted with NOxcertied engines.


32/40

Energy Efciency Design Index (EEDI)

The Energy Efciency Design Index what does it mean for your ship?

We break down the EEDI equation

EEDI may be improved through: Use of de-rated engines More efcient engines Use of low-carbon fuels such as LNG

and bio-diesel

EEDI may be improved through: Waste heat recovery systems Shaft propulsion generators and other

electrical energy efcient technologies Solar power

EEDI may be improved through: More efcient engines Optimised auxiliary machinery

Section 01Main engine(s)

Section 02Auxiliary engine(s)

Section 03Energy saving technologies(auxiliary power)

fj PME(i).CFME(i).SFCME(i) +(PAE.CFAE.SFCAE*)+ fj. PPTI(i) feff(i).PAEeff(i) CFAE.SFC

fi.Capacity.Vref. fw

M nME

j=1 i=1

M

nPTI neff

j=1 i=1 i=1 EEDI =

General design measuresThe overall EEDI may be improved through: Hydrodynamic and aerodynamic modication, such as optimised hull design Increased cargo carrying capacity Advanced hull coatings Design for slower speed


33/40


EEDI may be improved through: Wind power Nuclear power

Section 04Energy saving technologies(main power)

feff(i).Peff(i).CFME.SFCMEneff

i=1

The Energy Efciency Design Index(EEDI) is already being adopted ona voluntary basis and will possiblybecome mandatory from 2013, buthow does the EEDI equation applyto your ship, and how can youachieve a good rating?

A formula for efciencyThe EEDI is a formula for calculatingships specic CO2 emissions (per tonnemile). The equation certainly lookscomplicated, but it can be divided intofour sections, each one applicable to theships machinery or the technologiesbeing used on board.

Sections one and two of the formulacalculate the CO2 produced by the shipspropulsion and auxiliary power systems.

Section three accounts for any secondaryenergy usage by machinery such as shaftpropulsion motors and generators. Andsection four subtracts the CO2 savedthrough innovative energy savingtechnologies like kites or sails.

The resulting CO2 gure is divided bythe ships transport work or benet tosociety (in effect, the ships capacitymultiplied by its speed) to arrive at thenal EEDI.

For each of the four sections, we list

some of the existing and developingtechnical measures which may beconsidered in order to achieve a betterEEDI, and we also highlight other generameasures which will inuence theEEDI overall.

These general measures are not justlimited to reducing speed, and indeedspeed reduction may not suit yourneeds. Other options include simplehydrodynamic (underwater) andaerodynamic (above water) design

modications and the application ofadvanced coatings.

Zabi Bazari, Lloyds Registers ShipEnergy Services Manager, has beeninvolved in Energy Efciency DesignIndex (EEDI) impact studies for the IMO

SkySails

The EEDI equation can be divided intofour sections, each one applicable tothe ships machinery or the technologiesbeing used on board.

30/3


34/40

The EEDI is a tool for controlling CO2 emissions from shipsand is primarily applicable to new ships. It was rst developed

by the IMO in 2003 and draft guidelines on its voluntaryimplementation were developed in 2009 with input fromag states and other industry bodies. The EEDI is voluntaryat present but will possibly become mandatory in 2013.

Regulatory implementationOnce it is mandatory, the EEDIs regulatory mechanism willallow CO2 to be controlled in much the same way that MARPOLAnnex VI has regulated NOx and SOx emissions throughphased reductions in limits. The key regulatory elements are:

Reference line:The required baseline EEDI for each ship type.

Reduction rate:The percentage of EEDI reduction relative to the reference line.

Cut-off levels:At present, smaller size vessels are excluded from EEDI control.

In order for a ship to comply, its attained EEDI must be less thanor equal to the required EEDI for the ship type and size.

The rst stage of implementation will apply to the followingship types above 400 gt: bulk carriers

tankers gas carriers container ships general cargo ships refrigerated cargo ships combination carriers

Other ship types, such as ro-ro and cruise vessels are beinginvestigated for inclusion in later phases of implementationand turbine, diesel electric and hybrid propulsion types willinitially be excluded.

Verication

EEDI verication will require input from the shipyard,shipowner and a recognised organisation (RO) in order toachieve certication under the guidelines. Pre-verication willoccur at the design stage whereas nal verication will beconducted after sea trials and upon commissioning.


Aerodynamic modications to ship structures can reduce drag,leading to fuel savings and a lower overall EEDI.

In 2010, we carried out a study with a London and Greece-basedclient to apply this theory to a 95,000 dwt bulk carrier usingcomputational uid dynamics (CFD). Air ow was modelled toassess wind drag and this included examining the effect of addinfairings and repositioning deckhouse appendages.

The ndings showed that large reductions in wind drag of up to20% were possible by attaching well-designed fairings to the shand altering appendages on the deckhouse and funnel.This equated to an estimated fuel saving of 2.5% when sailing a14 knots into a 22 knot headwind. Smaller, but still signicant,

fuel reductions were also estimated for lower wind speeds.

Since completion of this work, we have repeated the study on a59,000 dwt bulk carrier. This achieved a similar fuel consumptionreduction, demonstrating the potential for consistent savingswhen applying the same technique to classic bulk carrier design

For more information, contact [email protected]

Case studyDragging the EEDI down

Air ow around the deckhouse before (top)and after (bottom) the modications,showing the achieved wind drag reduction

Legislation:The Energy Efciency Design Index(EEDI)


35/40

Inventory of Hazardous Materials 32/3

Ten good reasons forgetting an Inventory ofHazardous Materials

Why it pays to get an Inventory now

Known at Lloyds Register as theGreen Passport, the Inventory ofHazardous Materials (IHM) is a keyrequirement of the Hong Kong

Convention for the Safe andEnvironmentally Sound Recycling ofShips. It records materials present inthe ships structure, systems andequipment which may be hazardousto the health and the environment.

Due to complicated entry-into-forcecriteria, it is difcult to anticipate whenthe Convention will be ratied, althoughit is expected sometime between 2013and 2015. Once in force, all ships will berequired to maintain an Inventory.

Yet almost 1,000 ships have alreadysigned up for Lloyds Registers GreenPassport services. So why have so manyclients asked for assistance in achievingearly compliance with the Hong KongConvention?

Here are the top ten reasons for gettingan Inventory ahead of time.

01Quality controlPress reports reveal that asbestos-containing materials have been detected

on a number of recent newbuilds,despite the SOLAS Conventions totalasbestos ban. In one case so muchasbestos was found in thousands ofgaskets and seals that the removaloperation cost an estimated 10% of thepurchase price. The problem is not justconned to newbuilds, either as newsupplies are purchased during operationthere is still a risk of bringing asbestos-containing materials on board.Controlling subcontractor supply throughan IHM based on Declaration of

Conformity forms* is yet another wayof showing due diligence and helpingensure a robust asbestos-freeprocurement plan is in place.

02Risk managementMaintaining an IHM can also improve thhealth and safety of your ships crews;

not only does the IHM control theinstallation of hazardous materials onships, it also promotes better hazardmanagement and ensures crews areaware of any potential risks on board.

03The right timeEnsuring that the requirement for an IHMis included in the specication for currennew-build projects makes sense for anumber of reasons. The constructionof a ship is the best time to compile a

comprehensive Inventory as there iscomplete information available on thematerials being used. Also, the majorityof ships under construction today will beexisting ships by the time the Conventioenters into force, at which stage they whave to develop an IHM. Compliancenow could save you time, effort andadditional expenditure at a later date. >

The construction of a ship is the best time to compilea comprehensive Inventory as there is completeinformation on the materials being used.Jim HeathShip Recycling Product Manager

*Declaration of Conformity forms are supplied to manufacturers

when items are purchased for installation on board ship and

should detail any hazardous materials they contain.


36/40


37/40

Inventory of Hazardous Materials 34/3

Legislation:The Ship Recycling Convention

The Hong Kong Convention for the Safe and EnvironmentallySound Recycling of Ships was adopted by 67 member statesof the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in May, 2009.

It is designed to address growing concerns about global shiprecycling standards.

The Convention will enter into force 24 months after the date onwhich 15 states, representing 40% of world merchant shippingby gross tonnage, have ratied it. The combined maximumannual ship recycling volume of those states must, duringthe preceding 10 years*, constitute not less than 3% of theircombined merchant shipping tonnage.

In 2010, the IMO Secretary-General reiterated the wish thatmajor ship recycling nations join the Convention as soon aspossible. However, to date the Convention has only been

signed, subject to ratication or acceptance, by France, Italy,the Netherlands, Saint Kitts & Nevis and Turkey.The fact that these states have only signed subject to raticationmeans that, at the time of writing, the total number of signatorierecorded by the IMO as contributing to the entry into forcerequirements is nil.

What the Convention will requireOnce the Convention is in force, shipowners will need: An Inventory of Hazardous Materials, which must be

maintained throughout the life of the ship A Ship Recycling Plan, developed in partnership with an

authorised recycling facility Permission from the ag state to conduct a Final Survey An International Ready for Recycling Certicate, issued by

the ag state once the Final Survey is completed.

*This means the 10 years preceding the date by which15 states have ratied the Convention.

21the number of differentship types which havebeen issued with aGreen Passport fromLloyds Register

09Improved planningAs well as aiding nancial planningby promoting better awareness ofthe changing value of assets due toincreasingly stringent dismantlingrequirements, the IHM can provideadditional in-service benets.Maintaining a record of all potentialonboard hazards enables eet-wide

long-term liability planning, allowingyou to identify all ships on which ahazard is present and your potentialtotal liability for its removal orreplacement.

10Easier recyclingAnd last but not least, maintainingan IHM is the rst step towards saferand more environmentally sounddecommissioning of your ship atthe end of her life, helping your

chosen facility to formulate a ShipRecycling Plan.


38/40

an we help?

upport at every step

services cover the entire ship lifecycle. From helpingget things right at the earliest design stage totaining quality in service, we help you operatey and sustainably through life. Take a look to seewe support owners, operators, builders and

gners at every step.

igndesign stage we work with youget things right rst time so thatip operates as safely, cleanly and

ntly as possible through life.contract advicegn optimisationapproval [01]assessment and statutoryputational software[02]Right software[03]utory certicationronmental services

man factors services approvalnical investigations

ning

nstructionstruction we help ensureew vessel meets the designments and is completed as

ntly as possible.contract advicestruction survey anditoring[04]erials and components survey[05]utory certicationronmental servicesnical investigations

ning

03 OperationIn service our priorities are eet safetyand quality. We help you operate yourship sustainably, maintaining complianceand helping optimise efciency. Pre-contract advice Port state control advice[06] FOBAS [07] Class survey[08] In-water survey[09] Statutory certication[10] Environmental services Human factors services[11] Maintenance optimisation Ship emergency response services Ship inspection and assessment Software Technical investigations [12] Type approval[13] Training

04 End of lifeAt the end of your ships life ourservices help you comply with recyclingrequirements and provide addedcondence in a safe dismantling process. Pre-contract advice Final survey[14] Statutory certication[14] Audit during dismantling[15] Training

[03]

[05]

[04]

[06]

[09]

[07]

[09][08] [10]

[12]

[13]

[11]

[14]

02 Construction 04 En03 Operation

[01] [02][03]

01 Design


39/40

Talk to us

Lloyds Register is uniquely placed to provide support toowners, operators, builders and regulators interested ina cleaner, greener shipping industry. Helping to buildunderstanding of safety, environmental and operationalissues and related risks is our daily work.

Our environmental services cover a wide range of

issues affecting ship design, operation and dismantling.They range from helping you interpret and prepare forfuture regulations to holistic reviews to help you reduceenvironmental impacts.

Talk to us today and see how we can help you operatemore safely and sustainably:www.lr.org/sate

Printed on Soporset Premium Offset from the

Robert Horne Group. The virgin wood bre is

sourced from Spain and Chile and produced

at a mill in Scotland that has been awarded

the ISO14001 certicate for environmental

management. The pulp is bleached using an

elemental chlorine-free (ECF) process. Soporset

is an FSC product group from well-managed

f t d th t ll d

Contact 36/3


40/40

Documents

LR - Shipping & Environment