GSF Bulk Carrier Concept Study PDF

35.000 dwt bulk carrier

exhaust gas emission reduction
concept study
December 2009
Published : 20 November 2009

Project : 40.5070.00
Prepared : Søren Schnack

Checked : Hans Otto Kristensen
Green Ship of the Future 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 Purpose 4
1.2 Emission regulations 5
1.3 Emission reduction methods 7
2 THE REFERENCE SHIP SEAHORSE 35 8
2.1 Outline description 8
2.2 Main data 9
2.3 Fuel consumption and emission 10
2.4 General arrangement 10
2.5 Machinery arrangement 10
2.6 Electrical power balance 12
2.7 Load profile 12
3 MODIFICATIONS TO THE BASIS SHIP 13
3.1 List of modifications 13
3.2 Speed nozzle / propeller and twisted spade rudder / Costa-bulb 13
3.3 De-rating of main engine 15
3.4 Water in fuel (WIF) 15
3.5 Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) 17
3.6 Waste heat recovery system (WHR) 19
3.8 Ducted / direct air intake for main engine 22
3.9 Optimised coolers and cooling pumps 23
3.10 Auxiliary engine and boiler operation on marine gas oil (MGO) 23
3.11 High capacity fresh water generator 23
3.12 Installation of ballast water treatment System (BWT) 24

4 CONSEQUENSES OF MODIFICATIONS 25
4.1 Space considerations 25
4.2 Effect on electrical power balance 27
4.3 Steam balance 28
4.4 Emission reductions 29
4.5 Deadweight loss 34
4.6 Economical consequences 34
5 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES 36
5.1 Air Lubrication and/or micro bubbles 36
5.2 Low friction bottom paint 36
6 OPERATIONS 36
6.1 Effect of speed reduction 36
7 CONCLUSIONS AND FINAL REMARK 38

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The purpose with this bulk carrier conceptual study is to show the effect of selected
existing technologies and operational means to reduce exhaust gas emissions from
ships.
This bulk carrier study is one of two studies supported by the Danish Maritime
Foundation and part of the many projects under Green Ship of the Future – aimed to
demonstrate the potential of maritime exhaust gas emission reducing technologies,
primarily used by Danish partners, and to show that high exhaust gas emission
reductions may be obtained, with following main targets:
CO2: 30 % reduction
NOx: 90 % reduction
SO2: 90 % reduction
The following describe the basis ship and the selected GSF emission reducing
technologies necessary to achieve these reductions, which are more ambitious than
the rules expected to come into force in the coming years.
The case study integrates and quantifies the main effects of selected ‘green systems’.
Most of the systems have been custom designed for the case study, by partners in
the ‘Green Ship of the Future’ network. The main technical system data, including
emission, consumption and cost data, also originate from the system designers:
• MAN Diesel, Copenhagen GSF partner

• MAN Turbo, Hamburg GSF partner
• Aalborg Industries, Aalborg GSF partner
• Force Technology, Lyngby GSF partner
• DESMI Pumps, Nørresundby GSF partner
• APV Heat Exchanger, Kolding GSF partner
• Atlas-Danmark, Nr. Alslev
• Alfa Laval, Copenhagen
• Grontmij | Carl Bro, Glostrup GSF partner
1.2 Emission regulations
As illustrated below the international rules concerning NOx, SOx and particular matter
will be tightened in the future.
5,0
4,5 Global
4,0 ECA (Emission Control Area)

Max. Sulphur percentage in
oil for ship propulsion
3,5
3,0
SOx emission limit schedule
2,5 according to IMO
2,0
(Int. Maritime Organisation)
1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Year
Throughout the world, national and regional governments tend to extent the Emission
Control Areas (ECA’s). Lately, the US and Canada have put forward a proposal, that
will extend their emission control areas to 200 nautical miles from the coast.
It demands use of fuels containing less than 0,1% sulphur from 2015 as well as an
80% NOx reduction from 2016. In lieu of low sulphur FO the proposal calls for
exhaust gas cleaning devices, so called scrubbers, as the world production of low
sulphur FO can not meet the demand.
The EU is going to limit the sulphur content of fuels to 0.10% in EU ports from
January 2010.
Since May 2009, California has limited the sulphur content of fuels to 0.50% in ports
and within 24 nautical miles from the coastline.
18
16 NOx emission limit schedule

according to IMO
14 (Int. Maritime Organisation)
NOx limit (g/kWh) 12
10
8 2000
2011
6 2016 (ECA´s only)
4
0
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
Engine RPM
The rules coming into force concerning NOx emissions are internationally controlled
by the IMO and, to some extent, by national governments stating separate
requirements for NOx within ECA areas.
Concerning CO2 it is expected, that rules for ships will come into force in the near
future, both internationally and regionally. For the moment, however, the only
concrete step, is the probably coming rules enforcing CO2 indexing of new ships. 3 %
of the worlds CO2 emission has been calculated to come from ship transport (IMO
GHG study, July 2009)
1.3 Emission reduction methods
Listed below are some of the emission reduction measures, which have been
mentioned in recent years. The claimed potential for each measure is listed as well.
The idea of this concept study is to determine, for a specific ship design, the
combined effect of some of these measures.
MEASURE / METHOD CO2 NOx SOx

Reduction Reduction Reduction
MACHINERY
Dual / Multi MCR certification 1 to 3 % 1 to 3 %
Turbo charging with variable nozzle ring
WHR systems (Waste Heat Recovery) 8 to 10 % 8 to 10 8 to 10 %
EGR systems (Exhaust Gas
Recirculating) -2 to -3 % 80% 19%
Auxiliary systems optimisation 1,5 % 1,5 % 1,5 %
Automated engine monitoring 1% 1%
Scrubber systems 3% 98 %
Optimized control for ship cooling
LNG fuel 25 % 35 % 100 %
increase 1 to 2 increase 1 to 2
WIF systems (Water In Fuel) % 30 to 35 % %
PROPULSION
ACS (Air lubrication system) 5 to 10 % 5 to 10 % 5 to 10 %
Innovative propeller Not yet known Not yet known Not yet known
OPERATION
SIMAC GSF student forum Not yet known Not yet known Not yet known
Performance monitoring of silicone
antifouling 4 to 8 % 4 to 8 % 4 to 8 %
Lab on a ship 0 to 5 % 0 to 5 % 0 to 5 %
2 THE REFERENCE SHIP SEAHORSE 35
2.1 Outline description
The bulk carrier study is based on the Grontmij | Carl Bro designed SEAHORSE 35
which is a new generation, shallow draft, wide hatched and geared 35,000 DWT
Handy size Bulk Carrier with double hull. The vessel is laid out with 5 cargo holds,
equipped with end-folding hydraulically operated hatch covers and 4 x 30 t deck
cranes. The SEAHORSE 35 is designed to accommodate the latest trends and
developments within the Handy size Bulk Carrier trade. For the time being, eight
SH35’s are on order at Chinese yards. The keel has been laid for the first two. The
design is based on Grontmij | Carl Bro’s previous handy size bulker, the Diamond 34,
of which two have been completed and are ready for seatrial, and four more are on
order.
The SEAHORSE 35 is a future-orientated design incorporating a wide range of

operational features and expected future safety regulations. The following items have
been emphasized in the design:
• Economical operation/maintenance
• Environmental friendliness
• Loading flexibility and robustness
• Future regulations for Bulk Carriers
• Safety
The double hull concept ensures easy discharging and cargo hold cleaning, as well
as a strong and robust hull structure, able to withstand the demanding service of bulk
carriers. The absence of hopper tanks, as well as an efficient cargo hold cleaning
system, contributes to an effective cargo operation.
Low maintenance costs are ensured by a high quality paint specification, ballast pipes
and valves arranged in double bottom pipe duct and service systems, such as fire
main line, compressed air, hydraulic piping and cables are arranged in the wing tank
pipe ducts.
The safe operation of the SEAHORSE 35 is improved by the double hull, which forms
a second barrier against accidental water ingress and allows safe access for close-up
survey of the complete hull structure, even when the vessel is loaded. Green water
protection of forecastle air pipes, ventilation heads and stores hatch are provided by
the breakwater, and a protected under-deck passage to the fore deck improves the
safe operation of the vessel.
The environmental friendliness is ensured by low emission machinery, easy ballast

water exchange and the arrangement of a cargo hold washing-water holding tank.
Furthermore, to minimise the risk for oil spill, all heavy fuel oil and diesel oil is stored
in protected location tanks away from the ships shell plating.
2.2 Main data
The main data of the basis ship are:
Length over all 180.0 m

Length PP 176.75 m
Breadth 30.00 m
Depth 14.7 m
Draught 10.1 m
tons
Deadweight 35,000
Cargo hold cubic (grain) 46,700 m3
Gross tonnage 23,800
GT/NT
Net tonnage 10,500
Main engine (TIER I): MAN 5S50ME-B9
Main engine power output (SMCR) 7410 kW
Revolutions 117 RPM
Diesel generators: 3 x 600 kW
Propeller, fixed pitch, keyless 5.6 m, 4 blades,
Service speed at design draught and with a propulsive
14.0 knots
power of 6.300 kW corresponding to 0.85 x SMCR
2.3 Fuel consumption and emission
The specific oil consumption of main and auxiliary engines, respectively, is 159.3
g/kWh and 200.0 g/kWh, under ISO conditions. These are catalogue values, which
will be used throughout the report.
The total oil consumption at 14.0 knots service speed and with an electrical load of
376 kW, according to the electric al balance, is thus:
(6300 x 159.3 + 376 x 200 / 0.95) x 24 / 1.000.000 tons/day = 26 tons/day (ISO conditions)
The emission during normal navigation at service speed, based on heavy fuel oil with
a sulphur content of 3%, will be:
CO2: 85.4 tons per 24 hours

SOx: 1.6 tons per 24 hours
NOx: 2.7 tons per 24 hours
Particulate matters (PM): 0.3 tons per 24 hours
2.4 General arrangement
2.5 Machinery arrangement
The machinery arrangement for the bulk carrier is concentrated around the main
engine with all the ancillary systems distributed on the different deck from tanktop to
casing.
Following ‘green technologies’ are already incorporated for these vessels:
• Exhaust gas boiler utilizing main engine exhaust heat to generate service
steam
• Waste water treatment according to IMO / SOLAS requirements
• Protected location of oil tanks (double hull) to minimize fuel spill in case of
grounding or collision.
2.6 Electrical power balance
Extract of electrical power balance for the basis ship
ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING EQUIPMENT: QTY' POWER

DIESEL GENERATOR SET (GENERATOR CAPACITY) [kW]: 3 500
EMERGENCY DIESEL GERERATOR SET (GENERATOR CAPACITY) [kW] 1 100
LOAD [kW]
ELECTRICAL BALANCE
GROUP: / CONDITION: AT SEA,
MANOEUV CARGO
AT SEA BALL. HARBOUR
. HANDLING
EXCH.
GROUP 1 PROPULSION SERVICE [KW]: 43 43 100 5 5
GROUP 2 OTHER AUX SYSTEMS IN E/R [KW]: 124 244 141 123 177
GROUP 3 DECK MACHINERY [KW]: 0 0 21 21 21
GROUP 4 CARGO GEAR [KW]: 0 0 0 557 0
GROUP 5 VENTILATION [KW]: 117 117 117 87 88
GROUP 6 OTHER AUX. SYSTEMS OUTSIDE E/R [KW]: 18 18 43 2 2
GROUP 7 GALLEY AND LAUNDRY [KW]: 23 23 23 23 23
GROUP 8 220 V INSTALLATION [KW]: 39 39 39 58 59
TOTAL POWER DEMAND [KW]: 365 485 484 875 375
TOTAL POWER DEMAND INCL. 3% SAFETY MARGIN: 376 499 498 902 386
AUX. ENGINE SETS RUNNING: 1 2 2 2 / 3 1
EMERGENCY DIESELGENERATOR RUNNING:
GENERATOR LOAD: 75% 50% 50% 90% / 60% 77%
2.7 Load profile
Time distribution of engine and boiler loads

at sea at sea manoeuv. unloading loading total
ballast
exchange
operating days / year 225 5 10 60 60 360
main engine
power/SMCR % 85 85 50
power kw 6300 6300 3706
diesel generators
electrical load kw 365 485 484 875 375
oilfired boiler
steam production kg/h 782 782
3 MODIFICATIONS TO THE BASIS SHIP
3.1 List of modifications
The following developed technologies have been selected for the concept study to
evaluate the effect on emissions, electric balance (and fuel consumption), space
requirement, budget costs and cargo intake for this ship design if all these
technologies were included:
The technologies are:
• Speed nozzle / optimized propeller / ME derating

• Twisted spade rudder with Costa bulb
• Water in fuel (WIF)
• Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
• Waste heat recovery system (WHR)
• Exhaust gas scrubber
• Ducted/direct air intake for main engine
• Optimised coolers and cooling pumps
• Auxiliary engine operation on marine gas oil (MGO)
• High capacity fresh water generator
• Installation of ballast water treatment System (BWT)
3.2 Speed nozzle / propeller and twisted spade rudder / Costa-bulb
The propeller diameter on a bulk carrier is normally restricted, due to propeller

immersion requirements at ballast draught, leading to a relatively high propeller
loading. This, in connection with the low speed, typical of a bulk carrier, leads to a
relatively low propeller efficiency. The reason is, in principle, that the propeller thrust
is relatively large compared to the mass flow through the propeller disc, meaning that
a relatively high velocity increase of the flow is necessary, leading to a relatively high
level of kinetic energy in the propeller wash.
Propeller nozzles have been utilized for many years to overcome this type of problem,
on tugs, trawlers and other vessels using relatively high power at low speed, and with
a restricted propeller diameter, either due to space or RPM restrictions.
For applications where the speed is slightly higher, such as a bulker, the nozzle is
called a speed nozzle, but the principle is the same. The circulation around the
nozzle’s wing section is utilized to increase the contraction of the flow forward of the
propeller, and in a corresponding manner divert the flow aft of the propeller, thus
creating a flow pattern equivalent to the flow generated by a larger propeller.
In practice this leads partly to the transfer of thrust from the propeller to the nozzle.
The propeller design will of course have to be adapted for, and optimized together
with the nozzle. The standard propeller diameter on the Seahorse is 5.6 m. When
fitting a propeller nozzle, the critical parameter is going to be the nozzle’s outside
diameter. It was decided to allow a slight increase to 5.8 m, which means the
clearance above the baseline will be reduced by 100 mm.
The idea of the twisted rudder is to align the rudder blade to the flow direction in the
propeller wash. For a right hand turning propeller the wash above the shaft will be
deflected somewhat to starboard, where as the flow will be deflected somewhat to
port, below the shaft. On the twisted rudder, the upper and lower part, of the blade,
are angled relatively to each other, such as to give a better alignment with the flow for
both parts. In order to minimize the rudder torque, for the rudder around neutral
position, a certain symmetry between the upper and lower part of the rudder is
necessary, which means that twisted rudders are normally made as full spade
rudders.
The Costa bulb is a streamlined body fitted on the rudder, behind the propeller hub. It
minimizes the hub vortex and its related loss, by providing a more homogeneous flow
distribution behind the hub area.
The total reduction in propulsive power at service speed (85 % MCR), from the
application of the above mentioned devices, has been estimated by FORCE
Technology (the Danish ship model basin in Lyngby) to 4 % or 250 kW (reduced from
6,500 to 6,250 kW). The ship speed is unchanged.
Aft body with modifications, including speed nozzle, spade rudder, Costa bulb,
increased funnel and elevated accommodation block.
3.3 De-rating of main engine
The reduction in the propulsive power required, makes it possible to de-rate the main
engine, which, at unchanged RPM, makes it possible to lower the ratio between mean
effective pressure and maximum pressure in the combustion chambers. This
increases the engines thermal efficiency, thereby reducing the specific fuel oil
consumption.
The reference engine, an MAN 5S50 ME-B9, has a nominal maximum continuous
rating (NMCR) of 8,900 kW at 117 RPM.
In order to deliver 6,300 kw at 85 % of specified maximum continuous rating (SMCR)

in the basis ship, however, the engine’s SMCR is reduced to 7,412 kW at 117 RPM,
meaning that it is already de-rated. In order for the engine to deliver 6,050 kW at 85
% SMCR, the engine has been further de-rated to 7,118 kW at 117 RPM.
3.4 Water in fuel (WIF)
Operating on WIF gives the following possibilities:
o Based on already obtained experience the effect of adding 50 % water to the

fuel is expected to give a 30-35% NOx reduction of the exhaust gas, at the
expense of an increase in CO2 emissions of 1-2%.
o To be used as an alternative measure to reduce the NOx level instead of

mechanical adjustments / modification of the engine and thereby being able to
fulfil the IMO Tier II limit.
o To be used to reduce CO2 emission together with turbochargers with variable

nozzle area, as the maximum fuel oil reduction potential cannot be obtained
operating on fuel only (without WIF) as the NOx emissions would exceed an
unacceptable level.
The mechanism of water in fuel
WIF is believed to decrease the NOx formation because the peak temperature is
lowered due to the higher heat capacity of water vapour (compared to ambient air)
and the heat absorption by water vaporization. It has also been observed, that the
formation of PM is lowered when WIF is employed, which can be explained by the
phenomenon micro-explosions or secondary atomization of emulsified fuel. This
occurs, because the boiling point of water is lower than that of the surrounding fuel
oil. The overall effect of the improved mixing of fuel with the combustion air is a
decrease of the final CO, THC and PM concentrations. The improved mixing is also
due to an increased momentum of the vaporized fuel jet (the mass is increased due
to addition of water), which also improves the mixing. The presence of water in the
fuel leads to a potential ignition delay, which means that more time for premixing of
fuel and air is available. The last effect of WIF is an increased amount of hydroxyl
radicals due to the higher water concentration. Hydroxyl radicals are essential in the
oxidation of CO and THC.
Water in fuel on MAN two-stroke engines
MAN diesel delivers the main components of the system, assembled in a so-called
WIF unit, plus the necessary modifications to the main engine.
Modifications to main engine:
In general the needed changes to ME/ME-C and ME-B engines are very limited,
whereas the mechanical camshaft engine types MC and MC-C requires more
changes.
Modifications to auxiliary systems:
When adding water to the fuel, the emulsion needs to be heated to a higher
temperature than without water and the pressure in the system has to be increased in
order to avoid evaporation of the water.
Furthermore, the auxiliary engines will be required to be supplied from a separate fuel
oil system, as they will not be capable to operate on the same amount of water. The
amount of water added is 50 % of the fuel, corresponding to app. 13.5 tonnes of fresh
water per 24 hours. This means that a larger fresh water generator is needed; but
enough heat is available from the main engine jacket cooling water system.
For newbuildings the extra investment is limited, as many of the components just
differ a little from its specification and placement in the systems. For existing vessels
the piping system and many of the components needs to be replaced, which will be
relatively costly.
The WIF fuel system for the main engine is shown in the diagram on next page. The
new components are a water in fuel measuring device, homogenizer, dumping tank,
and an air driven back-up fuel oil supply pump for securing pressure in the fuel
system, in case of black-out. The supply pump pressure must be increased from the
normal 6 bar to 13 bar, meaning that all components in the re-circulation circuit,
including the homogenizer, mixing tank, circulating pumps, preheaters, viscotherm,
filter and main engine, must be designed for this pressure.
The preheating temperature must be increased to180 deg. C, which cannot be

obtained by heating with 6 bar service steam. A 14 bar steam system has been
introduced, in order to boost the temperature of the fuel emulsion.
Water In Fuel system (WIF)

30-35% NOx reduction
1-2% increase in CO2 & fuel consumption
11 © 2009, Grontmij | Carl Bro A/S
3.5 Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
This is a well known method of reducing NOx emissions from internal combustion
engines. The basic concept of the EGR technology is to reduce the peak combustion
temperature, which suppresses the thermal formation of NOx . EGR obtains this,
partly because the heat capacity of the re-circulated exhaust gas is higher than that of
normal combustion air (ambient air). Furthermore, the lower oxygen content
(compared to the ambient air) in the re-circulated exhaust gas lowers the chemical
reaction rate for the combustion of the fuel, thereby also reducing the peak
combustion temperature.
MAN diesel’s EGR system consists mainly of a pipe connection from the main
engine’s exhaust gas receiver, via an EGR unit, to the scavenge air receiver. The
EGR unit consists of three parts:
• A scrubber unit which removes SOx and particle matters from the re-
circulated gas, to prevent this from damaging the engine. The scrubber uses
re-circulated fresh water, which is being cleaned continuously and neutralised
with NaHO, in a special water cleaning unit.
• A cooler ensuring that the re-circulated gas does not raise the scavenge air
temperature significantly above the temperature of the air from the charge air
coolers.
• A frequency controlled blower, which overcomes the pressure differential

between exhaust gas receiver and scavenge air receiver, and controls the
flow. The electrical power consumption of the blower is about 85 kW when the
engine runs at 85 % SMCR, corresponding to service speed.
The recirculation ratio is 0.3 at full engine load, increasing to 0.4 for engine loads
below 75 % SMCR. The fresh water consumption of the scrubber corresponds
roughly to the water condensation from the exhaust gas, meaning that the
requirement for fresh water is negligible.
The diagram below shows the principal system lay-out on the modified Seahorse
design. The EGR unit is indicated in the recirculation loop. The intake filter, boilers
and exhaust scrubber, are not part of the EGR system. The colour table shows the
combined influence, on main engine emissions, of ME de-rating, WIF and EGR.
Scavenge air / exhaust system with EGR

5S50ME-B9 EGR + WIF emission change vs. reference
SFOC CO2 SOx NOx PM
% % % % %
3,5 3,5 -28,5 -80,0 -49,7

3.6 Waste heat recovery system (WHR)
Steam turbine generator

500 kw (electric) equal to 8.3 % of ME power
Waste heat recovery systems, with different degrees of sophistication, have been
used on ships for decades, and with respect to CO2 , it gives by far the largest
emission reduction, of the systems in this case study. Experience from existing
installations, e.g. large container vessels owned by A.P.Møller-Mærsk, shows a
potential for recovery of 10-15 % of the main engine power.
The system in this case study has been designed in a co-operation between MAN
Diesel, Aalborg Industries and MAN Turbo. The steam turbine generator, which
replaces one of the existing diesel generators, has been designed by MAN Turbo,
and has an electric output of 500 kW, when sailing at service speed, corresponding to
8.3 % of the main engine output. The reason for this relatively modest output is, partly
that the so called power turbine *) has been omitted for simplicity on this relatively
small system, partly that a substantial portion of the generated steam must be used
for fuel heating, not least due to the WIF system, and finally that the main engine
exhaust gas temperature is relatively low, due to the de-rating. There is simply less
wasted heat to utilize.
*) The power turbine (omitted) is similar to the turbine part of a turbocharger, and
some of the exhaust gas is led through this, thereby bypassing the turbochargers.
The power turbine is part of the steam turbine generator unit. It typically provides 15 -
25 % of the WHR output.
Steam System (WHR)
The vessels boiler plant has been designed by Aalborg Industries, and consists in
total of six individual boilers, out of which four (intermediate and low pressure boilers)
produces steam for the steam turbine:
High pressure (HP), intermediate pressure (IP) and low pressure (LP) exhaust boilers
in the EGR circuit in the engine room. As the exhaust gas in the EGR system is under
pressure, these boilers are of the firetube type. This also makes it possible to utilize
the boilers as steam drums in the the HP, IP and LP pressure systems respectively.
IP and LP exhaust boilers as part of the uptake in the casing. These boilers are of the
watertube type with forced circulation from the IP and LP steam drums respectively.
As the exhaust boilers are not able to be heated by oil-firing, unlike the original
composite boiler, a small oil-fired boiler is also needed for start-up and harbour
service.
In order to minimise the size of the heating surfaces (and boilers), the evaporation
temperature and thus the steam pressure is generally kept low. The pressure levels in
LP, IP and HP circuits are 0.5, 5.5 and 14 bar, respectively. The high pressure steam
is only utilised to boost the preheating temperature of the fuel emulsion. In order to
extract as much heat as possible, the exhaust gas is cooled down to app. 120 deg. C.
This is considerably below the dew point of sulphuric acid, meaning that the last part
of the LP exhaust boiler (LP evaporator) must be made from sophisticated materials.
The total amount of steam generated when sailing at service speed (85% SMCR) is
about 4.6 t/h. The maximum capacity of the oil fired boiler is 1.2 t/h. More detailed
information on exhaust and steam data for the different parts of the steam system can
be found in the appendices.
3.7 Exhaust gas scrubber
The exhaust gas scrubber incorporated in this concept study is based on Aalborg
Industries scrubber technology, which basically can be seen on this diagram:
Scrubber system with sea water

The exhaust gas scrubber is a large component, and in order not to remove valuable
heat from the exhaust gas, the scrubber must be arranged in the casing area after the
exhaust boilers. The scrubber removes a high proportion of SOx and particles (PM)
from the exhaust gas, about 98 % and 80 % respectively. It is normally operated with
seawater, and the sulphuric acid and particles, extracted from the exhaust gas, is
washed into the sea, where the acid is converted to harmless sulphate. In coastal
areas this potential air pollution might otherwise have been transported over land with
the prevailing wind, and subsequently ended on the ground as acid rain.
The SW pump for the exhaust scrubber is one of the major consumers of electrical
power, with a typical consumption of app. 50 kW, when sailing at service speed. It is
advantageous, in order to minimize the lifting height of the water, and thereby the
power consumption, to locate the scrubber unit as low as possible. The lay-out of the
scrubber ensures the exhaust gas to enter from above, and leaving upwards. This is
a simple way of forming a loop where the scrubber water can be controlled in a
simple way, without running down into the boilers or even the engine. At the same
time, it collects the water from water washing of the boiler above. The flow direction of
the exhaust gas must now be changed 180 deg. twice, but this appears to be an
advantage, both with respect to a low position of the scrubber, and with respect to the
arrangement of bypass connections on the exhaust pipe.
In order to prevent droplets to escape from the scrubber, it is provided with a re-
heater at the top, which raises the temperature of the exhaust gas by app. 10 – 20
deg. C.
In harbours, fjords, rivers or other sensitive areas, the scrubber may be operated with
re-circulated fresh water, which is continuously being neutralized with sodium
hydroxide (NaOH). The resulting sodium sulphate is considered to be harmless, and
led overboard. The scrubber system can only operate on fresh water, up to a
relatively low main engine load (e.g. 20 % SMCR). The loss of water from the
scrubber during operation, means an additional fresh water consumption of 1.1
tonnes / 24h.
3.8 Ducted / direct air intake for main engine
This has been introduced in order to provide the main engine with air intake at the
lowest possible temperature, thereby increasing the engine’s thermal efficiency. This
effect has not been quantified in the case study, but the system is well known, and
has been used on all the large containerships from Odense Steel Shipyard. A
reduction of the engine room ventilation has, however, been quantified. The number
of fans has been reduced from three to two, and the average power consumption for
engine room ventilation has been reduced from about 38 kW to about 14 kW, when
the ship sails at service speed.
In order to keep a low air velocity in the duct (< 8 m/s), it must have a min cross-
sectional area of about 1.6 m2. Above upper deck level the duct consists of a trunk
attached to the aft bulkhead of the accommodation, extending aft one frame spacing,
and upwards along the two lower tiers of the accommodation block. The filters which
need to have a larger area corresponding to about 4 m/s, can be accommodated in
the trunk in way of the second tier. Below the upper deck level the trunk is lead
directly to the main engine turbocharger intake.
3.9 Optimised coolers and cooling pumps
Most ships operate with pumps in the auxiliary systems, which have larger capacity
than needed. The reason is that firm orders for pumps and coolers are placed at
vendors, before the systems, for which the pumps are intended, have been designed.
This means that the capacities specified are preliminary ones, often taken from the
engine manufacturer’s technical brochures. As a rule, these values are conservative.
To obtain the proper flow, once the ship has been built, it is normal practice to install
orifices in the systems. Needless to say, this practice is not very energy conscious.
In order to optimize coolers and pumps, from a capacity point of view, it is necessary
to perform an early assessment of the pressure drop of the pipe system in question.
This can be done using various pipe flow calculation programs like ‘Fluid Flow’, which
is being used by Grontmij | Carl Bro.
The optimisation for this case study has been carried out in cooperation with the
pump manufacturer Desmi, and APV who manufactures plate coolers. Often the plate
cooler represents a large proportion of the system’s total pressure drop, and fitting a
somewhat larger cooler may often contribute considerably to minimize the pumping
power needed. Finally, the introduction of pumps, with coated interior and pumping
wheels, has shown to reduce the power requirement by almost 10%.
The combined effect of these measures has been to reduce the power requirement of
engine auxiliaries from about 167 kW to about 136 kW, when the ship operates at
service speed.

3.10 Auxiliary engine and boiler operation on marine gas oil (MGO)
This measure almost lends itself, for several reasons:

As shown in the beginning of this report, the use of heavy fuel in ports is going to be
restricted in the future.
The waste heat recovery system delivers most of the power at sea.
The WIF system makes a separate fuel oil supply system necessary for the auxiliary
engines.
As can be seen in the section on emission reductions, this measure alone reduces
the emission of SOx, in or near harbours, by about 25 tonnes per year.
3.11 High capacity fresh water generator
The need for large quantities of fresh water for the WIF system, and, to a minor
degree, the ballast water treatment and exhaust scrubber systems, requires
additionally 17 tons/24hours, on top of the original production of 20 tons/24 hours,
needed. In order to meet this requirement, the original fresh water generator must be
replaced by a new high capacity fresh water generator from Alfa Laval (see
appendices). This highly efficient set is utilising three stage evaporation, and is able
to produce up to 48 tons/24 hours, with the heat available in the jacket cooling water,
when the ship operates at service speed.
3.12 Installation of ballast water treatment System (BWT)
A special kind of pollution of the seas is the problem of invasive species, now being
addressed by the IMO ballast water convention, which, though still in the process of
being ratified, will require ballast water to be treated in order to prevent the spread of
invasive species. Ballast water treatment is, strictly speaking, outside the scope of
Green Ship of the Future; but depending of the type of system selected, it has
potentially a large impact on the ship design, operation and energy consumption,
which is the reason for it to be included. The system selected for this case study has
been designed by ATLAS-DANMARK, and a description can be found in the
appendices.
The basic principle is the use of 30 u filters plus a so called active substance, called
‘Anolyte’. An interesting feature is that the active substance is being produced
onboard, while the ship is in service, and collected in a special tank. The tank
capacity needed is about 60 m3, and may in principle be arranged in a part of a
ballast tank, but in this case a part of the aft peak tank is used for this purpose. The
active substance, is made from fresh water and ordinary salt (NaCl), by an electrolytic
process. The average power requirement for the process is about 2 kW if the process
takes place during the ballast voyage. The corresponding fresh water requirement is
app. 2.2 tons per 24 hours.
4 CONSEQUENSES OF MODIFICATIONS
4.1 Space considerations
Where do we put it ?
Considering the amount and size of equipment, it proved to be relatively easy to fit all
of the above mentioned systems into the ship’s engine room and casing. The
modified engine room is seen in the profile above, as well as a cross section and plan
views, which can be found in the appendices.
The most difficult part to fit in has been the EGR circuit, with three boilers and a large
EGR unit. An additional platform deck, for the large IP and LP boilers, has been
situated between the A-deck and the upper deck level, in starboard side of the engine
room, similar to the starboard part of the existing A-level platform deck. In order to
create sufficient head-room for the fittings on top of the boilers, the whole
accommodation block has been elevated by 500 mm. This is actually more
straightforward, than it may sound, because of the existing cofferdam between upper
deck and deckhouse, which simply has to be increased.
The introduction of the new platform deck, has limited the working area for the engine
room crane, which originally spanned almost the full width between the longitudinal
bulkheads. It is, however, still satisfactory, and with an outboard shift of the escape
trunk, which is now being introduced on the Seahorse 35 design, it will be possible to
regain most of the working area.
The steam turbine generator unit, even though larger and much heavier, fits neatly
into the space of the diesel generator being replaced. Space for its condenser,
however, has been provided by making a recess in the aft peak tank, with access
from the oil treatment room. This room has also provided the space for the WIF unit,
which is a most suitable location for this kind of equipment.
The exhaust boilers have been located in the funnel. The exhaust flows upwards in
the IP boiler, through a box with two sets of vanes to change the flow direction, and
downwards through the LP boiler, into the exhaust scrubber, where the flow is
changed to upwards again. The scrubber and oil fired boiler, have both been located
on the upper deck level. The funnel has been extended one frame spacing aft-wards,
in order to accommodate this arrangement.
Tanks for sodium hydroxide (for scrubbers) and anolyte (for ballast treatment) have
been arranged as built-in tanks, in the aft peak and a former cofferdam, respectively.
The water treatment plants for the EGR scrubber have been located in the steering
gear flat. The ballast water filters, part of the ballast water treatment plant, have to be
located near the main ballast pipes near the engine room front bulkhead, at tank top
level, where space is going to be restricted. Most of the additional pumps are going to
be located at tank top level aft of the main engine, where space is also limited.
The coolers, preheaters, steam turbine, condenser, feed pumps, circulation pumps
and boilers, with their considerable number of economizers, evaporators and
superheaters, have to be connected by a lot of piping, particularly as the IP and LP
boilers in the engine room act as steam drums for the corresponding boilers in the
casing. All told, it means the engine room is going to be significantly more complex
than on the basis ship.
4.2 Effect on electrical power balance
Extract of electrical power balance for the modified ship

WHR TURBO GENERATOR SET (GENERATOR CAPACITY at 85 % SMCR) [kW] 1 500
ELECTRICAL BALANCE LOAD [kW]

GROUP: / CONDITION: AT SEA MANOEUV. CARGO HARBOUR
HANDLING
GROUP 1 PROPULSION SERVICE [KW]: 40 97 6 6

GROUP 2 OTHER AUX SYSTEMS IN E/R [KW]: 96 128 115 165
GROUP 3 DECK MACHINERY [KW]: 0 21 21 21
GROUP 4 CARGO GEAR [KW]: 0 0 557 0
GROUP 5 VENTILATION [KW]: 94 94 85 85
GROUP 6 OTHER AUX. SYSTEMS OUTSIDE E/R [KW]: 18 43 2 2
GROUP 7 GALLEY AND LAUNDRY [KW]: 23 23 23 23
GROUP 8 220 V INSTALLATION [KW]: 39 39 58 59
GROUP 9 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS [KW] 175 132 0 0
GROUP 10 WASTE HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM 11 0 0 0
TOTAL POWER DEMAND [KW]: 494 575 866 361
TOTAL POWER DEMAND INCL. 3% SAFETY MARGIN: 509 592 892 372
AUX. ENGINE SETS RUNNING: 1 1 1
TURBO GENERATOR (WHR) RUNNING: 1
GENERATOR LOAD: 102% 59% 89% 37%
Electric consumption comparison between basis and modified ships

Modified ship, consumption groups 1 - 8 kW 309 443 866 361
Basis ship, consumption for groups 1 - 8 kW 365 484 875 375
Change due to modifications, groups 1 - 8 kW -56 -41 -9 -14
Change due to modifications, groups 9 - 10 kW 186 132 0 0
Change due to modifications, groups 1 - 10 kW 129 91 -9 -14
When the original consumers (groups 1 - 8) are compared, for the basis and the
modified ship, it is seen that power consumption is lower on the modified ship. This is
mainly due to pump and cooler optimization and saving in engine room ventilation
power. It is also seen, that the power consumption of WHR system and, particularly,
the various emission control systems is much larger than these savings. During
normal navigation, two power consumers are responsible for the majority of this
consumption, the EGR blower (85 kW) and the sea water pump for the exhaust
scrubber (48 kW). A lot of smaller consumers also contribute to extra power
requirement, such as:
o higher capacity fuel pumps in the WIF system
o fuel homogenizer
o sea water pumps for condenser cooling
o lubrication oil pumps for the steam turbine generator unit
o condensate, feed and circulation pumps
o higher capacity pumps for the fresh water generator (group 2)
o pumps for water treatment units in connection with scrubbers
o electrolytic generation of Anolyte for ballast water treatment
o control systems
As long as the total electrical power consumption during normal navigation, however,
can be covered by the WHR, it does not contribute to the ships exhaust gas
emissions. As can be seen, the actual consumption of 494 kW is lower than the rated
capacity of the steam turbine generator of 500 kW, when operating at service speed,
but there is virtually no margin. In practice a margin of about 10 % of the rated
capacity of the generator is needed.
4.3 Steam balance
Cold condition: Normal condition:

Servic steam consumption Max At sea In port Max At sea In port
cons cons
kg/h LF kg/h LF kg/h kg/h LF kg/h LF kg/h
TOTAL: 1221 1020 821 809
Steam flow from exhaust boilers

LP TC-Outlet EGR-boiler
ECO
EVAP 1042 690 352 kg/h low pressure boilers
Service steam 0 kg/h conventional
Pressure 0,5 barg exhaust & EGR
Temperature 160 deg.C
IP
Flow 2781 1176 1605 kg/h intermediate press. boilers
Service steam 700 kg/h conventional
Pressure 5,5 barg exhaust & EGR
HP
Flow 210 210 kg/h high pressure boiler
Service steam 210 kg/h EGR only
Pressure 14 barg
The upper table shows the service steam consumption in various conditions (a
specified table can be found in the appendices). The lower table shows how much
steam each boiler generates during normal navigation (85 % SMCR).
During normal navigation, the service steam consumption is about 821 kg/h of
saturated steam at 5.5 bar. This figure has not changed significantly as a result of the
modifications. The extra steam consumption caused by the increased fuel preheating,
which is necessary due to the WIF system, is the most significant change; but it is not
reflected in the above consumption figure. This extra consumption corresponds to the
output from the high pressure boiler, e.g. 210 kg/h of saturated steam at 14 bar.
This leaves about 1,960 kg/h at 5.5 bar, plus the full output from the low pressure
boilers, e.g. about 1,042 kg/h at 0.5 bar , for the steam turbine generator. Both of
these steam flows are superheated. Out of a total amount of steam of about 4,033
kg/h, generated onboard, app. 3,002 kg/h, corresponding to 74 % is available for the
WHR.
4.4 Emission reductions
The main engine
The emission figures for the modified engine, incl. de-rating, WIF and EGR, are
shown in the tables below, together with the corresponding figures for the reference
engine. The third table shows the relative change. The particle emissions is halved,
and SOx is reduced by app. 30 %, due to the exhaust scrubber. NOx is reduced by
80 % due to WIF and EGR; but specific fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are
increased by 3.5 % (at 85 % SMCR) due to WIF and EGR. The WIF and EGR in
combination make the engine to comply with Tier 3 requirements concerning NOX. It
should be emphasized, that these numbers are valid for the main engine, not for the
ship’s total emissions.
Low fuel consumption and low NOx emissions are somewhat conflicting. One of the
main factors in obtaining a high thermal efficiency is a relatively high combustion
temperature; but this is unfortunately also one of the main drivers for a high formation
of NOx.
With respect to the values for specific fuel consumption and emissions, it shall be
noted that the SFOC values, given by MAN Diesel, are always based on the calorific
value of marine diesel oil, even though the emission values refer to heavy fuel oil with
a sulphur content of 3 %. The CO2 emission figures has been calculated from the
internationally (IMO) agreed values of 3.11 kg CO2 / kg HFO and 3.21 kg CO2 / kg
MDO. Even though heavy fuel oil gives lower CO2 emissions than marine diesel oil,
per kg fuel, it still gives a higher CO2 emission for the same engine power, because
the engine’s consumption is higher when running on heavy fuel oil. The calorific value
of heavy fuel oil is 40.5 MJ / kg versus 42.8 MJ /kg for marine diesel oil.
Main engine consumption and emissions

5S50ME-B9 de-rated + EGR + WIF (modified)
acc. to calc. acc. to acc. to acc. to

MAN diesel MAN diesel MAN diesel MAN diesel
Load Power SFOC CO2 SOx NOx PM

(MDO)
% kW g/kWh g/kWh g/kWh g/kWh g/kWh
85 6050 164,8 541,6 7,1 3,4 0,93
50 3560 168,2 552,8 7,2 3,4 0,75
5S50ME-B9-T1 (reference)


(MDO)
85 6300 159,3 523,6 10,0 17,0 1,85
50 3706 164,0 539,0 10,1 17,0 1,50
Relative change from reference to modified engine

(MDO)
% kW % % % % %
85 - 3,5 3,5 -28,5 -80,0 -49,7
50 - 2,6 2,6 -29,2 -80,0 -50,0
The ship
The ship’s exhaust gas emissions, when operating at service speed, are shown in the
tables below, for the modified as well as the reference ship. The ‘at sea ballast
exchanging’ column has been omitted for the modified ship, because of its ballast
water treatment plant.
GSF concept project

(modified Seahorse 35)
normal at manoeuv. in port in port total
sea unloading loading
(cranes)
operating 230 10 60 60 360
days / year
main engine
power/SMCR % 85 50
power kw 6050 3559
FO consumption t/year 5504 144 5.648
CO2 emission t/year 18089 472 18.562
SOx emission t/year 4,7 0,1 5
NOx emission t/year 113,6 2,9 116
PM emission t/year 6,2 0,1 6
diesel generators
electrical load kw 494 550 866 361
engine power kw 579 912 380
FO consumption t/year 28 263 109 400
CO2 emission t/year 89 843 351 1.283
SOx emission t/year 0,1 0,6 0,2 1
NOx emission t/year 1,4 13,0 5,4 20
PM emission t/year 0,3 2,6 1,1 4
oilfired boiler
FO consumption t/year 84 84 169
CO2 emission t/year 271 271 542
total ship
FO consumption t/year 5.504 171 347 194 6.216
CO2 emission t/year 18.089 561 1.114 622 20.387
SOx emission t/year 5 0 1 0 6
NOx emission t/year 114 4 13 6 137
PM emission t/year 6 0 3 1 10
reference ship
(Seahorse 35 "as is")
normal at at sea manoeuv. unloading loading total
sea ballast
exchange
operating 225 5 10 60 60 360
days / year
main engine
power kw 6300 6300 3706
FO consumption t/year 5420 120 146 5.686
diesel generators
engine power kw 396 511 509 921 395
FO consumption t/year 427 12 24 265 114 843
CO2 emission t/year 1405 40 80 872 374 2.771
SOx emission t/year 26,8 0,8 1,5 16,6 7,1 53
NOx emission t/year 24,6 0,7 1,4 15,3 6,5 48
PM emission t/year 4,3 0,1 0,2 2,7 1,1 8
oilfired boiler
total ship
FO consumption t/year 5.847 133 170 355 203 6.708
CO2 emission t/year 19.217 436 560 1.150 651 22.014
SOx emission t/year 367 8 11 22 12 420
NOx emission t/year 603 14 17 16 7 656
PM emission t/year 67 2 2 3 1 74
The ship emission calculations are based on the above mentioned figures for the
main engine, as well as the following values concerning some of the other
components.
Calculation basis
SMCR (GSF concept) kw 7.118
SMCR (reference ship) kw 7.412
scrubber efficiency SOx - 0,98
scrubber efficiency PM - 0,80
generator efficiency - 0,95
Relative emission reduction
Combining the two tables above, the relative emission reductions, have been
calculated both when operating at service speed, and on an annual basis.
Emission reduction
normal at annual
sea basis
% %
main engine
power -4,0 prop./nozzle, twisted rudder & Costa bulb
FO consumption -0,7 -0,7 increased SFOC
CO2 emission -0,7 -0,7 increased SFOC
SOx emission -98,6 -98,6 EGR scrubber og exh.scrubber
NOx emission -80,8 -80,8 EGR og WIF
PM emission -90,3 -90,3 EGR scrubber og exh.scrubber
diesel generators
FO consumption -100,0 -51,9 WHR
CO2 emission -100,0 -53,0 slightly reduced due to MGO
SOx emission -100,0 -98,4 MGO
NOx emission -100,0 -58,6 reduced due to MGO
PM emission -100,0 -51,9
oilfired boiler
FO consumption -5,4 slightly reduced due to MGO
CO2 emission -2,4 slightly reduced due to MGO
SOx emission -97,0 MGO
NOx emission -53,2 MGO
total ship
FO consumption -7,7 -7,2 SMCR (GSF concept) kw 7.118
CO2 emission -7,7 -7,2 SMCR (reference ship) kw 7.412
SOx emission -98,7 -98,6 scrubber efficiency SOx - 0,98
NOx emission -81,6 -79,1 scrubber efficiency PM - 0,80
PM emission -90,9 -86,0 generator efficiency - 0,95
Resulting exhaust gas emission reductions due to all the measures, mentioned above, are:
Emission reduction
normal at annual
sea basis
% %
total ship
FO consumption -7,7 -7,2
CO2 emission -7,7 -7,2
SOx emission -98,7 -98,6
NOx emission -81,6 -79,1
4.5 Deadweight loss
The total lightweight increase due to the modifications is estimated to app. 160 t,
which must be deducted from the deadweight. The payload, at a given arrival
draught, may be further reduced by the weight of the anolyte (generated onboard for
ballast treatment), which will increase during the loaded voyage, from zero at the start
to about 55 t at arrival. If the ship is loaded to scantling draught, however, the fuel
consumption during the voyage will normally compensate this.
4.6 Economical consequences
Capital expenditure
The total investment necessary, in order to install all the measures listed in this study,
amounts to about 5.2 mill USD, corresponding to app. 22 % on top of the current
estimated newbuilding price at a Chinese shipyard. A rough price break-down, is
seen in the table below. The prices include both equipment purchase and installation
cost, at a far-eastern yard. It must be emphasized, that the prices are rough
estimates, based on preliminary figures from the equipment vendors.
Additional weight (estimate)

160 t
Additional cost (estimate)
USD
Speed nozzle/optimized propeller 700.000
Twisted spade rudder with Costa bulb 160.000
Water in fuel (WIF) 200.000
Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) 600.000
Waste Heat Recovery system (WHR) 1.250.000
Exhaust Gas Scrubber 1.200.000
Ducted/direct air intake for main engine 20.000
Optimised coolers and cooling pumps 150.000
Auxiliary engine operation on marine gas oil (MGO) -
High capacity fresh water generator 50.000
Installation of Ballast Water Treatment System (BWT) 810.000
5.140.000
Estimated price for a Seahorse 35 is 22-25 mill. USD
(Chinese yard)
Operational expenditure
This figure includes changes in the cost of fuel and other consumables, spares,
maintenance time and crew training. Only two major costs will be mentioned here, the
change in fuel cost and the cost of sodium hydroxide for neutralization of scrubber
water.
Change in annual cost (fuel and sodium hydroxide)
concept basis Difference
main engine consump. price cost
HFO consumption t/year 5.648 5.686 t/year $/t $/year
MGO consumption t/year 0 0
diesel generators
HFO consumption t/year 0 843
MGO consumption t/year 400
oilfired boiler
total ship
HFO consumption t/year 5.648 6.708 -1.060 470 -498.182
MGO consumption t/year 569 0 569 650 369.640
NaOH (1% of HFO cost) x 0 26.544
cost change -101.998
The cost of sodium hydroxide has been calculated to about 1 % of the cost of heavy
fuel oil (see calculation in the appendices). Based on the annual consumption figure
and the price from the table above, this amounts to about 26.500 USD/year.
The sum of these two figures may be rounded to an annual saving of about 100.000
USD/year.
5 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
5.1 Air Lubrication and/or micro bubbles
Several different air lubrication systems have been proposed and tested, but at
present none of these are judged to give reliable advantages for this concept study,
and this technology has consequently been left out.
5.2 Low friction bottom paint
Silicone based paint systems are in operation on large container vessels, and are
reported to give reductions in propulsive power of around 4 – 8 %. High speed,
without long periods in between are, however, crucial in order to avoid fouling. For a
relative slow ship, like a handy size bulker, which furthermore may spend relatively
long periods without sailing, this technology is not at present judged to be relevant.
6 OPERATIONS
6.1 Effect of speed reduction
Speed reduction is the most efficient way of reducing both fuel consumption and
emissions, and as it is the ’active component’ of many operational measures, it will be
considered in this case study.
In the spreadsheet below the effect of speed reduction on CO2 emissions is illustrated
for the concept ship. In the10 columns, the consequences of 10 different speeds are
calculated. The set of speeds considered is the present service speed of the basis
ship multiplied by a speed ratio varying from 1 to 0.1. The propulsive power is
assumed to vary with the third power of the speed (often it is more). The fuel
consumption, electrical power requirement, WHR power, DG power and emissions
during ‘normal at sea’ operations vary with the main engine power. The number of
days spent in ‘normal at sea’ mode is increased corresponding to the lower speed.
The emissions and number of days spent in all other conditions are kept unchanged.
This gives an equivalent annual operation period, in which the amount of transport
work done is unchanged. The CO2 emissions are calculated as the ratio between the
emissions for the equivalent annual voyage period, and the annual emissions when
operating at basis speed, i.e. a speed ratio of 1.
The total duration of the voyage is expressed as a total time duration factor. This
factor also expresses the number of equivalent ships needed to do the same
transport work per year. The number of ships employed does not, however, influence
the CO2 emissions for a given amount of transport work.
speed ratio 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2
service speed (average between full load and ballast) kn 14,6 13,1 11,7 10,2 8,8 7,3 5,8 4,4 2,9
days 230 256 288 329 383 460 575 767 1150
main engine during cruising (normal at sea)
ME power ratio (rel. to 85 % SMCR) 1,000 0,729 0,512 0,343 0,216 0,125 0,064 0,027 0,008
CO2 emission t 18.089 14.652 11.577 8.864 6.512 4.522 2.894 1.628 724
diesel generators during cruising (normal at sea)

ME related electrical load kw 222 162 114 76 48 28 14 6 2
total electrical load kw 494 434 386 348 320 299 286 278 273
available power from steamturbine (WHR) kw 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100
diesel generator power (remaining) kw 0 0 0 0 20 49 86 128 173
CO2 emission t 0 0 0 0 123 369 801 1588 3236
emission in port and during manouvring (constant)

days 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130
CO2 emission t 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298
total for ship

days pr. ref. transport 360 386 418 459 513 590 705 897 1280
total duration ratio 1,000 1,071 1,160 1,274 1,426 1,639 1,958 2,491 3,556
CO2 emission t 20.387 16.950 13.875 11.162 8.933 7.189 5.994 5.514 6.257
CO2 emission ratio 0,93 0,77 0,63 0,51 0,41 0,33 0,27 0,25 0,28
The graphs below illustrate the variation with speed of the ‘CO2 emission ratio’ and
the ‘total time duration ratio’. The latter has been multiplied by 0.1. The speeds below
8 - 10 knots are hardly relevant, and have been included as a consistency check only.
It appears, that a speed reduction from the 14.6 knots service speed of the basis ship
(average between ballast and full load) to about 10.3 knots is going to half the fuel
consumption and emissions.
1,0 10
0,9 CO2 emission ratio 9
0,8 8
0,7
total duration ratio 7
0,6 6
0,5 5
0,4 4
0,3 3
0,2 2
0,1 1
0,0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
S pe e d [ k n ot s ]
7 CONCLUSIONS AND FINAL REMARKS
The goal for Green Ship of the Future was to get 90% NOx, 90% SOx and 30% CO2
reduction. The first two goals were achieved by adding emission technologies as
described in this report, but only 7.2 % CO2 reduction was obtained with unchanged
ship speed.
As it has been shown, the large emission reductions particularly concerning NOx and
SOx are possible using technologies like, WIF, EGR and scrubber, but for CO2
substantial reductions with emission reducing technologies known today will only be
possible by lowering the ship speed.
The NOx and SOx reductions are obtained at a higher cost, both in terms of
investment and operating costs. Also higher electrical power is required to run the
exhaust gas reducing systems, and finally an increased specific fuel oil consumption
of the main engine is a consequence of the NOx reducing technologies. This power
can, scarcely, be supplied by the WHR system, but in principle it could have been
used for propulsion, which would have further reduced fuel consumption and
emissions.
If the goal of 30% CO2 reduction must be achieved, a speed reduction of about 2
knots is needed.
APPENDIX 1.2
Emission regulations
5,0
4,5 Global
4,0 ECA (Emission Control Area)

Max. Sulphur percentage in
oil for ship propulsion
3,5
3,0
SOx emission limit schedule
2,5 according to IMO
2,0
(Int. Maritime Organisation)
1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Year
18
16 NOx emission limit schedule

according to IMO
14 (Int. Maritime Organisation)
NOx limit (g/kWh)
12
10
8 2000
2011
6 2016 (ECA´s only)
4
0
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
Engine RPM
Green Ship of the Future
Page 40
APPENDIX 1.3
Emission reduction methods
MEASURE / METHOD CO2 NOx SOx

Reduction Reduction Reduction
MACHINERY
Dual / Multi MCR certification 1 to 3 % 1 to 3 %
Turbo charging with variable nozzle ring
WHR systems (Waste Heat Recovery) 8 to 10% 8 to 10 8 to 10 %
EGR systems (Exhaust Gas
Recirculating) -2 to -3 % 80 % 19 %
Auxiliary systems optimisation 1,5 % 1,5 % 1,5 %
Automated engine monitoring 1% 1%
Scrubber systems 3% 98 %
Optimized control for ship cooling
LNG fuel 25 % 35 % 100 %
increase 1 to
WIFsystems (Water In Fuel) increase 1 to 2% 30 to 35% 2%
PROPULSION
ACS (Air lubrication system) 5 to 10 % 5 to 10 % 5 to 10 %
Innovative propeller Not yet known Not yet known Not yet known
OPERATION
SIMAC GSF student forum Not yet known Not yet known Not yet known
Performance monitoring of silicone
antifouling 4 to 8 % 4 to 8 % 4 to 8%
Lab. on a ship 0 to 5 % 0 to 5 % 0 to 5 %
Page 41
APPENDIX 2.1
Outline description
Page 42
APPENDIX 2.4
Seahorse 35 general arrangement
Page 43
APPENDIX 2.5
Seahorse 35 engine room arrangement
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
APPENDIX 2.6
Electrical power balance

LOAD [kW]
ELECTRICAL BALANCE
GROUP: / CONDITION: AT SEA,
MANOEUV CARGO
AT SEA BALL. HARBOUR
. HANDLING
EXCH.
GROUP 1 PROPULSION SERVICE [KW]: 43 43 100 5 5
GROUP 2 OTHER AUX SYSTEMS IN E/R [KW]: 124 244 141 123 177
GROUP 3 DECK MACHINERY [KW]: 0 0 21 21 21
GROUP 4 CARGO GEAR [KW]: 0 0 0 557 0
GROUP 5 VENTILATION [KW]: 117 117 117 87 88
GROUP 6 OTHER AUX. SYSTEMS OUTSIDE E/R [KW]: 18 18 43 2 2
GROUP 7 GALLEY AND LAUNDRY [KW]: 23 23 23 23 23
GROUP 8 220 V INSTALLATION [KW]: 39 39 39 58 59
TOTAL POWER DEMAND [KW]: 365 485 484 875 375
TOTAL POWER DEMAND INCL. 3% SAFETY MARGIN: 376 499 498 902 386
AUX. ENGINE SETS RUNNING: 1 2 2 2 / 3 1
GENERATOR LOAD: 75% 50% 50% 90% / 60% 77%
Page 49
APPENDIX 3.2
Speed nozzle / propeller and twisted spade rudder / Costa-bulb
Aft body with modifications, including speed nozzle, spade rudder, Costa bulb,
increased funnel and elevated accommodation block.
Page 50
APPENDIX 3.4
Water in fuel (WIF)
Water In Fuel system (WIF)

30-35% NOx reduction
1-2% increase in CO2 & fuel consumption

Page 51
MAN proposed WIF fuel diagram

Page 52
WIF unit - Mechanical
© MAN Diesel 1
WIF unit. The central parts of the homogenizer are shown to the right
Page 53
Page 54
APPENDIX 3.5
Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
Scavenge air / exhaust system with EGR

5S50ME-B9 EGR + WIF emission change vs. reference
SFOC CO2 SOx NOx PM
% % % % %
3,5 3,5 -28,5 -80,0 -49,7

Page 55
EGR-diagram
EGR-data
5S50ME-B9 de-rated + EGR + WIF
Max.
Load Power SFOC Mass Temp. Mass Temp. EGR Bl. T/C-comp T/C-comp Pscav Water
Flow EGR EGR in Flow T/C T/C out Power flow out Preheat
% kW g/kWh kg/h Dg. C kg/h Dg. C Kw kg/h dg.C Bar abs dg.C
100 7120 168,2 16140 454 37660 279 81 36920 197 3,85 139
95 6760 166,8 16544 437 35156 271,2 83 34470 190 3,69 140
90 6410 165,7 16864 426 32736 264,8 84 32090 187 3,62 141
85 6050 164,8 17100 418 30400 259,8 86 29800 185 3,56 142
80 5700 164,3 17214 411 28086 256,2 86 27540 182 3,5 143
75 5340 164,4 17240 406 25860 254 86 25350 180 3,44 144
70 4980 164,7 16280 396 24420 253,2 81 23940 170 3,23 145
65 4630 165,3 15280 389 22920 253,8 76 22470 161 3,03 146
60 4270 166,1 14280 382 21420 255,8 71 21000 151 2,83 147
55 3920 167 13240 377 19860 259,2 66 19470 141 2,63 148
50 3560 168,2 12120 372 18180 264 61 17820 130 2,42 149
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
EGR System Installation – 5S50ME-B9
EGR System Installation - 5S50ME-B9

Component Dry mass (kg) Dimensions (mm)
EGR Unit 10000 Lenght=3350, Height=3143, Widht=1580
Scrubber 3000 Lenght=3350, Ø=1150
Blower +wheel 3000 Lenght=1650, Height=1611, Widht=1580
Cooler+housing 4000 Lenght=1350, Hight=1800, Widht=1580
Buffer tank 450 Ø=1260, Height=2010
Electrical cabinets (x2) 50 Lenght=1400, Hight=2040, Widht=624
Water cleaning unit 100 Lenght=2000, Hight=1800, Widht=1000
Polishing unit 100 Lenght=2000, Height=1800, Widht=1000
NaOH tank 1000 Lenght=4300, Height=1200, Widht=950
Component Power consumption (kW)

Blower See process data
Seawater pump 14 kW
Scrubber pump 11 kW
Water Cleaning / Polishing
unit 13 kW
NaOH pump 0.1 kW
NaOH heating 3 kW
Actuators / Sensors 0.5 kW
Page 59
APPENDIX 3.6
Waste heat recovery system (WHR)
Steam System (WHR)

Page 60
Steam System (WHR)
Preliminary steam diagram from Aalborg Industries. In the system adapted for the case study,
the steam turbine, however, utilizes only IP and LP steam (HP, IP and LP shown above).
Page 61
Exhaust data for EGR circuit and turbocharger outlet at 100 % SMCR, and corresponding
steam data for HP, IP and LP boilers.
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Steam turbine generator

500 kw (electric) equal to 8.3 % of ME power

Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
MAN Turbo AG. composed of the following components:
1 steam turbine with HP, MP and LP steam feed including the following features:
• multiple stage reaction design,
• turbine casing of cast design,
• guide blade carriers of cast or forged design,

Page 69
• HP, MP and LP part throttle control by external steam armatures: 1 emergency stop ar-
mature and 1 control armature for each steam feed (loose delivery),
• steam strainer for each steam feed (loose delivery),
• gland steam system and turbine drainage system,
• rotor turning device,
• thermal insulation consisting of glass fibre mats with mineral wool filling.
1 exhaust gas turbine (power turbine) including the following features:
• variable inlet area geometry (VTA),
• thermal insulation consisting of glass fibre mats with mineral wool filling.
1 parallel shaft gearbox between steam turbine and generator including high speed curved
tooth coupling at the fast and the slow end.
1 parallel shaft gearbox between power turbine and generator including high speed curved
tooth coupling and SSS coupling.
1 three-phase 4-pole synchronous generator driven from both sides including the following
features:
• outfeed and star point box,
• brush-less excitation system,
• automatic voltage regulator,
• single air/water cooler.
1 combined oil system for lubrication and control for turbine, gear box and generator,
comprised of:
• oil tank integrated in package base frame,
• single water-cooled oil cooler,
• 5 bar(g) low pressure system for lubrication with 1 x 100% mechanical driven main
pump and 1 x 100% electrical driven auxiliary pump,
• 2 x 100% lubrication oil filters,
• 160 bar(g) high pressure system for control with 1 x 100% electrical driven pump,
Page 70
• 2 x 100% control oil filters,
1 oil filling for combined lubrication and control oil system.
1 common base frame for steam turbine, power turbine, generator, gear boxes and oil system
including spring elements for integration into vessel structure.
1 local MAN package control cubicle as a black box system for installation in proximity of the
package, comprised of two fields containing:
package control system based on Siemens S7-400,
package supervisory equipment,

•
package protection equipment,
automatic synchronising equipment,
power management system for package.
1 measuring and control cabling between MAN package and MAN cabinets.
1 prime and final coating according to MAN package standard.
1 wear part package.
1 water cooled condenser incl. connecting steam line between turbine and condenser,
evacuation unit based on steam ejectors or water ring pumps, discharge/circulation
control and 2 x 100% condensate pumps. Cooling water design inlet temperature
according ISO ambient conditions.
Page 71
APPENDIX 3.7
Exhaust gas scrubber
Exhaust gas scrubber

SOx PM
% %
-98 -80

Page 72
Page 73
Recirculation fresh water with NaOH as reactant.
Scrubber system with sea water

Page 74
Water system diagram for scrubber

Page 75
APPENDIX 3.11
High capacity fresh water generator
Page 76
APPENDIX 3.12
Installation of ballast water treatment System (BWT)
Process Description for ATLAS-DANMARK ballast water treatment system.

The biocide applied in the systems concept is sometimes called “electrochemical activated
water” and contains a mixture of reactive molecules (O3, O2, H2O2, ClO2, HClO, Cl2 and HCl)
and metastable ions and free radicals (H+, H3O+, OH- and ClO-).
This biocide mixture will be called ANOLYTE in the following and will have an acidity of about
pH = 6. From the electrolytic cells also a reducing agent (called CATHOLYTE with pH = 10 –
11) will leave separately (at a rate about 30% of the ANOLYTE), containing reactive molecules
(H2O2, NaOH and H2) and metastable ions (OH- and Na+). This fluid is not used for the
disinfection, but have excellent properties for cleaning greasy surfaces, etc. However, the
preferred method is to add the CATHOLYTE – after the ANOLYTE disinfection – to the ballast
water tanks to slightly increase the pH value and increase corrosion resistance.
The ANOLYTE is injected after the ballast pumps and the filters, and the various compounds –
when dissolved in the water – works in a synergy to create a very high so-called Redox
potential (in excess of 1200 mV). When added to the filtered ballast water during the intake in
a ratio about 1:250 all microorganisms (and small organisms like eggs, larvae, etc.) will be
killed within a few seconds. The redox potential can be likened to the electrical potential within
thunderclouds relative to the ground, waiting to discharge.
The requirement for the ballast water to be filtered is mainly derived from the IMO Convention
requirements to remove particles above 50 μm, but will at the same time increase the “killing
power” because of the ease for the biocide in penetrating the smaller particles. Subsequently,
the redox potential will drop to about 500 to 600 mV and all traces of the reactive compounds
will disappear. At the same time the ANOLYTE will cause the organic remains from the
organisms to dissolve over a short time – which will reduce formation of deposits substantially.
Therefore, the water in the ballast tanks will be practically “dead” throughout the voyage.
During the voyage the redox potential in the individual ballast tanks will be measured. If the
Redox potential drops to less than 200mV, the ballast water from the actual tank has to be re-
injected with ANOLYTE to raise the Redox potential to above 600 mV. The process will
continue to the redox potential is stabilized. When discharging the ballast water in port, the
ballast water is (still) free of living organisms and the data from these measurements will be
used to verify the disinfection for the local Port Authorities. A preliminary flow diagram for
system integration into a (6000 m3) ballast water system is presented below:
Page 77
It is obvious, that the installation requirements for the ABTS system are very small – this will
be further illustrated at the end of this paper.
Sample System Operation
The vessel has arrived and is beginning to

discharge the cargo. Initially, the ballast tanks are
empty and are being filled gradually from the intake
valves through the primary strainers (to remove
larger particles and aquatic life).
The intake water is subsequently filtered through the
50-μm self-cleaning filters and the ANOLYTE is
injected.
Page 78
When all cargo has been discharged, the ballast

water tanks will be filled with water devoid of all life
and the vessel may now leave port without carrying
any living organisms from the port environment (which
will be killed shortly after intake and enter a
dissolution process). The CATHOLYTE produced
during the previous ANOLYTE preparation may then
be injected to increase the pH value slightly, as
explained. During the voyage some additional
ANOLYTE is produced (for anticipated injection
before ballast water adjustment before discharge at
the destination port).
Shortly before arrival at the destination port, the

biological activity in the various ballast tanks is
monitored (and – if necessary – readjusted by
injecting additional ANOLYTE in relevant tanks,
where life signs have been detected). Based on the
data log reports from these operations, the local
Port Authorities may approve the discharge of
ballast water during the subsequent loading of
cargo.
After having discharged the ballast water, the vessel

is now able to resume the return voyage. During this
voyage a new full batch of ANOLYTE is produced
(using 1 – 5 days for this purpose).
Economic Overview
The operational expenses for a vessel having a ballast water capacity of 6000 m3 will now be
considered.
24 m3 of ANOLYTE is needed to treat this amount of water applying a mixture ratio of 1:250.
Using a generator with a capacity of 1000 liter/h, about 24 hours operation during the voyage
will produce the necessary biocide and additional about 2,5 m3 of CATHOLYTE (as mentioned
previously).
For this production we need about 27 m3 of clean water – drawn from the freshwater
generators – and about 120 kg of common salt. The power needed for the electrolytic cells is
about 5 kW.
Page 79
The “footprint” of the generator (including the storage for the salt) is about 4 m2 and
furthermore we need about 24 m3 of space available for the storage of ANOLYTE. This is not a
problem for new built vessels and
for retrofitting a vessel; the storage container may be split into several food quality plastic or
stainless steel tanks.
It has been preliminary estimated, that the operational cost for one ballasting operation is 24 –
60€.
The Atlas-Danmark Ballast Water Treatment System consists of:

1 – Connection from Freshwater Generator to the Atlas-Danmark AWTU unit and the Salt
mixing tank
2 – The Atlas-Danmark AWTU unit having the app. dimensions: 2000 x 1600 x 500 mm
3 – Storage tank(s) for ANOLYTE and CATHOLYTE, which can be built into the vessel or
installed as free tanks located where space are available.
4 – Connection from Storage tanks – Dosing pump – with connection to discharge pipe(s) after
Ballast Water Pump(s)
5 – Monitoring system, for monitoring the redox potential in the individual ballast water tanks.
6 – The total system incl. the monitoring system operated by PLC
Some Installation details
To the left, the main features of

an existing Seawater system for
handling both the ballast
operations and the supply for the
freshwater generator system
(AFGU) are depicted. This
system also includes the
particulate filter as stipulated by
the IMO Ballast Water Quality
standard
Page 80
The AWTU (Atlas Water Treatment

Unit) is producing the ANOLYTE for
storage in a tank (AWTT – Atlas Water
Treatment Tank), while the Lye
generated is stored in a (smaller) tank.
The raw materials for this production
are clean water drawn from the
Freshwater Generators and common
salt.
The requirements for installation will be
space for the ANOLYTE tank - either
built into the vessel or installed as free
tanks located where space are
available
The only intervention into the

existing ballast water system is
illustrated on the sketch: If the
ballast operation is to be carried out
during 2 – 3 hours, only a 2”
injection tube will be needed for the
dosing of the ANOLYTE needed in
the example studied here.
The monitoring system AWM (Atlas

Water Monitor) is connected to the
sampling valves for Ballast Water
and to a bridge data logging
system (for verification to Port
Authorities)
Page 81
Finally, an implementation on a typical vessel with 6 Ballast water Tanks is presented.

Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
APPENDIX 4.1
Space considerations
Where do we put it ?

Page 85
Where do we put it ? BWT-CONTROL
WATER IN FUEL TREATMENT UNIT

(WIF-UNIT)
CONDENSER
OIL FIRED BOILER
WHR SCRUBBER EGR-UNIT:

SCRUBBER
COOLER
BLOWER
LP-BOILER (EGR-SYSTEM)
EGR ELEC. PANEL
HP-BOILER (EGR-SYSTEM)
BWT-FILTER
EGR BUFFER TANK
HP-BOILER (EGR-SYSTEM)
IP-BOILER (EGR-SYSTEM)
LP-BOILER (EGR-SYSTEM) ADDITIONAL PUMPS
EGR-UNIT: EGR BUFFER TANK

SCRUBBER
BWT-FILTER
COOLER
STEAM TURBINE GENERATOR BLOWER
WATER CLEAN. UNIT &

POLISH. UNIT (EGR-SYSTEM)
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
APPENDIX 4.2
Effect on electrical power balance
Extract of electrical power balance for the modified ship

WHR TURBO GENERATOR SET (GENERATOR CAPACITY at 85 % SMCR) [kW] 1 500
ELECTRICAL BALANCE LOAD [kW]

GROUP: / CONDITION: AT SEA MANOEUV. CARGO HARBOUR
HANDLING
GROUP 1 PROPULSION SERVICE [KW]: 40 97 6 6

GROUP 2 OTHER AUX SYSTEMS IN E/R [KW]: 96 128 115 165
GROUP 3 DECK MACHINERY [KW]: 0 21 21 21
GROUP 4 CARGO GEAR [KW]: 0 0 557 0
GROUP 5 VENTILATION [KW]: 94 94 85 85
GROUP 6 OTHER AUX. SYSTEMS OUTSIDE E/R [KW]: 18 43 2 2
GROUP 7 GALLEY AND LAUNDRY [KW]: 23 23 23 23
GROUP 8 220 V INSTALLATION [KW]: 39 39 58 59
GROUP 9 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS [KW] 175 132 0 0
GROUP 10 WASTE HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM 11 0 0 0
TOTAL POWER DEMAND [KW]: 494 575 866 361
TOTAL POWER DEMAND INCL. 3% SAFETY MARGIN: 509 592 892 372
AUX. ENGINE SETS RUNNING: 1 1 1
TURBO GENERATOR (WHR) RUNNING: 1
GENERATOR LOAD: 102% 59% 89% 37%
Electric consumption comparison between basis and modified ships

Modified ship, consumption groups 1 - 8 kW 309 443 866 361
Basis ship, consumption for groups 1 - 8 kW 365 484 875 375
Change due to modifications, groups 1 - 8 kW -56 -41 -9 -14
Change due to modifications, groups 9 - 10 kW 186 132 0 0
Change due to modifications, groups 1 - 10 kW 129 91 -9 -14

Page 90
APPENDIX 4.3
Steam balance
2 HEAT BALANCE CONCLUSION
Cold condition: Normal condition:

Steam consumer: Max At sea In port Max At sea In port
cons cons
kg/h LF kg/h LF kg/h kg/h LF kg/h LF kg/h
Preheaters FO booster unit 176 0,8 141 0,3 53 176 0,8 141 0,3 53
Preheater for HFO purifier 88 0,8 70 0,5 44 88 0,8 70 0,5 44
Preheater for HFO/DO purifier 88 0,3 26 0,3 26 88 0,3 26 0,3 26
Preheater for LO purifier for ME 88 1,0 88 0,5 44 88 1,0 88 0,5 44
Preheater for LO purifier for AE 88 0,3 26 0,3 26 88 0,3 26 0,3 26
FW preheater for ME heating 141 0,0 0 0,2 28 141 0,0 0 0,2 28
AC heating section 350 0,8 280 0,7 245 10 0,8 8 0,7 7
AC humidifier 32 0,5 16 0,3 10 0 0,0 0 0,0 0
Steam calorifiers 40 0,5 20 0,5 20 0 0,0 0 0,0 0
Hot water calorifier 32 0,3 10 0,3 10 32 0,3 10 0,3 10
Heattracing HFO pipes 26 1,0 26 1,0 26 26 0,5 13 0,5 13
No. 1 HFO deep tank P 94 0,0 0 0,0 0 64 0,0 0 0,0 0
No. 2 HFO deep tank P 144 0,8 115 0,8 115 101 0,8 81 0,8 81
No. 3 HFO deep tank P 72 0,8 57 0,0 0 51 0,8 40 0,8 40
No. 1 HFO deep tank S 117 0,0 0 0,0 0 65 0,0 0 0,0 0
No. 2 HFO deep tank S 93 0,8 74 0,8 74 93 0,8 74 0,8 74
No. 1 HFO settling tank 57 0,8 45 0,8 45 56 0,8 44 0,8 44
No. 2 HFO settling tank 57 0,0 0 0,0 0 56 0,0 0 0,0 0
No. 1 HFO service tank 95 0,8 76 0,8 76 94 0,8 75 0,8 75
No. 2 HFO service tank 95 0,0 0 0,0 0 99 0,0 0 1,0 99
HFO overflow tank 23 0,0 0 0,5 11 12 0,0 0 0,5 6
HFO/DO overflow tank 21 0,0 0 0,5 11 12 0,0 0 0,5 6
ME LO cleaning tank 20 0,5 10 0,5 10 20 0,5 10 0,5 10
ME LO sump tank 9 0,0 0 0,8 7 9 0,0 0 0,5 4
AE LO cleaning tank 10 0,5 5 0,8 8 10 0,5 5 0,5 5
Mixing tank for incinerator 50 0,5 25 0,5 25 50 0,5 25 0,5 25
Scavenge air drain tk. 10 0,5 5 0,5 5 10 0,5 5 0,5 5
Piston rod unit 10 0,5 5 0,5 5 10 0,5 5 0,5 5
Chemical cleaning tank unit 10 0,0 0 0,5 5 10 0,0 0 0,5 5
Sludge oil tank 32 0,6 19 0,6 19 32 0,5 16 0,5 16
Separator sludge oil tank 20 0,6 12 0,6 12 20 0,5 10 0,5 10
Bilge holding tank S 23 0,4 9 0,4 9 23 0,3 7 0,3 7
Sea chest blowing 10 0,1 1 0,1 1 10 0,1 1 0,1 1
Steam injection to hot well 165 0,0 0 0,0 0 165 0,0 0 0,0 0
Heatloss estimated 5% 119 1,0 58 1,0 49 90 1,0 39 1,0 39
TOTAL: 1221 1020 821 809
Page 91
APPENDIX 4.4
Emission reductions
Main engine consumption and emissions

5S50ME-B9 de-rated + EGR + WIF (modified)


(MDO)
85 6050 164,8 541,6 7,1 3,4 0,93
50 3560 168,2 552,8 7,2 3,4 0,75
5S50ME-B9-T1 (reference)


(MDO)
85 6300 159,3 523,6 10,0 17,0 1,85
50 3706 164,0 539,0 10,1 17,0 1,50
Relative change from reference to modified engine

(MDO)
% kW % % % % %
85 - 3,5 3,5 -28,5 -80,0 -49,7
50 - 2,6 2,6 -29,2 -80,0 -50,0
Page 92
GSF concept project

(modified Seahorse 35)
normal at manoeuv. in port in port total
sea unloading loading
(cranes)
operating 230 10 60 60 360
days / year
main engine
power/SMCR % 85 50
power kw 6050 3559
FO consumption t/year 5504 144 5.648
CO2 emission t/year 18089 472 18.562
PM emission t/year 6,2 0,1 6
diesel generators
electrical load kw 494 550 866 361
engine power kw 579 912 380
FO consumption t/year 28 263 109 400
oilfired boiler
total ship
FO consumption t/year 5.504 171 347 194 6.216
CO2 emission t/year 18.089 561 1.114 622 20.387
SOx emission t/year 5 0 1 0 6
NOx emission t/year 114 4 13 6 137
PM emission t/year 6 0 3 1 10
Page 93
reference ship
(Seahorse 35 "as is")
normal at at sea manoeuv. unloading loading total
sea ballast
exchange
operating 225 5 10 60 60 360
days / year
main engine
power kw 6300 6300 3706
FO consumption t/year 5420 120 146 5.686
diesel generators
engine power kw 396 511 509 921 395
FO consumption t/year 427 12 24 265 114 843
CO2 emission t/year 1405 40 80 872 374 2.771
SOx emission t/year 26,8 0,8 1,5 16,6 7,1 53
NOx emission t/year 24,6 0,7 1,4 15,3 6,5 48
PM emission t/year 4,3 0,1 0,2 2,7 1,1 8
oilfired boiler
total ship
FO consumption t/year 5.847 133 170 355 203 6.708
CO2 emission t/year 19.217 436 560 1.150 651 22.014
SOx emission t/year 367 8 11 22 12 420
NOx emission t/year 603 14 17 16 7 656
PM emission t/year 67 2 2 3 1 74
Calculation basis
SMCR (GSF concept) kw 7.118
SMCR (reference ship) kw 7.412
scrubber efficiency SOx - 0,98
scrubber efficiency PM - 0,80
generator efficiency - 0,95
Page 94
Relative emission reduction
Emission reduction
normal at annual
sea basis
% %
main engine
power -4,0 prop./nozzle, twisted rudder & Costa bulb
FO consumption -0,7 -0,7 increased SFOC
CO2 emission -0,7 -0,7 increased SFOC
SOx emission -98,6 -98,6 EGR scrubber og exh.scrubber
NOx emission -80,8 -80,8 EGR og WIF
PM emission -90,3 -90,3 EGR scrubber og exh.scrubber
diesel generators
FO consumption -100,0 -51,9 WHR
CO2 emission -100,0 -53,0 slightly reduced due to MGO
SOx emission -100,0 -98,4 MGO
NOx emission -100,0 -58,6 reduced due to MGO
oilfired boiler
FO consumption -5,4 slightly reduced due to MGO
CO2 emission -2,4 slightly reduced due to MGO
SOx emission -97,0 MGO
NOx emission -53,2 MGO
total ship
FO consumption -7,7 -7,2 SMCR (GSF concept) kw 7.118
CO2 emission -7,7 -7,2 SMCR (reference ship) kw 7.412
SOx emission -98,7 -98,6 scrubber efficiency SOx - 0,98
NOx emission -81,6 -79,1 scrubber efficiency PM - 0,80
PM emission -90,9 -86,0 generator efficiency - 0,95
Emission reduction
normal at annual
sea basis
% %
total ship
FO consumption -7,7 -7,2
CO2 emission -7,7 -7,2
SOx emission -98,7 -98,6
NOx emission -81,6 -79,1

Page 95
APPENDIX 4.5
Economical consequences
Additional weight (estimate)

160 t
Additional cost (estimate)
USD
Speed nozzle/optimized propeller 700.000
Twisted spade rudder with Costa bulb 160.000
Water in fuel (WIF) 200.000
Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) 600.000
Waste Heat Recovery system (WHR) 1.250.000
Exhaust Gas Scrubber 1.200.000
Ducted/direct air intake for main engine 20.000
Optimised coolers and cooling pumps 150.000
Auxiliary engine operation on marine gas oil (MGO) -
High capacity fresh water generator 50.000
Installation of Ballast Water Treatment System (BWT) 810.000
5.140.000
Estimated price for a Seahorse 35 is 22-25 mill. USD
(Chinese yard)

Page 96
NaOH consumption and cost

HFO
Max. power ( SMCR ) kW 7.118
Engine load % SMCR 0,85
Service power kW 6.050
SFOC (MDO) g/kWh 164,8
SFOC (HFO) g/kWh 174,2
HFO burned kg/h 1.054
Sulphur
Sulphur ratio in HFO 3,0%
Sulphur burned kg/h 31,6
EGR ratio 36,0%
Sulphur removed in EGR scrubber, massflow kg/h 11,4
MOL weight S g/MOL 32
SO2 removed in EGR scrubber MOL/h 356
Sodium hydroxide
NaOH / SO2 ratio 1,75
Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) for neutralization MOL/h 622
MOL weight NaOH g/MOL 40
Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) mass flow kg/h 25
Prices
HFO price (Bunkerworld ult.nov. 2009) $/ton 470
NaOH (100%) price, November 2009 (see graph) $/ton 194
NaOH currency/h 4,83
HFO currency/h 495,25
Price ratio NaOH/HFO 0,98%
Page 97
Change in annual cost (fuel and sodium hydroxide)

concept basis Difference
main engine consump. price cost
HFO consumption t/year 5.648 5.686 t/year $/t $/year
diesel generators
MGO consumption t/year 400
oilfired boiler
total ship
HFO consumption t/year 5.648 6.708 -1.060 470 -498.182
MGO consumption t/year 569 0 569 650 369.640
NaOH (1% of HFO cost) x 0 26.544
cost change -101.998
Page 98
APPENDIX 6.1
Effect of speed reduction
speed ratio 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2
service speed (average between full load and ballast) kn 14,6 13,1 11,7 10,2 8,8 7,3 5,8 4,4 2,9
days 230 256 288 329 383 460 575 767 1150
main engine during cruising (normal at sea)
ME power ratio (rel. to 85 % SMCR) 1,000 0,729 0,512 0,343 0,216 0,125 0,064 0,027 0,008
CO2 emission t 18.089 14.652 11.577 8.864 6.512 4.522 2.894 1.628 724
diesel generators during cruising (normal at sea)

ME related electrical load kw 222 162 114 76 48 28 14 6 2
total electrical load kw 494 434 386 348 320 299 286 278 273
available power from steamturbine (WHR) kw 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100
diesel generator power (remaining) kw 0 0 0 0 20 49 86 128 173
CO2 emission t 0 0 0 0 123 369 801 1588 3236
emission in port and during manouvring (constant)

days 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130
CO2 emission t 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298 2.298
total for ship

days pr. ref. transport 360 386 418 459 513 590 705 897 1280
CO2 emission t 20.387 16.950 13.875 11.162 8.933 7.189 5.994 5.514 6.257
CO2 emission ratio 0,93 0,77 0,63 0,51 0,41 0,33 0,27 0,25 0,28
1,0 10
0,9 CO2 emission ratio 9
0,8 8
total duration ratio
0,7 7
0,6 6
0,5 5
0,4 4
0,3 3
0,2 2
0,1 1
0,0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Speed [ knots ]

GSF Bulk Carrier Concept Study PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GSF Bulk Carrier Concept Study PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

35.000 dwt bulk carrier

Published : 20 November 2009

Prepared : Søren Schnack

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1.2 Emission regulations 5

1.3 Emission reduction methods 7

2 THE REFERENCE SHIP SEAHORSE 35 8

2.1 Outline description 8

2.2 Main data 9

2.3 Fuel consumption and emission 10

2.4 General arrangement 10

2.5 Machinery arrangement 10

2.6 Electrical power balance 12

2.7 Load profile 12

3 MODIFICATIONS TO THE BASIS SHIP 13

3.1 List of modifications 13

3.2 Speed nozzle / propeller and twisted spade rudder / Costa-bulb 13

3.3 De-rating of main engine 15

3.4 Water in fuel (WIF) 15

3.5 Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) 17

3.6 Waste heat recovery system (WHR) 19

3.8 Ducted / direct air intake for main engine 22

3.9 Optimised coolers and cooling pumps 23

3.11 High capacity fresh water generator 23

3.12 Installation of ballast water treatment System (BWT) 24

4.1 Space considerations 25

4.2 Effect on electrical power balance 27

4.3 Steam balance 28

4.4 Emission reductions 29

4.5 Deadweight loss 34

4.6 Economical consequences 34

5.1 Air Lubrication and/or micro bubbles 36

5.2 Low friction bottom paint 36

6.1 Effect of speed reduction 36

7 CONCLUSIONS AND FINAL REMARK 38

• MAN Diesel, Copenhagen GSF partner

1.2 Emission regulations

4,0 ECA (Emission Control Area)

16 NOx emission limit schedule

1.3 Emission reduction methods

MEASURE / METHOD CO2 NOx SOx

2 THE REFERENCE SHIP SEAHORSE 35

2.1 Outline description

The SEAHORSE 35 is a future-orientated design incorporating a wide range of

The environmental friendliness is ensured by low emission machinery, easy ballast

2.2 Main data

The main data of the basis ship are:

Length over all 180.0 m

2.3 Fuel consumption and emission

CO2: 85.4 tons per 24 hours

2.4 General arrangement

2.5 Machinery arrangement

Following ‘green technologies’ are already incorporated for these vessels:

• Waste water treatment according to IMO / SOLAS requirements

2.6 Electrical power balance

Extract of electrical power balance for the basis ship

ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING EQUIPMENT: QTY' POWER

2.7 Load profile

Time distribution of engine and boiler loads

3 MODIFICATIONS TO THE BASIS SHIP

3.1 List of modifications

The technologies are:

• Speed nozzle / optimized propeller / ME derating