A PRESENTATION TO GREEK SHIPPING COMMUNITY Best Fuel Purchase Practices, Energy Management and Asset Protection – An attempt to quantify benefits MARPOL.

A PRESENTATION TO GREEK SHIPPING COMMUNITY

Best Fuel Purchase Practices, Energy Management and Asset Protection – An attempt to quantify benefits

MARPOL ANNEXE VI – AN UPDATE

BEST FUEL AND LUBE PURCHASE PRACTICES – ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND ASSET PROTECTION-

AN ATTEMPT TO QUANTIFY THE BENEFITS

1. Bunker Industry Overview and Potential for savings

2. Quantification of savings through Bunker Quantity Surveys, ROB Surveys and Sludge Surveys

3. Holistic View of Bunker Fuel Performance including Bunker Purchase Efficiency - Saving Millions

4. Algorithms to Identify Problem Fuels saving marine machinery from major breakdown expenses

5. Spending less $ through best Fuel and Lube management – Energy Efficiency and Asset Protection

6. Total Lube Management – Quantifying $ Benefits

7. Scrubbers – A new simplified low cost regulations compliant design

INTRODUCTION TO BUNKER INDUSTRY -GLOBAL AND IN SINGAPORE

GLOBAL BUNKERING – 230 MILLION MT HFO AND 70 MILLION MDO

VALUE - $240 BILLION ((HFO $700/MT, MDO $1200/MT, AVERAGE TAKEN AS $800/MT)

SINGAPORE

QUANTITY BUNKERED IN SINGAPORE > 40 MILLION MT

THE EFFECT OF WATER

WATER CONTENT IS 0.16% AGAINST 0.06% IN JAPAN

0.1% OF WATER = 40,000 MT = $32 MILLION !

INTRODUCTION TO BUNKER INDUSTRY -GLOBAL AND IN SINGAPORE

THE EFFECT OF DENSITY DIFFERENCE

EVEN FOR DENSITY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BDN (SAY 990) AND LAB DENSITY (980), IT IS 10 MT PER 1,000 MT. IN SINGAPORE, THIS COMES TO 400,000 MT = $320 MILLION

THE EFFECT OF QUANTITY SURVEY SHORTAGE

ASSUMING 40,000 BUNKERINGS AT 1,000 MT EACH

AND 10 MT LOST PER BUNKERING = 400,000 MT LOST DUE TO QUANTITY SUPPLY SHORTAGE = $320 MILLION !!

ADD UP THESE LOSES AND IN SINGAPORE ALONE THE LOSS IS NEARLY $672 MILLION

HOW TO REDUCE THESE LOSSES?

QUANTIFICATION OF SAVINGS FORBQS, ROB AND SLUDGE SURVEYS

Assumptions: 1 Bunkering Stem = 3,000 MT of HFO used up in a 30 day voyage.

# SERVICE NATURE OF PROBLEM COST @ $700/MT COST OF SERVICE

1 BQS - Quantity Shortage 30 MT $21,000 $1,000

2 BQS - Density Differential 3000 X (0.990 - 0.980) = 30 MT $21,000 included in #1

3 BQS - Water Differential 3000 X (0.2-0.1) = 3 MT $2,100 included in #1

4 Remaining on Board (ROB) 30 days X 2 MT/day = 60 MT $42,000 $1,000

5 Sludge Survey (SS) 3000 X 0.5% = 15 MT $10,500 $1,000

Savable Loss in 30 day voyage $96,600

Total Cost of Service about $3,000

WHY BQS?

• Disputes on bunker quantity are about 8 times that of disputes on quality.

• Lot of scope for errors & manipulations• Well known that quantities and their measurements

are manipulated by some suppliers through sounding tape, temperature, water addition, ship staff corruption, Cappuccino etc.

• Quantity surveys do not eliminate, but reduce losses considerably

WHY DO BQS WITH VISWA?

Viswa Lab is the one of few labs to be accredited to ISO 17020 by Singapore Accreditation Council for the Bunker Quantity Survey Activity

Highly Experienced, Highly paid and mature surveyors familiar with

• Cappuccino and Line blending• Calibration table and barge track record• Proper sampling and dealing with barge captains• 7 Exclusive employees surveyors in Singapore/Malaysia

area, 3 in mainland China/Hong Kong area and many more in US and Europe

WHY ROB SURVEY?

WHY ROB SURVEY

- To capture unaccounted and hidden bunker fuels on ships- Sounding all tanks and hidden spaces for the above- Helps in keeping ship staff and supply barge stay above

temptation- Helps shore operations to calculate exact fuel consumption- Helps shore operations to order the correct bunker fuel

quantity- Savings can be 2 MT/day or $42,000 in a 30 day voyage

WHY SLUDGE SURVEY?

HISTORY- Some sludge is always produced on a ship; this is stored in the

sludge tank. It contains some fuel which has value

PRACTICEThe sludge generation can be increased through unethical

practices such as - Forced de sludging of heavy oil purifier- Excessive draining of heavy oil settling and service tank- Forced purifier malfunctioning to extract more sludge- Excess sludge so produced stored in sludge tank and smaller

quantity declared. The excess sludge commands premium and payments in some ports

WHY SLUDGE SURVEY?

Viswa Solutions- Viswa surveyors will carry out comprehensive sludge survey,

calculate the sludge discharge, study the oil record book and identify and quantify malpractices

- Savings affected = 0.5% or 15 MT/3000 MT= $10,500 per 30 day voyage

BUNKER PURCHASE EFFICIENCY (BPE)VL uses three clear parameters to study Bunker Purchase Efficiency (BPE) 1. Density differential, 2. Water content differential 3. EFN (Engine Friendliness Number)

The study reveals that avoiding bunkering in a certain port will improve BPE considerably. Similarly, avoiding purchasing from a certain supplier can show dramatic improvements in BPE.See below Singapore example

* There is a difference in the supplier BDN density and the lab determined density. Fuel buyer can claim this difference. ** There is a difference supplier BDN water content and the lab determined water content. Fuel buyer can also claim.

# SUPPLIERDENSITY

DIFFERENCE PER 1000 MT *

WATER PER 1000 MT **

EFNUSEFUL FUEL

RECEIVED/1000 MT

1 SUPPLIER A 0 1.2 59 998.8

2 SUPPLIER B 0.7 1.3 60 998

3 SUPPLIER C 5.6 2.1 54 992.3

4 SUPPLIER D 20.7 2.4 53 976.9

5 SUPPLIER E 22.8 2.5 52 974.7

BUNKER PURCHASE EFFICIENCY (BPE)COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE ON QUALITY

SINGAPORE PORT - 4/2010 TO 4/2011

1. ABCD had lowest losses due to density differential (- 0.02%)2. ABCD purchased fuel with lowest water content (0.13%)3. Catfines in fuel purchased by ABCD was lowest at 12.42 ppm4. Vanadium in fuel purchased by ABCD was lowest at 96.62 ppm5. ABCD purchased fuel had best EFN at 616. Quantity loss per 1000 MT by ABCD due to density difference and water content was

lowest at 1.43 MT/1000 MT (worst performer lost 3.78 MT/1000 MT). This means that ABCD saved over 2.35 MT/1000 MT or $1.65 per MT over the poorest bunker purchase buyer.

Category Customer Sample # Total QtyDensity Diff

Tonnes% Den Diff DEN H2O Al+Si V EFN

O,M ABCD 102 277,972 -0.456 -0.02 995.9 0.13 12.42 96.62 61O,M BBBB 48 118,184 -2.947 -0.11 998.4 0.16 32.04 126.11 57O,M CCCC 485 1,122,273 -3.860 -0.15 999.3 0.18 34.17 122.84 56O,M DDDD 459 363,783 -0.451 -0.11 989.3 0.19 25.44 128.74 55O,M EEEE 47 68,455 -0.843 -0.06 1001.3 0.19 34.40 137.93 55M FFFF 603 706,002 -0.862 -0.07 989.3 0.23 25.74 136.29 55

O,M GGGG 156 81,186 -0.439 -0.07 988.3 0.18 29.01 122.40 55M HHHH 385 415,716 -0.843 -0.08 989.2 0.19 27.70 130.26 55

O,M JJJJ 70 73,776 -0.749 -0.07 988.2 0.21 29.01 135.37 54M LLLL 176 152,996 -0.788 -0.10 988.4 0.21 28.46 136.76 54

O,M MMMM 3 2,140 -0.676 -0.12 987.8 0.28 28.73 183.31 53

BUNKER PURCHASE – SHOWING BENEFITS OF FUEL QUALITY INCLUDING IGNITION AND COMBUSTION PROPERTIES

TRUE WORTH INDEX – TABLE 1CALCULATING TWI (EFN common as 50) - TABLE 1

BUNKER PORT

AVERAGE LIFT (MT)

AVERAGE DENSITY (Kg/m3)

QUANTITY CONSIDERED FOR

CALCULATION (KG)

AVERAGE WATER (%)

AVERAGE WATER (Kg)

KG AVAILABLE

FOR COMBUSTION

ROTTERDAM 1000 987.7 1000 0.14 14 986

SINGAPORE 1000 988.1 1000 0.16 16 984

JEDDAH 1000 968.6 1000 0.1 10 990

TOKYO 1000 983 1000 0.06 6 994

HOUSTON 1000 988.6 1000 0.16 16 984

UAE 1000 979.7 1000 0.09 9 991

BUNKER PURCHASE – SHOWING BENEFITS OF FUEL QUALITY INCLUDING IGNITION AND COMBUSTION PROPERTIES

TRUE WORTH INDEX – TABLE 2CALCULATING TWI with EFN common as 50 (continued)

  A B C D E F G H

BUNKER PORT

KG AVAILABLE

FOR COMBUSTION

AVG CALORIFIC

VALUE (MJ/Kg)

MJ in 1000 kg (A X B)

TWI (NO EFN) (expressed as

%)

MJ available for work (C X D)

HFO 380 cost$/MJ (F/E)

MJ/$ (E/F)

ROTTERDAM 986 40.38 39814.7 44 17518.468 $644 0.0368 27.20 SINGAPORE 984 39.57 38936.9 47 18300.343 $680 0.0372 26.91

JEDDAH 990 40.93 40520.7 61 24717.627 $703 0.0284 35.16 TOKYO 994 41.23 40982.6 60 24589.56 $707 0.0288 34.78

HOUSTON 984 40.25 39606 42 16634.52 $662 0.0398 25.13 UAE 991 40.3 39937.3 50 19968.65 $677 0.0339 29.50

BEST PORT Jeddah 0.0284 $/MJ or 35.16 MJ/$  

TRUE PRICE DIFFERENTIAL FROM JEDDAH  

ROTTERDAM 22.80% (0.0368-0.0284)/0.0368

SINGAPORE 23.70%  

TOKYO 1.40%  

HOUSTON 28.60%  

UAE 16.20%  

Though Rotterdam price appears to be cheaper at $644 per MT, if you take into account the quality of the fuel, Jeddah fuel is 22.8% less expensive even though the Jeddah fuel costs $703 per MT.

GARD - AN INTERNATIONAL P&I COMPANY REPORTED:

• MAIN AND AUXILARY ENGINE REPORTED CLAIMS - 31% OF TOTAL HULL AND MACHINERY CLAIMS

• INDUSTRY STATISTICS INDICATE 80% OF ALL ENGINE BREAKDOWNS ARE RELATED TO FUEL OIL OF LUBE OIL.

• CIMAC USER GROUP IN VIENNA COMPLAINED THAT 40% OF THE VESSELS DEVELOPED MACHINERY PROBLEMS WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD.

• ENGINE BREAKDOWNS, BLACKOUTS, DRIFTING SHIPS CONSTITUTE MAJOR DANGERS

FUEL RELATEDMACHINERY PROBLEMS – P&I FINDINGS

- Asked if they had encountered "any serious off-specification fuel deliveries" last year, 52% said no, while 44% said yes.  4% did not reply. Off spec included items covered by para 5.1 of ISO 8217:2005

- 64% reported filter clogging, 48% experienced sludging, 40% said they had fuel pump sticking/seizures, and 19% had piston ring breakages.

- 77% said they had no regulatory problems in emission control areas (ECAs), while 22% said they did. 

FINDINGS OF A SURVEY CONDUCTED ON BUNKER FUELS

• WITH THE REGULATIONS DRIVEN NEED TO DROP SULPHUR CONTENT, MORE AND MORE REFINERY PROCESS CHANGES BEING EMPLOYED – MORE CONTAMINANTS ARE FINDING THEIR WAY INTO THE FUEL

• COMPLIANCE WITH ISO 8217 NO GUARANTEE THAT CONTAMINANTS WILL NOT BE PRESENT

• IN OVER 99% OF MACHINERY PROBLEMS, FUEL CONFORMED TO THE ISO 8217 SPECS!!

MACHINERY PROBLEMS AND ISO 8217

17

18

SOME QUESTIONS

A)Can we identify problem fuels using comprehensive testing and before they cause machinery damage?

Yes, thereby you can save machinery from poor performance and fuel related damage.

B) Can a problem fuel be treated on board to mitigate damage?

Yes. Performance of Purifier/Filters have to be monitored closely. Asset protection of high order can be achieved through proper monitoring of onboard treatment

C) Can the performance of the fuel be maximized using mechanical and chemical manipulations?

Yes. Through TFM and TLM, substantial savings can be achieved

19

HOLISTIC VIEW OF BUNKER FUEL

Using the Magic of Algorithms to identify problem fuels and saving millions

Algorithms

In Layman's terms, play with numbers (data), find patterns and empirical rules.

A formula or a set of rules to solve a

problem

Definition Of

Algorithm

Viswa Lab Algorithms

# ALGORITHM ACRONYM

1 ENGINE FRIENDLINESS NUMBER EFN

2 PURIFIER EFFICIENCY FRIENDLINESS NUMBER PEFN

3 PROBLEM FUEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER PFIN

4 TRUE WORTH INDEX TWI

5 NEW EQUIVALENT CETANE NUMBER NECN

6 FILTER BLOCKING TENDENCY NUMBER FBTN

7 CONTAMINANT PRESENCE INDICATOR CPI

8 FAMES DETECTION INDICATOR FDI

Beautification Algorithm

Beautification Algorithm uses mathematical

formula to alter original form into more attractive

version

Israeli Software takes into account 234 facial parameters. These

parameters were arrived at based on likes and

dislikes of 68 people who expressed their preference

in beauty.

Algorithms In Bunker Fuel

Typically a fuel test yields 29 data points

With additional tests, this can be up to 40

Yes, we can use data, statistical analysis, pattern recognition studies to identify most of the problem fuels

The secret to identifying problem fuels is using appropriate Algorithms

Viswa Lab deeply into Algorithms and can claim success in >85%

ALGORITHM PFIN (Problem Fuel Identification Number)

PISTON RING BREAKAGE

PROBLEM – SEVERE M.E PISTON RING BREAKAGE

PROBLEM PORTS – SINGAPORE, GREECE, GIBRALTAR, SPAIN, PANAMA, HOUSTON

PROBLEM PERIOD – OVER 3 YEARS

NUMBER OF REPORTED CASES - OVER 100

BROKEN PISTON RINGS

• Fuels with high MCR(11.5%), high asphaltene (> 10.5%) and high CCAI (>849) were found to cause main engine piston ring breakage. However, in a few cases even this combination did not cause piston rings to break

• The need for finding other parameters which, in addition to the three above can effectively pin down the problem fuels was clear.

• VL was able to identify Xylene Equivalent number and Reserve Stability Number as two other parameters which in combination with the three listed above, clearly flagged fuels likely to cause piston ring breakage with over 85% certainty using an algorithm developed for this purpose. Further study continuing.

WHAT IS PFIN? (Problem Fuel Identification Number)

PFIN GLOBAL COVERAGE

PORTS PFIN TESTS REQUIRED PORTS PFIN TESTS NOT REQUIRED

Singapore Hong Kong

Malta Brazil

Gibraltar Africa

Panama Argentina

Houston Australia

Spain Russia

ARA Japan

China Korea

UAE Saudi Arabia

Quantification of Fuel Quality-EFN

EFN < 35 Fuel usually has problem

EFN > 60 generally there is no problem

18 years, hundred’s of thousands of samples after

• Engine Friendliness Number (EFN) - Already famous Benchmark of fuel quality.

• Quantification helps evaluation of engine maintenance cost.

TRUE WORTH INDEX OF BUNKER FUEL –TWI(PUBLISHED AT BUNKERWORLD.COM)

The Selection of Bunker fuel – Importance of TWITrue worth of a fuel is the energy transformable to useful work with minimal machinery wear

What constitutes the True Worth of a Fuel?

Calorific Value (CV) – the energy content

Engine Friendliness Number (EFN)

Equivalent Cetane Number (ECN) or the ability of the fuel to combust on time to maximize fuel energy usage

Determination FBT Of Problem Fuel Oils

Procedure Fuel oil is pumped with target viscosity of 35 cst at

flow rate (20mL/min) through 10µm mesh filter paper using a piston type metering pump.

Back pressure of filter is recorded continuously. Test is designed to record pressure until 100kPa or

the volume of the oil pumped reaches 300 mL. FBT is pressure differential/volume pumped

Sample ID AAA BBB CCC DDDVessel Name Morning

ExpressANTWERPEN CARDONIA AU ARIES

Density (kg/m3) 987.8 974.3 942.3 988.1

Viscosity @ 50°C (cst)

330.3 310.3 407.1 330

Temperature to attain 15 cst viscosity ( °C)

124.5 129.7 125.7

Al+Si (ppm) 143 58 43TSP (%,mass) 0.02 0.06 0.03

Iron (ppm) 10 36 22Water (%,vol) 0.10 0.10 0.70 0.20FBT number

(obtained by ASTM formula)

1.04 15.09 2.02 3.53

Test parameters of fuel oil

Determination Of FBTN Of Problem Fuel Oils

Energy Management

Energy Management – Not only saves energy…

(ENERGY = FUEL = $$)

but also reduces emissions

VISWA ENERGY INITIATIVES

Energy and Emission improvements – Driven by regulations

VISWA Contributes through :

TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT

TOTAL FUEL MANAGEMENT

CHOOSING THE FUELS WITH BEST VALUE (TWI) – SAVINGS IN COST, EMISSIONS AND ENERGY

ENERGY MONITORING – SEEMP & EEOI

SCRUBBERS

VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT

LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY

• Lubricants provide a barrier between rubbing surfaces and prevent metallic wear

• Lubricants consume 5% to 15% of the energy transmitted in order to provide this lubrication. This energy loss is used for overcoming churning losses and friction losses which are load, viscosity and chemistry dependent.

• Viscosity behavior under high temperature and high shear mainly determines oil energy efficiency.

• Many base oils to meet many viscosity requirement.

VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT

LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY

• In selecting the right lubricant for the right function, energy aspect has not received due weightage. Energy efficiency can be improved by selecting the right viscosity (lower the better but must avoid boundary conditions)

• Energy efficiency can also be improved by right selection and quantity of the additives.

• The savings in energy far outweighs the cost of the lubricant itself.

VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT

LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ASSET PROTECTION

• Asset protection simply means reduced wear and tear in the machinery. Wear and tear can be reduced by correct selection of additives and their quantity

• Wear and tear can be reduced by monitoring the oil condition and taking preventive action

• Wear and tear reduced by the correct filtration, particle count, temperature and every operational aspect of the oil

• Asset protection should extend even to the surface finish condition of the rubbing parts.

• The machinery life can be extended 3-4 times by investing in the above points

VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT

LUBE CONDITION MONITORING INCLUDING AFTERMARKET ADDITIVES.

• Detergents to keep spaces clean which will have the effect of clean combustion which could add to the fuel efficiency.

• Detergents prevent scale formation which impedes heat transfer (0.1 mm layer of soot/sludge can affect heat transfer to the effect of 50 to 100 degC). Higher the temp of the piston, greater the wear on the liner and piston ring.

• Identifying and purchasing After Market Additives - This is based on knowledge and functionality and how the additives work. This can provide valuable asset protection, higher energy efficiency, lower wear and particles generation and longer life for the lubricating oil.

VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENTLUBE AND MACHINERY DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

WEAR DEBRIS ANALYSIS

Viswa Total Fuel Management

A concept in fuel management introduced by Viswa in 2001

How to get the best out of the fuel – Maximize Thermal Efficiency

Obtain the ignition and combustion characteristics.

Carry out complete analysis and forensic studies to identify chemical contaminants.

Based on analysis results and EFN and TWI values of the fuel, mechanical manipulation of machinery controls to obtain maximum thermal efficiency

Also chemical manipulation by using additives or lighter fractions such as distillate fuels

TFM Benefit – As Computed For APL/NOL SHIPPING Calculations Over Several Voyages

Location Hong Kong San Pedro San Pedro Hong Kong Singapore

Quantity (MT) 3200 3307.2 3600 4290.03 5600

Viscosity 324.8 295.8 491 302.6 444.7

Consumption before TFM (MT/day) 210.84 217.47 206.4 204.62 207.66

Percentage Fuel Savings per day after TFM 2.80% 1.98% 4.79% 1.82% 1.80%

Actual fuel savings per day after TFM 3.799 4.306 4.309 3.725 3.744

Cost of Fuel $452.00 $452.00 $500.00 $520.00 $600.00

Savings over 30 day voyage $51,517.15 $58,383.94 $64,635.00 $58,106.88 $67,392.00

Cost of Test and Advisory service $3,000 to $4,000 $3,000 to $4,000 $3,000 to $4,000 $3,000 to $4,000 $3,000 to $4,000

Tests Performed On Fuel For TFM

Routine Analysis

TAN/SAN

GC-MS

Asphaltene Stability

Reserve stability number

Xylene equivalent

number

Fuel Tech Ignition and Combustion

Purifier Efficiency - Before & After -

Spectroscopic And Particle Count

Analyze Ship Machinery

Condition With Logged Data

Monitor Results After Corrections

Are Implemented

How Does It Work

Combustion Pressure Trace

Ignition delayPre combustion

Main combustion

After burning

Rate Of Heat Release - ROHR

Time

Max ROHR time

Max ROHR value

Combustion Energy

Output: Parameters derived from Combustion

Pressure Trace and Rate of Heat Release (ROHR)

Case: Problem Fuel

Fuel Properties According to ISO 8217• Caused extensive problems for

main engine– Reduced engine output– Heavy knocking at part load– Cylinder components needed

replacement

• FIA testing at Fueltech shows:– Bad ignition and combustion

properties– Indication of dumb-bell fuel

ROHR Curves

-0,5

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (msec)

RO

HR

(b

ar/m

sec)

Combustion Pressure Trace

-0,5

0,5

1,5

2,5

3,5

4,5

5,5

6,5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (msec)

Pre

ssu

re in

crea

se (

bar

)

Normal fuel

Problem fuel

Normal fuel

Problem fuel

FIA - Curve & Glossary

46

Figures on Manipulation

Sample Ref Normal Fuel Temp increaseChamber ref. pressure 45.0 bar 45.0 barChamber ref. temp. 500.0 °C 520.0 °CFuel ref. temp. 113.5 °C 113.5 °CCooling water ref. temp. 90.0 °C 90.0 °C

Ignition delay 8.10 ms 6.15 msStart of main combustion 13.50 ms 9.25 msCombustion periode 38.5 ms 17.3 msMax. ROHR position 13.6 ms 9.4 msMax. ROHR level 0.9 bar/ms 1.7 bar/ms

ENERGY MANAGEMENT MODULES

FUEL MANAGEMENT

SHIP ENERGY EFFICIENCY MANAGEMENT

CREATING AWARENESS AND MOTIVATION AND TRAINING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN

VOYAGE PLANNING

OPTIMIZED SHIP HANDLING

HULL MAINTENANCE

ONBOARD ENERGY MONITOR MEASURES THE FOLLOWING

EEOI - Energy Efficiency Operational Index TonHFO/Ton nm - Mass of HFO per nautical mile TonLFO/Ton nm - Mass of LFO per nautical mile TonCO2/nm - CO2 per nautical mile kWh/nm - Energy used per nautical mile kWh/Shaft Kw - ME efficiency TonCO2/shaft kWh - CO2 per shaft energy kn/shaft kWh - Velocity per shaft energy Ton CO2 / kWh - Generators emissions GEffi. - % Generator and efficiency Ton CO2 / kWh - Boiler emissions

SOME OTHER FUEL SAVING OPTIONS

TECHNOLOGY POSSIBLE SAVINGOptimized Hull design and form upto 10%

Weather and Voyage Routing 4%Propeller Mewis Duct 4% to 6%

Fins on propeller boss nut 1%Propeller - 3 blades upto 3%

Trim Adjustment 3% to 5%Wind Energy upto 50%

LFC Paint upto 9%Emulsion Fuel upto 10%

Choosing the right lubricants 5% to 15%

OTHER ENERGY SAVING OPTIONS

STARISTINDGriegStarShippingfirstvesselwithMDinfullscaleSeptember2009

4

Cost around USD 200,000. Fitting time 2 days in Dry DockRetrofitting Possible. Currently 140 on orderUpto 6% energy savings

Scrubbers

• EXPENSIVE MARINE DISTILLATE • FUELS• • TIGHTER SULFUR REGULATIONS

• SRUBBERS - VIABLE ALTERNATIVE

53

MARPOL ANNEXE VI LIMITS ON SULPHUR

GLOBAL (Jan 1st) EMMISSION CONTROL AREAS

ENTRY INTO FORCE DATE

>= 2012 TO 2020/25* >= 2020/25*

>= 1 Jul 2010 TO < 1 Jan 2015 >= 1 Jan 2015

LIMITS 3.5% + 0.5% + 1.0% + 0.10% +

* EFFECTIVE YEAR (2020 OR 2025) WILL BE DECIDED IN 2018

+ ALTERNATE TECHNOLOGIES ALSO ACCEPTABLE INCLUDING EXHAUST GAS CLEANING SYSTEM

LIMITS ON SULPHUR - EUROPEAN UNION (EU) REQUIREMENTS AND CARB

0.1 % SULPHUR LIMIT(m/m) FOR MARINE FUEL INTRODUCED

EFFECTIVE DATE: JANUARY 1, 2010

APPLIES TO ALL TYPES OF MACHINERY

CALIFORNIA – 0.1% FROM 01 JANUARY 2014

Why Scrubbers? CASE 1

Consider a ship of 35,000 DWT consuming 25 MT per day. Based on detailed working, it is reasonable to assume that a ship will be in ECA area for at least 100 days in a year.Take the example of a ship coming from Japan/China to US West Coast.

Voyage takes 30 days. In a year, at least 11 voyages. This will involve:

Port stay of 11 voyages X 2 x 3 days stay = 66 days.

Maneuvering time of 0.5 day X 22 times = 11 daysUS West Coast ECA entry will be 1 X 22 = 22 days.Total ECA time = approximately 100 days

Why Scrubbers?

Consider the following benefits for Case 1As ECA area increases, this 100 days can become much more thereby

increasing the savings.Post 2015, the differential cost between HFO and MDO can be much more than

$300 per MT.After 2020, there will be substantial benefit when the sulfur content is capped

at 0.5%. Assuming the ship will be around for another 10 years, the savings will be:

265 (days) X 25 (consumption) X $220 + 34 (days) X 20 (consumption) X $220 +66 (days) X 5 (port consumption) X $220 = $1,680,000 per year

So from 2012 to 2020, savings are $ 630,000 and From 2020 to 2030, savings are $18,500,000

Up to 2030, the savings will come to

$19 million

Why Scrubbers?

Other benefits are:Not having to have more tanks and pipelines

for LS fuel, The freedom to buy any sulphur fuel, Not having to go to ports with added delay

and bunkering small quantities of low sulphur fuel all of which are expensive and time consuming.

Introducing VISWA Scrubbers

Forefront of Technological Excellence. Fully

automated trouble free operation

A product developed by three IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) Engineers

with combined experience of over 100 years

30 years of experience, supplying pollution control equipment including scrubbers

Expertise in all aspects of Ships and Marine industry through the Viswa Group

VISWA Scrubbers

Features and Options

Single scrubber can treat exhaust

gas streams

from ALL combustion

sources

Includes main

engine, auxiliary

boilers and generators

Scrubber capacities up to 20

MW

Higher capacity

scrubbers available

Options for exhaust

gas treatment in ports

A LOGICAL alternative to WET SCRUBBERS - An exclusive from Viswa Scrubbers

• A new simplified low cost regulations compliant design

• New Design Dry scrubbers• Spray Dried Absorbers• Uses lime for SO2 capture• Safe to handle• No Centrifuges• No wash water to be discharged

Schematic Diagram of SDA

Inlet exhaust gasFrom main engine, auxiliary engine and boilers

Air to Atomizer

Spray Dryer

Lime & Water

Fabric Filter Stack

Waste solids(CaSO3 &

CaSO4)

Atomizer

Advantages of SDACa(OH)2 + SO2 > CaSO3 + H2OCaSO3 + ½ O2 > CaSO4

• Removes SOx as well as particulates (upto 70%)• Sox removal 98% +, Some Nox removal

• Low water consumption• Can use waste water or lake water• No wash water generation• No sludge treatment• Lower power consumption

• Safe; no corrosive materials to handle• Inexpensive material selection

CONCLUSIONSubstantial savings are possible through bunker quantity management Asset protection and long term savings are possible through a Holistic Management of Bunker fuelsEnergy Efficiency can be augmented through fuel savings and Total Fuel Management and Energy saving in Total Lube Management. Lube Management also enhances asset protectionLow cost new design scrubbers help in conforming to emission regulations with maximum savings and minimum complicationsAdditional Energy Savings ideasViswa Lab will continuously partner, participate and contribute in realizing these goals

MARPOL ANNEXE VIREGULATIRY UPDATES

* MEPC 62

EEDI – 01 JAN 2013 – NEW SHIPS

SEEMP 01 JAN 2013 – ALL SHIPS

EEOI ( Voluntary )

MARKET BASED MEASURES DISCUSSED

*MEPC 63

LARGELY UNEVENTFUL

Clarifications on EEDI

Discussions on ECA compliant fuels

Market Based Measures Discussed 65

MEPC 62

• Chapter 4 Enters into Force on 01Jan 2013 • All ships 400 GT and Above (Some exceptions )• Attained EEDI not to exceed Required EEDI• Building Contract on or after 01 Jan 2013• No Building Contract - Keel Laid or Similar stage

of construction• Irrespective of above dates delivery on or after

01Jan 2015• All ships to be provided with SEEMP• 30% reduction in three phases by 2025

67

societyforBenefit

cost talEnvironmenEEDI

Energy Efficiency Design Index

• Cost: Emissions of CO2

• Benefit: Cargo capacity & transport work

Complex formula to accommodate most ship types and sizes

Attained Index

• Cost: Emission of CO2

• Benefit: Cargo capacity transported a certain distance

• Relates to seagoing maximum condition – maximum capacity transported using maximum engine power

societyforBenefit

ttalEnvironmenindexCOdesignAttained

cos2

Attained Index

wrefi

F

fVCapacityf

P SFCCindexAttained

• CF: Conversion between fuel and CO2

• SFC: Specific fuel consumption

• P, Vref and Capacity: A consistent set of engine power required to

sail at a certain speed when the ship is carrying its capacity in calm

weather

• fw: Speed reduction factor in wind and waves

• fi: Correction factor for any regulatory limitation on capacity

Benchmark Against Baseline

Different Benchmarks for different types

Benchmark against a baseline• From public databases (LRFP*) a baseline for the ship types in

the current MEPC discussion is derived for– Bulker– Tanker– Gas carrier– Container ships– General cargo ships– Ro-ro passenger ships, etc.

• The “Required EEDI” of a new ship shall be below the BaselineEEDIRequired < EEDIBaseline

EEDI base line vs. required EEDI

EEDI base line = a x DWT–c

To be determined according to “Guidelines”

Reduction of EEDI (MEPC61)

Required EEDI = base line x (1-(X/100))X = reduction ratio of EEDI(%)

YY DWT : Ship Size requiring attained EEDI to be less than required EEDI

73

Baseline Establishment

• EEDI New Baseline formula agreed at MEPC 60

Baseline EstablishmentcbavalueBaseline

Ship type a b c

[Passenger ships [ ] ]

Dry Cargo Carriers DWT

Gas tankers DWT

Tankers DWT

Container Ships DWT

[Ro-Ro Ships ]

General Cargo Ships DWT

[Ro-ro Passenger Ships ]

Refrigerated Cargo Ships DWT

• If the design of a ship makes it possible to fall into more than one of the above ship type definitions the required energy efficiency design index for the ship the most stringent energy efficiency design index.

Verification of EEDI

78

Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI)

• An efficiency indicator for all ships (new and existing) obtained from fuel consumption, voyage (miles) and cargo data (tonnes)

Cargo Onboard x (Distance traveled)

Fuel Consumption in Operation=

Actual FuelConsumption

Index

Objective of the EEOI

• Measuring energy-efficiency of existing ships

• Evaluation of operational performance by owners or operators

• Continued monitoring of individual ship

• Evaluation of any changes made to the ship or its operation

• Currently voluntary in nature

Market Based Instruments• Should MBIs be included?• Reasons for MBIs

– Long life of ships– Growth of international shipping– CO2 reductions due to EEDI (new ships) = long term measure– Measures on existing ships = not sufficient to meet reductions of

20% or more in the short terms (up to 2020)• Which MBI?

- Bunker Levy (Denmark/Japan)- Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) (Norway, Germany, U.K. & France)- US alternative – based upon EEDI- World Shipping Council (WSC) – modified US alternative- IUCN Proposal of Levy on Imported Goods- Bahama proposal of doing nothing other than Technical and Operational Measures.

Work Being Done At IMO

• EEDI and SEEMP will come into force as a part of MARPOL Annex VI by 2013 under tacit acceptance.

• Many leading maritime nations (European and Asian) are testing EEDI Formula and EEDI Base formula and carrying out impact assessment and reporting back to IMO for development of regulations that are equitable and implementable.

MEPC 63SESSION 27 FEB TO 02 MARCH 2012

• EEDI Formula Correction Factors AGREED

Bulk carriers and Tankers built to CSR

Ship Specific Structural Enhancements

Containerships – 70% Deadweigtht

Chemical carriers Cubic correction factor

ICE Class ships

ALL SHIPS - Weather correction factor option

Minimum Power and Mimnimum Speed – No AGREEMENT reached – defer to MEPC 64

82

Epilogue – Crisis ; Danger or Opportunity ?

Crisis

Danger Climate Change

Opportunity Green Growth

?83

Coming together is a beginning, Staying together is progress &

Working together is a success- Henry Ford

Viswa Lab will be happy to be your partner in these endeavors and to achieve these goals together

THANK YOU