MARitime POlicy Support - TRIMIS

Deliverable 5.3 Dissemination level: PU Contract N. 218522

Page 1 CERTH/HIT

MARitime POlicy Support

MARPOS

Proceedings of the MARPOS Conference

Deliverable No. (use the number indicated on technical annex) D5.3

Workpackage No. WP5 Workpackage

Title

Dissemination – consultation

activities

Task No. T5.1 Task Title Organization and execution of

Maritime Conference

Date of preparation of this version: May 2010

Authors H. Janssens (DMN), L. Sdoukopoulos, M. Boile

(CERTH/HIT)

Status (F: final; D: draft; RD: revised draft): D

Dissemination level (Pu, Re,Co) Co

File Name: MARPOS-D5.3.doc

Version: 1

Task start date and duration

SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

FP7-SST-2007-RTD-1


Page 2 CERTH/HIT

Revision History

Version No. Date Details

1

2

3

4

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation/Term Definition

EC European Commission

EU European Union

FP Framework Programme


Page 3 CERTH/HIT

Table of Contents

Introduction – scope of this document ...................................................................... 4 MARPOS Conference: Opening and welcome ........................................ 6 Session I: EU Maritime Transport Research I........................................ 8 Session II: EU Maritime Transport Research II ................................... 10

Session III: Cooperation / Coordination ............................................. 12 Session IV: Overcoming Challenges Ahead ........................................ 14 Annex I: Conference Agenda ............................................................ 16

Annex II: List of Participants ............................................................ 17 Annex III: Photos of the event ......................................................... 18

Annex IV: Presentations .................................................................. 32


Page 4 CERTH/HIT

Introduction – scope of this document

The main objective of the MARPOS project is to assist the Commission in

the implementation of the EU Maritime Transport Policy objectives, by

utilizing the results of past research work in the field of Maritime

Transport and related expertise from the Transport sector and

indentifying, through a gap analysis, the fields where further research is

needed. The project focuses on Maritime Transport research results that

were produced over the last decade by consolidating and synthesizing the

outputs of the related maritime projects that were co-funded by DG RTD

in the past and current Framework Programmes, namely FP5, FP6 and FP7

(up to the third call).

The ultimate goal of the project activities is to provide a comprehensive

and holistic view on future maritime transport research and form the

priority lines regarding five key Maritime Transport Research Themes

addressed within the project namely competitiveness, energy,

environment, human factors and safety & security. At the framework of

the project, two main events have been scheduled namely a technical

workshop and a final conference aiming to present the MARPOS work and

conclusions to the EU maritime transport community, and to receive

feedback from experts on issues related to maritime research and its

future priorities.

The scope of the final conference of the MARPOS project, the proceedings

of which are presented in this document, was to report on the results of

the MARPOS survey on research outcomes and their implementation by

the maritime industry. To this end, a series of successful examples of DG

RTD maritime research projects funded under FP6 and FP7 were

presented. The FP5 research projects were excluded, as they were

undertaken over a decade ago and their results will be of less relevance.

Moreover, the conference focused on the importance of cooperation &

coordination in research and presented, based on the MARPOS results &

the WATERBORNE TP Strategic Research Agenda, the research needs of

the maritime transport sector that should be addressed in future research

agendas in order to meet the future challenges, bearing in mind the

changes that have taken place in recent years.

A number (41 participants) of key maritime transport experts participated

in a joint event which was organized by the MARPOS and CASMARE

consortia and took place in Brussels on the 12th of April 2011. The

speakers, chairmen and participants came from several different

organizations and institutions of the EU maritime transport industry

representing key sectors and groups such as:

WATERBORNE TP support and Mirror Groups


Page 5 CERTH/HIT

European Member State and Regional Authorities

European Maritime Industry and Associations

European Research Organizations

European Universities

European Maritime Clusters

Coordinators of relevant EU projects and Support Actions

The conference was structured around four (4) main sessions. In the first

two sessions, a state of the art review of Maritime Transport Research was

presented followed by a series of successful examples of DG RTD maritime

research projects focusing mainly on the achieved or targeted

implementation of their outcomes. The first two sessions were closed by

presenting the research needs that have been identified through the

MARPOS analysis along with the future challenges that must be addressed

in view of the preparation of the next Research and Innovation

programme.

The third session highlighted the importance of cooperation & coordination

in research activities illustrating successful initiatives such as the Dutch

Maritime Cluster and the Joint Programme Initiative. The last session

focused on the significance of innovation and the challenges

(environmental and societal) that future maritime research needs to

address.

This report comprises a documentation of the conference activities and

captures the main messages that came out of the presentations and the

discussions that took place during the conference as well as the final

conclusions that were drawn.

The conference agenda, the list of participants and all the presentations

(but one) that took place as well as the photos of the event, are included

in the annexes of this report.


Page 6 CERTH/HIT

MARPOS conference: Opening and welcome

The conference co-chair Mr. Graham Clarke, Director of ECMAR, opened

the conference by welcoming all participants on behalf of the MARPOS and

CASMARE projects consortia. He introduced the key objective of the event

which was first to present the results of past research work in the field of

Maritime Transport and their successful implementation by the maritime

industry and secondly to present the research needs that should be

addressed in future research agendas, specifically in view of the

preparation of the next Research and Innovation programme. He then

welcomed to the floor Ms Dominique Ramaekers – Jørgensen, DG RTD,

MARPOS project officer, who underlined the importance of the findings of

the MARPOS project along with results of other actions such as the

CASMARE or EMAR2RES, at a time when research and innovation are

considered as crucial elements regarding the future of European

Transport.

Ms Dominique Ramaekers – Jørgensen in the conference opening

speech briefly noted two documents supporting the action of the

Commission in the domain of research and transport i.e. the White Paper

on the Future of Transport and the Green Paper on the Future Strategic

Framework for Research and Innovation, concentrating on the waterborne

transport sector.

Ms Ramaekers – Jørgensen referred to the first document and specifically

to the Roadmap for a Competitive and Sustainable Transport System that

was adopted by the Commission in March (the so called Transport 2050

Strategy) and its specific targets for waterborne transport. Aiming to

prepare the European Transport Area for the Future by ensuring increased

mobility, reducing the dependence on oil, limiting the effect of transport

on climate change and ensuring competitiveness for the transport sector,

the Transport 2050 Strategy set as a target for waterborne transport the

reduction of the EU CO2 emissions from maritime bunker fuels by 40%

(50% if possible) by 2050. Additional targets have been set to improve

the efficiency of transport and reduce congestion with implications for the

waterborne sector (e.g. shift of road freight to other transport modes,

connection of all seaports to rail freight and inland waterway system, etc).

Ms Ramaekers – Jørgensen then underlined the importance of innovation

in implementing the Strategy and the fact that EU research needs to

address the full cycle of research, innovation and deployment in an

integrated way. In this perspective, she informed the participants that the

Commission will devise an innovation and deployment strategy for the

transport sector i.e. Strategic Transport Technology Plan (STTP). The

outputs of the MARPOS project are therefore valuable elements that

should help the elaboration of the STTP.


Page 7 CERTH/HIT

Referring to the second document, Ms Ramaekers – Jørgensen stressed

the fact that Europe needs to make a step change in its research and

innovation performance, avoiding duplication and fragmentation of efforts

and generating greater efficiency and impact though EU level actions. To

this end, the Green Paper launches a public debate on key issues to be

taken into account for future EU research and innovation programmes, to

which Ms Ramaekers – Jørgensen encouraged all the conference

participants to participate. At this time, the importance to have a clear

vision concerning the technological challenges, the research needs, the

opportunity to implement the results and the possibilities to better

coordinate research at EU, national and regional level is obvious and

within this scope actions such as MARPOS and CASMARE are considered

as crucial.

Concluding her opening speech, Ms Ramaekers – Jørgensen stressed the

importance of the MARPOS and CASMARE results to the preparation of the

future framework for research and innovation and the elaboration of the

STTP and encouraged the participants to gather information on their

projects results and provide this information to MARPOS and CASMARE

projects.


Page 8 CERTH/HIT

Session I: EU Maritime Transport Research I

Chair: Mr. Graham Clarke, ECMAR

Mr. Graham Clarke opened the first session and passed the floor to the

first speaker.

Dr. Maria Boile, the coordinator of MARPOS, opened the first of the two

morning sessions dedicated to EU Maritime Transport Research by

stressing the importance of maritime transport for Europe and presenting

the key maritime transport research priorities that were set by the

European Commission in the last three FPs (FP5, FP6 and FP7).

Addressing those needs, an overview of 120 DG RTD maritime research

projects was then presented focusing mainly on the technology products

they produced and the achieved or targeted implementation of the FP6

projects research outcomes. Dr. Boile, concluded her presentation by

presenting the database that has been developed through the MARPOS

project (Maritime Transport Research Database – MTRD), which aims to

summarize all the information of the EU funded maritime research

projects. Furthermore, she described its structure and specific functions

and finally encouraged the conference participants to update the existing

information of their past or ongoing research projects with new

developments and outcomes or post their new projects.

The next speaker was Mr. Ørnulf Jan Rodseth, Research Director of

MARINTEK, who presented the DSS-DC project (Decision Support System

for Ships in Degraded Condition – FP6) emphasizing on its key results and

achievements, which were:

- A prototype multifunctional console (MFC)

- A number of integrated decision support applications (Weather

routing, degraded maneuvering, hull damage/grounding and

technical condition assessment)

Mr. Rodseth made a detailed presentation on the results that the project

achieved, concluding that the basic idea of this project was continued and

further developed in the FLAGSHIP project (FP6) highlighting the fact that

the area of maritime transport faces rapid developments and significant

gains need to be further achieved.

The next project presented in the 1st session was the SAFEICE project

(Increasing the Safety of Icebound Shipping – FP6). Prof. Pentti Kujala,

from Aalto University - Finland, made a short introduction regarding the

initial objectives of the project and then focused mainly on the impact of

the SAFEICE results on ice rule development. Based (i) on certain

analyses regarding the severity of ice conditions, the frequency of damage

and the balance of loading and response and (ii) measurements of ice

loading on different hull areas, the following conclusions were drawn


Page 9 CERTH/HIT

regarding the applicability of the SAFEICE results in view of the ice rule

updating:

- Load length formulation is applicable

- Load statistics data are applicable with modifications

- More knowledge is needed in view of the FSIRC i.e. design point

formulation, ice class – ice condition dependency, plastic and also

elastic response formulations.

Prof. Pentti Kujala concluded his presentation informing the conference

participants that the work carried out in the SAFEICE project continues to

a new FP7 project namely SAFEWIN (Safety of Winter Navigation in

Dynamic Ice).

The last presentation of the 1st session was made by Mr. Herman de

Meester, ECSA and concerned the FLAGSHIP project (European

Framework for Safe, Efficient and Environmentally Friendly Ship

Operations – FP6). Mr. de Meester gave an overview of the objectives and

results of the FLAGSHIP project by presenting a video that was developed

for dissemination purposes and described in detail the implementation of

the results that were recorded by the time the video was produced, which

concerned:

- A DNV commercial product (Top Monitoring) which monitors main

engines

- Commercial products auxiliary engines to be developed in 2011 by

Danaos and Wartsilla

- Commercial GL “Hull manager” tool released in July 2010

- Real time container management, which has already let to large

savings by a liner partner, the port of Valencia, terminals and

hauliers and is also being commercialized elsewhere.

- Main parts of the cooperative decision support ship-shore software

have been included in the latest version of AutroMaster ISEMS

(installed on Oasis of the Seas & Allure of the Seas). The software

is also being further developed by Autronica and included in later

versions of AutroMaster ISEMS.

- Six (6) orders for installation of the vulnerability index in 2010 –

2011 and further expression of interest by Italian, US and UK

navies, passenger ship operators and merchant ship operators (bulk

carriers)

The first session was completed with a discussion among the conference

participants concerning the role and future of European Technology

platforms, issue originally raised in the Green Paper. The conference

participants stressed the importance of research (coordination actions)

towards the support of such platforms indicating the lack of cooperation

between academia and the industry, highlighting the fact that Technology

Platforms are important elements for coordinating EU research.


Page 10 CERTH/HIT

Session II: EU Maritime Transport Research II

Chair: Prof. George Giannopoulos, CERTH/HIT

Prof. George Giannopoulos opened the second session of the conference

explaining that in this session the presentation of successful examples of

DG RTD maritime projects will be continued with three (3) more projects

and at the end of the session, the research needs that have come out of

the MARPOS analysis will be presented to meet the future challenges.

The first speaker, Mr. Pablo Martinez, TECHNALIA Research and

Innovation, presented the OFIENGINE project (Development of the New

Thermal Spraying Equipment and Technology for Production of

Components for Marine Transport Engines – FP6). After briefly describing

the project’s objectives, Mr. Martinez presented in detail the main

outcome of the project i.e. the Oxy-Fuel Ionisation Spraying System (OFI)

and its industrial application on many of the marine engines components.

He then concluded his presentation by highlighting the achievements and

impact of the OFI system which were: (i) The production of quality

coatings, (ii) Coating reproducibility and uniformity, and (iii) Reduced

usage of gases.

The next two presentations concern ongoing research projects funded

under FP7, aiming to show the direction of current research and the

expected future outcomes.

The second presentation was made by Mr. Paul Greaves, Rolls-Royce,

and concerned the STREAMLINE project (Strategic Research for Innovative

Marine Propulsion Concepts – FP7). The focus of this project is on

innovative marine propulsion concepts and Mr. Greaves after briefly

presenting the project’s objectives emphasized on the fields that the

project will address such as large area propellers, biomechanical systems,

distributed propulsion, advanced screw propeller, high efficiency water

jets, advanced pods and new CFD tools and methods. Concluding his

presentation, Mr. Greaves presented the targets that have been set by the

project regarding the potential efficiency improvement against the state-

of-the-art propulsion concepts.

The last research project that was presented, completing the series of the

successful DG RTD projects, by Mr. Paolo Guglia, Fincantieri-Cantieri

Navali Italiani S.p.A., was the BESST project (Breakthrough in European


Page 11 CERTH/HIT

Ship and Shipbuilding Technologies – FP7). After briefly describing the

targets and goals set by the project, Mr. Guglia presented the concrete

results that are expected to come out of the project which include a cost

reduction of approximately 120 M € / ship over 30 years life time and

emission reduction of 12.000 CO2 eq t/year (-12%). Mr. Guglia then

explained how the project has been structured, highlighting the size of the

consortium (64 partners), and gave some indicative R&D examples such

as total energy management and alternative energy sources, integrated IT

network for essential services and flexible and modular design equipment.

The last presentation of the second session was made by Dr. Tony

Morrall, ECMAR, and concerned the research needs that have been

identified through the MARPOS project to meet the future challenges. Dr.

Morrall after briefly describing the scope of MARPOS, presented the

methodology that was used in order to define the research and

development needs. The research drivers for maritime transport research

(global challenges, societal and economic needs and legislation) and the

visions and targets set by the EC, provided the basis for performing a gap

analysis structured around the five (5) maritime transport themes as

identified in MARPOS namely competitiveness, energy, environment,

human factors and safety & security. For each one of these themes, Dr.

Morrall presented the major technology gaps that have been identified

and gave his concluding remarks mentioning that EU maritime transport

research has led to significant technological improvements, although

research overlaps were found between the five themes, and that future

research must focus on the more than 100 technology gaps that have

been identified.

The last presentation monopolized the discussion among the conference

participants, which concerned (i) the shift of the next Framework

Programme (FP) towards addressing societal needs and not being so

technology oriented in comparison to the previous ones as the projects

that were presented indicated and (ii) the overlap of research on certain

fields, which highlights the importance of actions such as the Maritime

Transport Research Database (MTRD) in avoiding duplication.


Page 12 CERTH/HIT

Session III: Cooperation / Coordination

Chair: Mr. Graham Clarke, ECMAR

After highlighting the importance of cooperation and coordination in

research and innovation, Mr. Graham Clarke made a short introduction on

the next presentation and passed the floor to the first speaker of the third

session.

Prof. George Giannopoulos, CERTH/HIT, opened this session by

presenting the needs for establishing international cooperation, the

barriers that need to be overcome in that direction, the key elements that

need to be taken into account for achieving successful collaboration and

the benefits that can be derived from it. Prof. Giannopoulos then

described the possible models that can be used to this end and concluded

his presentation by introducing the EUTRAIN project, an initiative aiming

to contribute towards the establishment of a framework for international

transport research cooperation.

The second presentation made by Prof. Niko Wijnolst, DMN, concerned

the Dutch Innovation Case. In his presentation, Prof. Wijnolst described

the Dutch Maritime Cluster focusing on the benefits and added value of

clusters in innovation, giving a specific example of an innovative sub-

cluster i.e. the navy and naval sub-cluster. After presenting some of the

innovative applications developed through this sub-cluster, Prof. Wijnolst

made his concluding remarks highlighting the lessons learned so far,

regarding the role of clusters as an enabler of RD&I, the importance of

national innovation programmes in the cultural change of the SMEs

towards RD&I whereas European FPs are often too complicated and

expensive for SMEs and finally the necessity of financial and organizational

support of the leader firms and the monitoring of key performance

indicators of clusters for policy support.

The last presentation of the third session was made by Ms Kathrine

Angell – Hansen, JPI Oceans. Highlighting the importance of cooperation

in the JPIs, Ms Angell – Hansen initially described the policy context on

which the development of the Joint Programme Initiative for Healthy and

Productive Seas and Oceans was based. Ms Angell – Hansen then focused

on the process that was followed for the development of the JPI and the

main needs for establishing such an initiative. The goals and visions of the

JPI were then presented along with the target groups (industry & services,

researchers & technologists, policy makers & society) it aims to address.


Page 13 CERTH/HIT

Finally the next steps to be taken toward a long-term coordinated

approach in the marine and maritime research were described.

The topic of international cooperation and coordination proved to be of

great importance for the conference participants. Specifically the

connection of the JPI with the next Framework Programme (FP8) was

discussed as well as the interaction and cooperation with initiatives

developed in countries such as Japan, Canada, etc.


Page 14 CERTH/HIT

Session IV: Overcoming challenges ahead

Chair: Prof. George Giannopoulos, CERTH/HIT

The last session of the conference was dedicated to overcoming

challenges ahead. Prof. George Giannoupoulos, opened the last session

introducing the key challenges that will be presented in this session

namely innovation, environmental and societal challenges. He then passed

the floor to the first speaker of the session.

The presentation made by Dr. Rolf Skiong, DNV, addressed the

challenge of innovation, an issue of great importance for European

Maritime Research. Dr. Skiong presented the “Triality” concept, developed

through a DNV innovation project, which is a concept tanker design, an

LNG powered VLCC featuring a hull shape that completely removes the

need for ballast water and cuts harmful emissions. As its name indicates it

fulfils three main goals: it is environmentally superior to a conventional

crude oil tanker, its new solutions are feasible and based on well known

technology and it is financially attractive compared to conventional crude

oil tankers operating on heavy fuel oil. Dr. Skiong briefly explained the

benefits of this new tanker design and stressed the importance of

research projects in developing innovative and feasible solutions.

The second presentation made by Captain Eivind S. Vagslid, IMO,

addressed the environmental challenge, which has become a top priority

in all research efforts. Captain Vagslid, after presenting the need for IMO

and the impact of the application of its conventions on real ships,

identified the major challenges for IMO which are the reduction of CO2

emissions and the improvement of ship energy efficiency. Several studies

have been performed and tools have been developed to meet these

challenges. Additional challenges for IMO include: the ballast water

treatment, recycling, noise treatment, collisions with marine mammals,

shipping in polar regions and continued work on traditional pollutants such

as oil and HNS. Concluding his presentation, Captain Vagslid highlighted

the impact of IMO on annual casualties and serious oil spills, showing a

large reduction on both aspects in comparison to previous years.

The last presentation of this session and of the conference addressed the

societal challenges and was made by Mr. Del Redvers, BMT Group. The

main drivers for sustainability, according to Mr. Redvers, can be

summarized to climate events, demographic change, natural resource

availability and economic development, affecting trade routes, targeted

efficiencies, bunker prices and availability, short sea shipping & modal


Page 15 CERTH/HIT

impacts, legislation and consumer behavior. The impact of those changes

on ship design, shipyards, ship operations, infrastructure investment and

innovation can be substantial.

Conclusions

Through this joint event organized by the MARPOS and CASMARE

consortia, the key priorities for the Maritime Transport Research were

presented along with some successful examples of DG RTD projects

funded under FP6 and FP7. The six (6) research projects that were

presented addressed a number of diverse subjects focusing mainly on

energy efficient ships, minimizing their environmental impact and

enhancing their operations. The research needs to meet the future

challenges were then presented, emphasizing on the technology gaps that

need to be addressed in future innovations and research programme,

avoiding any duplications. General horizontal issues such as collaboration

and sustainability were also presented, pointing out their importance on

research and innovation. Finally the importance of coordination actions

such as the MARPOS and CASMARE was stressed highlighting some of

their key outcomes such as the Maritime Transport Research Database

(MTRD) – MARPOS.


Page 16 CERTH/HIT

Annex I: Conference agenda


Page 17 CERTH/HIT

ANNEX II: List of Participants

Name Organisation

1 Angell-Hansen Kathrine Research Council of Norway

2 Benedetti Lanfranco CESA

3 Bergulf Simon Danish Shipowners' Association

4 Bock Joost Surface Transport Unit / DG Research / EU Comission

5 Boile Maria HIT

6 Calduch David Fundacion Valencia Port

7 Carbonniere Aurelien Marine Board-ESF

8 Clarke Graham ECMAR

9 Cunningham Douwe EMEC

10 de Meester Heman ECSA

11 Duynisveld Monica Dutch Maritime Network

12 Frencia Chiara INOVAMAIS

13 Giannopoulos George HIT

14 Goldan Michael Holland Shipbuilding Association

15 Greaves Paul Robert Rolls Royce

16 Guglia Paolo Fincantieri

17 Janssens Constant Dutch Maritime Network

18 Kujala Pentti Helsinki University

19 Lane Oliver Rolls Royce Marine

20 Marchal Pierre GICAN

21 Martinez Pablo Foundation INASMET-Tecnalia

22 Marzi Jochen Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt GmbH

23 Mias Solon European Defence Agency

24 Moretti Pier Francesco CNR

25 Morrall Tony ECMAR

26 Paulauskas Vytautas Klaipeda Shipping Research Center

27 Prins H.J. MARIN

28 Ramaekers-Jorgensen Dominique EU Commission

29 Redvers Del BMT

30 Rodseth Jan Ornulf Marintek

31 Roland Frank CMT

32 Sdoukopoulos Lefteris HIT

33 Sinha Ashutosh Shipbuilder and Shiprepairers Association

34 Skjong Rolf DNV

35 Spyridaki Argyro HIT

36 Torregrosa Maicas Antonio Fundacion Valencia Port

37 Tsceliesnig P. TUV AUSTRIA Services GmbH

38 Vagslid Eivind International Maritime Organization

39 Wijnolst Niko DNM/ENMC

40 Wittamore Ken ICOMIA

41 Xu Jingjing University of Plymouth


Page 18 CERTH/HIT

ANNEX III: Photos from the event


Page 19 CERTH/HIT


Page 20 CERTH/HIT


Page 21 CERTH/HIT


Page 22 CERTH/HIT


Page 23 CERTH/HIT


Page 24 CERTH/HIT


Page 25 CERTH/HIT

Opening Speech

Ladies and Gentlemen, I would like to first thank the MARPOS and the CASMARE consortia for organizing this conference and for their efforts to gather information on research projects funded by the European Union over the last 14 years in the domain of waterborne transport and for the analysis of the objectives, results and implementation of results of those projects and for defining future research priorities. I would like also to thank you for your presence today. While the European Commission has started to reflect on the future framework programme for research and innovation involving the stakeholders through a public consultation and while basically at the same time the Commission has also unveiled its strategy for the future of the European Transport underlying the importance of research and innovation, I would like to stress that the findings of the MARPOS project, along with the results of other actions such as CASMARE or EMAR2RES, are very important at this time. In order to underline this importance, I am going to present briefly two documents supporting the action of the Commission in the domain of research and of transport: the first one is the White Paper on the Future of Transport and the second is the Green Paper on the Future Strategic Framework for Research and Innovation. As our preoccupation today is research and innovation in the waterborne transport sector, I will concentrate essentially on those aspects. On 28th March the Commission adopted a Roadmap for a Competitive and Sustainable Transport System - the so-called Transport 2050 Strategy1. The aim of the strategy is to prepare the European Transport Area for the Future by ensuring increased mobility, by reducing the dependence on oil, limiting the effect of transport on climate change and ensuring competitiveness of the transport sector. The Transport 2050 Strategy underlines that while a lot has been achieved in 10 years, since the adoption of the 2001 White Paper on Transport, one has to acknowledge that transport is still not sustainable. If we stick to a “business as usual" approach, the oil dependence of transport might still be around 90% in 2050, CO2 emissions would remain one third higher than their 1990 level and congestion costs will increase by about 50%, the social costs of accident and noise will continue to increase.

1 COM(2011) 144 final

Opening Speech

To change the approach towards more sustainability, the Commission has set a series of targets to be achieved according to a roadmap that goes until 2050. Targets address legislation as well as policy frameworks for all transport modes including maritime and inland navigation and ports. With regard to climate change, which is central to the strategy, the roadmap sets a reduction target of at least 60% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 with respect to 1990 for the whole transport system. Such reduction should ensure the implementation of the goal of limiting climate change below 2°C. The target specific for waterborne transport is a reduction of the EU CO2 emissions from maritime bunker fuels by 40% (50% if possible) by 2050. Additional targets have been set to improve the efficiency of transport and reduce congestion with implications for the waterborne sector, for example: The shift of 30% road freight over 300 km to other modes of transport such as rail and waterborne by 2030 and by more than 50% by 2050. A sufficient connection by 2050 of all core seaports to rail freight and where possible to inland waterway system. The establishment by 2020 of a framework for a European multimodal transport information, management and payment system. The deployment by 2020 of a waterborne management system. For safety and security, the target is that Europe should become the leader. As underlined in the White Paper, innovation is essential to implement the strategy and EU research needs to address the full cycle of research, innovation and deployment in an integrated way. Focus should be put on the most promising technologies and should bring together all the actors involved. Fragmentation of research and development efforts is seen as most harmful and joint efforts would be needed to bring the greatest European added value. Amongst the areas for which joint efforts are needed at European level, the White Paper mentions: Vehicles’ efficiency through new design, new engines, new propulsion systems, new materials, IT and management tools design Technologies to improve safety and security Unconventional transport systems for goods distribution Use of alternative fuels and infrastructure

Opening Speech

Integrated transport management and information systems Intelligent infrastructure to ensure maximum monitoring and inter-operability The Strategy also stresses that to be more effective, technological research needs to be complemented with a systems’ approach taking care of infrastructure and regulatory requirements, coordination of multiple actors and large demonstration projects to encourage market take-up. In this perspective, the Commission will devise an innovation and deployment strategy for the transport sector, in close cooperation with the Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan). Member State representatives are currently consulted in view of the elaboration of the Strategic Transport Technology Plan – or STTP - and I believe that several organisations in this audience have already been consulted during the hearings organised by the Commission in March. Written contributions can also be provided to the Commission2. A Communication on STTP is expected after the summer, and should include an impact assessment report and initial roadmaps for key technologies. The outputs of the MARPOS project, which include a gap analysis, are therefore valuable elements that should help the elaboration of the STTP. The second document, I would like to mention is the Green Paper on the future Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation funding3. The Green Paper launches a public debate on key issues to be taken into account for future EU research and innovation programmes. These programmes are part of a larger proposal – the next Multi-annual Financial Framework – to be presented in June this year. Some fundamental directions are already given in the Green Paper, based on the Council conclusions in November 2010 on Europe 2020 flagship initiative Innovation Union4. In particular, the Council called for future EU funding programmes to focus more on Europe 2020 priorities, address societal challenges and key priorities, facilitate collaborative and industry driven research, streamline the instruments, radically simplify access to research, reduce time to market and further strengthen excellence. Challenges requiring innovative solutions are mentioned in the Green Paper. Those are: Growth and high employment levels, climate change, moving towards a low-carbon society,

2 Public consultation from 29/03/2011 until 28/05/2011 on http://ec.europa.eu/transport/research/consultations/

3 COM(2011) 48

4 COM(2010) 546

Opening Speech

sustainable use of resources, security, ageing of population, dependence on fossil-fuel and competitiveness. The Green Paper stresses that Europe needs to make a step change in its research and innovation performance. This will require a better link between research and innovation. This means breaking away from the compartmentalised approaches and focus more on challenges and outcomes to be achieved, linking research and innovation funding closer to policy objectives. Emphasis is put on efficiency, stressing the fact that "at a time of severely constrained public budgets, the most needs to be made out of every euro." Therefore duplication and fragmentation of efforts should be avoided and EU level actions could provide the opportunity to generate greater efficiency and impact. An example of such EU level action based on joint efforts between Member States, industry and the EU is the Strategic Energy Technologies Plan – the SET-Plan. The Green Paper also makes reference to the upcoming Strategic Transport Technology Plan, which I mentioned previously. You can see how important it is to have at this time a clear vision concerning the technological challenges, the research needs, the opportunity to implement the results, the possibilities to better coordinate research at EU, national and regional level to avoid duplication of efforts. In order to help shaping the future research and innovation programmes, the Green Paper puts forward a series of questions. Questions are not only based on some pre-defined challenges which I mentioned but also on lessons learned from the previous framework programmes – or should I say criticisms from the users - such as: the complexity of the programmes, the difficulty to access funding, in particular for SMEs, the administrative burden, the time to grant or to pay, etc. Questions in the Green Paper to which you are invited to answer are organised around four main themes: Working together to deliver on Europe 2020 strategy Tackling societal challenges Strengthening competitiveness Strengthening Europe’s science base and the European Research Area

Opening Speech

5

The first set of questions (Working together to deliver on Europe 2020) includes questions such as: How should the Common Strategic Framework programme be easily accessible? How should EU funding cover the full innovation cycle from research to innovation? What should be the balance between smaller, targeted and larger projects How should EU funding be related to regional and national funding? Etc. Amongst the questions from the second set (societal challenges) you will find questions such as: Should there be more room for bottom-up activities? How should EU research and innovation best support policy-making activities and forward-looking activities? Etc. In relation to competitiveness, questions address the following: How should industrial participation be strengthened? What should be the role of European Technology Platforms? How and what type of SMEs should be funded? How should EU level financial instruments (equity and debt based) be used more extensively? How should intellectual property rules strike the right balance between competitiveness aspects and dissemination of scientific results? Etc. Finally, with regards to the European Research Area questions are asked regarding support to the European Research Council, research infrastructures, Marie Curie Actions and to international cooperation. Most of you – if not all in this audience - have considerable experience in EU-funded research programmes and I am sure that you have many suggestions to improve these programmes. I would like to encourage you to participate to the public consultation, which is accessible though the Europa Website/DG Research/public consultation5. The consultation is open until 20 May 2011 (close on). You can participate as individuals or as stakeholders or both. On 10 June, an event will be organised to wrap up the public consultation and discuss the results with the stakeholder community. The Commission intends to put forward its legislative proposal for a Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation funding by the end of 2011.

5 http://ec.europa.eu/research/csfri/index_en.cfm

Opening Speech

6

The MARPOS project has gathered information on waterborne transport research projects funded under the 5th, 6th and 7th research framework programme, in particular on the outcome of the projects and when possible on the implementation of the project results. The aim of the project is to get a clear picture on the development of technologies supported by EU funding, to establish a gap analysis and to contribute to the assessment of research progress with regard to the Waterborne Strategic Agenda. The results of CASMARE should complement work carried out within the CASMARE project, in particular with regard to national research funded activities and within the EMAR2RES project which focus on multi-disciplinary research within the framework of the marine/maritime strategy. As you can see, and to repeat myself, the conclusions of the project MARPOS as well as the other projects such as CASMARE, as well as the discussions you will have today are very important in relation to the preparation of the future framework for research and innovation as well as for the elaboration of the Strategic Transport Technology Plan. I would like to encourage pursuing your efforts to gather information on research results and on the implementation of the results and invite you to provide this information. Thank you for your attention.

Dominique Ramaekers - Jørgensen, European Commission-DG

MARPOS – CASMARE Final Conference:

“Overcoming Today’s Challenges for

Tomorrow’s Opportunities”

Brussels, April 12, 2011

Dr. Maria Boile, Research Director

Hellenic Institute of Transport





The Significance of Maritime Transport The Significance of Maritime Transport

2

Economic engine for Europe and important source of revenue and jobs

90% of the EU external trade is seaborne and sea shipping represents 40% of intra-EU freight exchanges

400 Million passengers pass through European ports

Support provided by the European Commission:

Publishing a series of policy documents

Providing funding for research activities through the EU’s research Framework Programmes (FP4 – FP7)

3

Key Maritime Transport Research Key Maritime Transport Research Priorities set in the FPsPriorities set in the FPs

Strengthening the competitiveness of the EU Maritime Transport Industry(Improving ship design, production processes, engine efficiency)

Minimizing energy consumption(Electric ship concept)

Greening of transport(Reduction of greenhouse and noise emissions, shift towards renewable energy sources)

Safety & Security(Reducing the number of fatalities by emphasizing on integrative approaches linking human elements, structural integrity, preventive, passive and active safety)

4

Maritime Transport Research Maritime Transport Research coco--funded by the DG RTD funded by the DG RTD under FP5, FP6 and FP7under FP5, FP6 and FP7

Number of projects FP5 FP6 FP7* Total

RTD small 49 31 30 110

RTD large (IP) N/A 6 4 10

Total 49 37 34 120

EU funding (Million €) FP5 FP6 FP7 Total

RTD small 85.0 53.2 79.4 217.6

RTD large (IP) N/A 76.6 50.5 127.1

Total 85.0 129.8 129.9 344.7

120 maritime transport research projects funded through thethree FPs with a total budget of € 594.9 Million and EU funding€ 344.7 Million

*Up to FP7 4th call

5

Maritime Transport Research ResultsMaritime Transport Research Results--11

Research fields addressed:

Shipbuilding and maintenance [Total budget: €120.4 Million, EU funding: € 68.2 Million]

Structural analysis, Innovative materials, Production processes, Ship repair, Shipdismantling

Ship hull [Total budget: €23.1 Million, EU funding: € 14.1 Million]

Hull efficiency, Hull cleaning, Hull inspection

Ship propulsion [Total budget: €31.4 Million, EU funding: € 19.7 Million]

Propulsion efficiency, Innovative propulsion concepts

6


Electric ship [Total budget: €47.3 Million, EU funding: € 25.4 Million]

Electric power component design, Marine fuel cells

Maritime vessel engine [Total budget: €83.2 Million, EU funding: € 44.1 Million]

Engine efficiency, Engines with ultra low emissions

Innovative ship and infrastructure concepts [Total budget: €23.5 Million, EU funding:

€ 12.5 Million]

New ship concepts, Innovative floating structures

7


Systems integration [Total budget: €38.8 Million, EU funding: € 22.1 Million]

Systems and onboard equipment, Ship/shore systems, Eco-ship systems

Systems for safety and security [Total budget: €34.9 Million, EU funding: € 20.8 Million]

Decisions support systems, Navigation systems, Monitoring systems, Evacuationsystems

Waterborne operations [Total budget: €29.4 Million, EU funding: € 16.4 Million]

Ship operations, Port operations, Operations on ice infested waters

Minimizing the environmental impact of vessels [Total budget: €58.6 Million, EU

funding: € 37 Million]

Ship coating, Minimizing wash, noise and vibration, Pollutiontreatment/prevention, Waste management and ballast water treatment

8


Ship design [Total budget: € 88.7 Million, EU funding: € 55 Million]

New design methodologies, Integrated fluid dynamic analysis

Rescue systems [Total budget: €3.5 Million, EU funding: € 2 Million]

Rescue systems regarding hydromechanics, mechanics and human behavior forpassengers addressing both the hardware and the procedures management

Maritime fire safety [Total budget: €7.6 Million, EU funding: € 4.7 Million]

Design tool kit including risk model databases - fire properties specifications - fireconsequences models for fire design scenarios and simulations, regulatoryframework for maritime fire safety based on probabilistic and numerical models ofignition, growth and impact of fires.

9

Maritime Transport Research Results Maritime Transport Research Results ImplementationImplementation

Questionnaires and personal telephone interviews for theFP6 maritime transport research projects (37)

46% of the projects produced innovative results that have been takenup by the maritime industry as publicly available commercial products

74% of the EU financial contribution to projects with results that havebeen taken up by the broader industry (15%) or by the projects’ industrialpartners (59%)

Lack of implementation is often attributed to:- lack of regulatory framework and/or lack of necessary actions

by the regulatory bodies- current poor economic climate- more funds are needed in some cases to fully develop the

research outcomes as a commercial product

10

Maritime Transport Research DatabaseMaritime Transport Research Databasewww.maritimetransportresearch.com

11


12


13


14


15


16


17






Dr. Maria Boile, Research Director

Hellenic Institute of Transport









Ørnulf Jan RødsethResearch Director, MARINTEK





2

Decision Support System for Ships in Degraded ConditionDecision Support System for Ships in Degraded Condition

EU project 2004-2006

3 years, 280 pm, 4.15 mEuro

Consortium 2 end users

4 system suppliers

2 R&D / consultancies

2 Universities

Norway, UK, Italy and Germany

Objectives Decision Support System for main

emergencies

Alarm analysis and Context sensitive filtering

Remote monitoring, decision support &crisis assistance

Technical Condition Management

Consequence assessment of intentional grounding

Onshore processing of data

Vessels Passenger vessels, Cargo vessels

Decision Support System for Ships in Degraded ConditionDecision Support System for Ships in Degraded Condition

End users◦ Carnival (P&O) UK

◦ TeeKay (Navion) NO

R&D / consultancies◦ Marintek NO

◦ BMT UK

Funded by the European Commission

System suppliers

Martec IT

Kongsberg NO

SIEMENS D

Lodic NO

Universities

NTNU NO

TU Berlin D

Company Presentations/Carnival Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/Teekay Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/MARINTEK Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/BMT Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/Martec Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/KM Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/SIEMENS Company Presentation.pdf

Company Presentations/Lodic Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/NTNU Company Presentation.ppt

Company Presentations/TUB-MAT Company Presentation.ppt

Project Project BackgroundBackground

4

P&O Princess Cruices: Safety and Automation systems◦ Alarm analysis, hierchysation, context sensitive filtering

EU Commission: Tanker safety◦ Prestige, Erica

EU FP5: ”Ship Operations Cluster”◦ HullMon+ (Marintek): Measuring motions and stresses

◦ SeaAhed (BMT): Manouevring in restricted waters

◦ SeaRoutes (TU Berlin): Weather routing

Prototype multifunction console (MFC)

Development of a number of integrated decision support applications.◦ Weather routing

◦ Degraded maneuvering

◦ Hull damage / grounding

◦ Technical condition assessment

AchievementsAchievements

5

Publications: 20

PhD: Dr. Alsos

Concrete product improvment◦ MARTEC (MFC)

◦ Lodic/Kongsberg (Remaining strength module)

◦ SIEMENS (Alarm presentation and context filtering)

Research institutes◦ Inhouse developments in BMT, MARINTEK, NTNU

and TUB


6

Prototype integrated display Prototype integrated display (MFC)(MFC)

77


88

Selected alarms based on predefined

filtering criteria

General alarm list


99

General high level summary status

information


1010

Application selection


1111

Display area for DSS applications

(general HTTP protocol with all

normal extensions)

Integration of applicationsIntegration of applications

1212

Allows integration of different information sources on one single display◦ Alarms and general monitoring and control information

◦ Data from decision support applications on shore and on ship

◦ Communication between different MFC users

Allows sharing of data between applications and systems on ship and on shore

Onboard network

DSS application 1 DSS application 2

Shore network

DSS application 3 DSS application 4

Ship/Shore

communication

link

MFC at bridge MFC in engine Portable MFC MFC in owner’s office MFC outside owner’s office

Automation, navigation and

safety systems

WeatherWeather forecastforecast and and weatherweather routingrouting

13

Generate parent route in form of great circle slice

Seek for an optimum in terms of:

◦ Fuel consumption (intact)

◦ Passage Time

◦ Accelerations and Movements

Boundaries are either travel time or accelerations

14

Long term trending and situation dependent assessment

Automation data

Manually measurements

Deviations or repair reports

Displays condition data in a tree so that root causes for problems can be found.

ManeuveringManeuvering simulatorsimulator

15

Gives an overview of ship’s ability to maneuver given certain defects in maneuvering systems.

Can automatically estimate defects based on ship response

SeaSea keepingkeeping

16

Give advice on the remaining strength of ship versus speed and direction

Can consider current weather

RemainingRemaining strengthstrength and and stabilitystability

17

Remaining strength and stability after hull damage.

Automatically calculated based on input of damage.

Ultimate resistance

Still water load load

Margin

Damage

Wave load

Increase in

damage

& wave load

Hull

mom

ent

GroundingGrounding

18

Same as previous, but considers effects of grounding

Ship is fixed in one point

Resulting damage Ultimate resistance

Still water load load

Margin

Damage

Wave load

Increase in

damage

& wave load

Hull

mom

ent

ShipShip to to shoreshore communicationcommunication

19

Reduce radio and telephone communication

Graphic point, click and draw

Messaging

Sucessful project with good results

Basic idea developed further in Flagship◦ Cooperation ship-shore

◦ Emergency, but also day to day operation

Rapid developments in area, but still significant gains to be had …

ConcludingConcluding remarksremarks

20

PossiblePossible reductionreduction in GHG in GHG emissionsemissions

21

Pathways to Low Carbon Shipping

Abatement potential towards 2030

DNV 2010

18,7 billion

USD/year

Pentti Kujala

VenueVenue: : Hotel Stanhope, Rue de Commerce 9, BHotel Stanhope, Rue de Commerce 9, B--1000 Brussels, Tel. +32 (0)2 506 90 311000 Brussels, Tel. +32 (0)2 506 90 31

Professor Pentti Kujala

Aalto University/School of Engineering/Marine

Technology

Finland

SAFEICE- RESEARCH PROJECT

Pentti Kujala

INCREASING THE SAFETY OF ICEBOUND SHIPPING

Pentti Kujala

PARTNERS

• Helsinki University of Technology, Finland (HUT), Coordinator

• Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden (CUT)

• Tallinn Technical University, Estonia (TTU)

• Finnish Maritime Administration, Finland (FMA)

• Swedish Maritime Administration, Sweden (SMA)

• Germanicher Lloyd, Germany (GL)

• Hamburg Ship Research Institute, Germany (HSVA)

• Antarctic and Arctic Research Institute, Russia (AARI)

• National Research Council, Canada (NRC)

• National Maritime Research Institute, Japan (NMRI).

Pentti Kujala

The objectives of SAFEICE

• Develop semi-empirical methods based on measurements and advanced theoretical models to determine the ice loads and hull response under ice loads and relate these to the operational scenarios and the ice conditions

• Create a framework to develop design codes and regulations based on plastic design approach for icebound ships

Pentti Kujala

WP2

WP3

Analysis of data

Existing data new data

WP10 WP4

Initial conditions;

operational environment

Load prediction

WP7

Risk model

WP5

Design methods

WP9

Ultimate strength

WP8

Load modelling

WP6

Classical design procedureDirect design procedure

Act

ivit

y 2

Act

ivit

y 1

Act

ivit

y 4

Act

ivit

y 3

The structure of the project

Pentti Kujala

Scheduling

Start 01.09.2004, end 31.08.2007

Budget about 2 milj euro

Pentti Kujala

IMPACT OF SAFEICE RESULTS ON ICE RULE DEVELOPMENT

Based on the summary by Jorma Kämäräinen (FMA) & Kaj Riska (ILS)

In the final seminar

Pentti Kujala

DEFINITION OF THE ICE CLASSES

• Design ice conditions

Implications:

What ice is expected

to be encountered?

Pentti Kujala



Implications:

Applicability to other sea areas

Pentti Kujala


• Design operative scenarios

Implications:

What operations are expected

Point of icebreaker escort

Pentti Kujala

DEFINITION OF THE DESIGN POINT

• Balance between allowed response and expected loading

Implications:

Expected lifetime loading

and response

Pentti Kujala

DEFINITION OF THE ICE LOAD

• Location of the load

Implications:

Ice belt vertical extent

Use of direct calculations

Hull areas

Pentti Kujala


• Determination of the ice pressure

Implications:

Dependence on PD and Δ

Load length effect (ca)

Correct load level based

on service experience

Pentti Kujala

DEFINITION OF THE RESPONSE

• Plate response

Implications:

Elastic or plastic design

Scantling formulations

Pentti Kujala


• Frame response

Implications:

Frame web stability

Scantling formulations

Connections of framesThe present structure,

not acceptable

WT collar

Best structure with

a continuous frame

going through the

deck strip

Better structure with

frame web attached to

the deck strip

Full penetration

welding

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS



Result :

Analysis of

severity of ice

conditions0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1 10 100 1000

Return Period (hr)

Lin

e L

oa

d (

MN

/m)

h > 0.4 m

h =< 0.4 m

Pentti Kujala


• Frequency of loading

Result:

Study on statistics

of ice loading

SAFEICE RESULTS

Return Period [days]

1 10 100 1000

q

[kN

/m]

500

1000

1500

2000

IB Sisu 1982 - 1985

MS Arcturus 1985-1988

MT Kemira 1985-1991

MT Kashira 1984-1990

Pentti Kujala


• Response analysis

Result:

Analysis of

frequency of

damage

SAFEICE RESULTS

Frequency of 3-hinge

Collapse of a frame

Pentti Kujala


• Balance between the allowed response and expected loading

Result:

Conceptual

analysis of the

balance between

loading and

response

SAFEICE RESULTS

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

0.1 1 10 100 1000

return period (days)lo

ad

(kN

/m)

measured

Gumbel I

ice rules 1AS

MT KEMIRA RESULTS

Plate thickness t

w1 > w0

w0

Permanent deflection

Tdesign

qdesign

tdesign

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS


• Hull area factors

Result :

Measurement

of ice loading

on different

hull areas

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS


Conclusion:

• Theoretical calculations of ice loads give some information on the hull angles

• Load length study applicable directly

• Hull area factors must be still based on experience but emphasize the shoulder areas

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS


Plate response

Result:

Non-linear FE

calculations have been

carried out

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS


Plate response

Result:

Validation

with one

damage

incident

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE RESULTS


Plate and frame response

Conclusion:

• Still uncertainty about the plastic calculation methods

• Stability analysis of frames is to be carried out

Pentti Kujala

CONCLUSIONS

APPLICABILITY OF RESULTS IN VIEW OF ICE RULE UPDATING

• Load length formulation applicable

• Load statistics data applicable with modifications

• More knowledge needed in view of FSICR:

Design point formulation

Ice class – ice conditions dependency

Plastic and also elastic response formulations

Pentti Kujala

SAFEICE CONTINUES IN A NEW PROJECT:

SAFEWIN – Safety of winter nvaigation in dynamic

ice

Meri-Kotka

Pentti Kujala

• Project manager: Pentti Kujala /Aalto• Running in 2009-2012• Budget about 3.9 Meuro • Funding: EU/FP7, partners

Lähde:Finstaship

Pentti Kujala

WP1 Project Management (TKK)

WP2Observation campaign

(ILS; AARI, FMI, FMA, TKK, KS, SMA,

STE, TUT)

Observations of ice cover motion and stresses using, drift buoys, ship-

borne measurements, ship-borne observations like IceCam and specific

field campaigns with combined helicopter-based, on-ice and ship-borne

measurements

WP3 Forecasting methods(SMHI; AARI, FMI, TUT)

Development of ice dynamics models to account for compression in the

ice field.

WP4 Compression in ship-scale(ILS; AARI, FMI, TKK, AS2CON)

The large scale forecast of dynamic ice models must be turned into a

forecast relevant for shipping. In addition tests in model scale are

conducted in an ice tank to study the scaling problem

WP5Operative forecasting

(FMI; AARI, FMI, FMA, ILS, KS, STE,

SMA, SMHI, TUT)

The forecasting methods developed in this project should be delivered

on-time to shipping.

WP6Risk control

(TKK; AS2CON, ILS, AARI, FMA, KS,

STE, SMA, TUT)

The impact on ship safety of ice compression is evaluated.

WP7 Ice management(AARI; ILS, FMI)

Timely and accurate ice drift forecasts are important in Arctic offshore

operations.

WP8Final reporting

(TKK; AS2CON, ILS, AARI, FMI, FMA,

KS, STE, SMA, SMHI, TUT)

Pentti Kujala

Extensive full scale measurements during the very good winters of 2010 and 2011

Results: Next seminar.....

Pentti Kujala

THANK YOU FOR

YOUR ATTENTION !

FLAGSHIP PROJECT

Presentation at Presentation at

MARPOS MARPOS –– CASMARE CASMARE

Conference Conference

Brussels, 12 April 2011Brussels, 12 April 2011

Three major technical Work Packages

WP A – Technical operations and

management of fleets

WP B – Nautical operations

WP C – Emergency Management

+

WP D – Support activities

Each WP a number of Subprojects.

SHIPPING ECSA, Superfast, Containerships, Minoan,

Portline, Perseveranza, Danaos, NSB, Teekay,

Carnival, V-Ships, CSS agency, ASME, KVNR,

NSA, Consar

EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIERS EMEC, Autronica, Rolls Royce, Lyngsøe, Wärtsilä,

Lodic, Kongsberg, SAM

CLASSIFICATION SOCIETIES GL, Rina, BV

PORTS TERMINALS AND

DEPOTS

Port of Valencia, TBS, SDS

SHIPYARDS CESA, Meyer Werfft, STX France, SSA

SOFTWARE SUPPLIERS &

CONSULTANCIES

TEMIS, Reg4Ships, MJC2,Sirehna, Isdefe

RESEARCH INSTITUTES BMT, Marintek,

UNIVERSITIES SSRC, NTNU, Cardiff, NTUA, WEGEMT, IST

FLAGSHIP

RESULTS and

IMPLEMNTATION

DISSEMINATION

FLAGSHIP FILM

FIRST PRESENTATION

IMPLEMENTATION OF

RESULTS

Uptake KPI’s and TCI’s

• Led to a DNV commercial product

(Top Monitoring) which monitors main

engines.

• Commercial products monitoring

auxiliary engines will come out in 2011

from Danaos and Wartsilla.

Uptake KPI’s and TCI’s

• Led to a DNV commercial product

(Top Monitoring) which monitors main

engines.

• Commercial products monitoring

auxiliary engines will come out in 2011

from Danaos and Wartsilla.

Hull Monitoring system

• The process has led to the commercial GL

“Hull Manager” tool released in July 2010.

Rule Compliance

• Prototype has been created to prove

the concept and has been

demonstration

Uptake Real time container

Management

• Has already led to large savings by a

liner partner, the Port of Valencia,

terminals and hauliers

• Being commercialised elsewhere.

Cooperative decision support

Ship - Shore.• Main parts of software have been included

in latest version of AutroMaster ISEMS

(installed on Oasis of The Seas & Allure of The Seas)

• The software is being further developed by Autronica and included in later revisions of AutroMaster ISEMS.

Uptake Vulnerability Index

• Orders for 6 installations 2010 – 2011

• Further expression of interest Italian,

US, UK navies, passenger ship

operators, merchant ships operators

(bulk carriers)

Dissemination & Information

• Demonstration, film presentation and

press coverage for dissemination first

half 2011

• Public access results under

www.flagship.be

Too follow shortly

http://www.flagship.be/

05-May-08

B-P-E International

“OFIENGINE”

research project

Pablo Martinez

TECNALIA Research & Innovation

http://www.mecanizados-kanter.es/

Objective

To increase the durability and efficiency of the propulsion system, by

the development of a new Oxy Fuel Ionization (OFI) thermal spray

technology to coat propulsion components.

The new thermal spray technology will generate the technically

required coatings to fight the identified wear mechanisms and will

also compete successfully with the current processes in cost,

reliability and industrial affordability.

OFIENGINE Objective

Outline

1. Thermal spray technologies

2. OFI concept

3. OFI prototype

4. System modelling & design

5. Examples of OFI coatings

6. Examples of industrial applications

7. Conclusions

8. Acknowledgements

V

PLASMA

HVOF

DETONACION

OFICOLD SPRAYING

1. Thermal Spray Technologies

T

Qualitative situation of OFI

2. OFI Concept

Plasma activated supersonic combustionAn electrically generated plasma flame works permanently on a mixture of oxi-

combustion gases.

Inside the OFI gun there are two simultaneous processes:

• Electrical generation of a DC plasma

• Combustion of a gas mixture

Function of the DC plasma inside the OFI gun:

• Permanent ignition of the combustion process.

• “Activation”, interaction, heating, ionization of gases

• Heat supply to the global flow of gases of the OFI gun

The Oxy-Fuel Ionisation (OFI) Spray System

Low energy plasma

section (up to 15 kW)

Combustion

chamberGun barrel

2. OFI Concept

Advantages of the process:

• Increased range of useful gas parameters for spraying.

Production of supersonic flows with high or low temperature

characteristics.

• Increased range of spray materials and coatings.

• Reduced consume of fuelgas mixtures.

2. OFI Concept

Plasma activated supersonic combustion

3. OFI system: Prototype

OFI equipment modules

•OFI gun

•Control console

•Gas unit

•DC plasma generator

•Powder feeder system

•Cooling water system

•Cables and connections

3. OFI system: Components

DC generator

• DC plasma generator: welding source

(13kW)

• Regulated to 500 Amp

Video OFI

4. Modelling & Design

Cathode

(-) Combust

ion

chamber

Nozzle

exit

(Gun

barrel)

Plasma

gas

injector

Anode

(+)

Burne

r

Two holes

for powder

carried

by N2 gas

A

B

C

D

E

F

OFI system gas

inputs/outputs

A.- Argon (Ar)

B.- Nitrogen (N2)

C.- Fuel (Ch4)

D.- Oxigen (O2)

E .- Nitrogen as carrier gas

F(output).- Flue supersonic

gases

4. Modelling & Design

5. Examples of OFI Coatings

WC-17Co cermet coating Cr3C2-NiCr cermet coating

5. OFI Coatings

- Mean hardness value:

1317 ± 92 HV0.3

- Deposition efficiency > 60%

Fuel: 200 l/min CHFuel: 200 l/min CH44

Oxidant: 450Oxidant: 450--500 l/min500 l/min OO22

Plasma gas: 20 l/min Ar Plasma gas: 20 l/min Ar

Secondary plasma gas:100 Secondary plasma gas:100

l/min Nl/min N22

Powder feeding rate: Powder feeding rate: 100 g/min, 100 g/min,

(6Kg/h)(6Kg/h), (2 opposite injectors) , (2 opposite injectors)

Carrier gas: 20 l/min NCarrier gas: 20 l/min N2 2 per lineper line

Spray distance: 250 mmSpray distance: 250 mm

Process parameters:Process parameters:

Development of WC-Co coatingsWC-17Co (Amperit 526.074, -45 +15 m, aggl. and sint.)

5. OFI Coatings


1286 ± 78 HV0.3

- Higher melting degree and

also high reproducibility.

150 mm long gun, 0º aperture150 mm long gun, 0º aperture

Same parameters: Same parameters:

250 l/min CH250 l/min CH44, 470 l/min O, 470 l/min O22, ,

100 l/min N100 l/min N22, FR: , FR: 100 g/min 100 g/min

(6Kg/h)(6Kg/h), , CG: 20 slpmCG: 20 slpm↓↓

Development of WC-Co coatingsWC-17Co (Amperit 526.074, -45 +15 m, aggl. and sint.)

Process parameters:Process parameters:

Tailoring the coating Tailoring the coating

structure: Longer structure: Longer

gun barrel, 150 mmgun barrel, 150 mm

Development of Cr3C2-25NiCr coatings

Parameters:Parameters:

- Oxygen: 425 l/min

- Fuel (CH4): 200 l/min

- Plasma gas (Ar): 20 l/min

- Auxiliary plasma gas

(N2): 100 l/min

- Current: 400 A

- Stand-off distance:

250 mm


10201020±±117117 HV0.3HV0.3

5. OFI Coatings

5. OFI Coatings

Ni-/Co-based coatings….

NiCr (INCO 718)NiCr (INCO 718)

CoCo--Mo alloy (T800)Mo alloy (T800)


313 ± 41 HV0.3- Mean hardness value:

645 ± 64 HV0.3

MCrAlY (CoNiCrAlY) coatings (with and without thermal treatment )

5. OFI Coatings

5. OFI Coatings

Parameters (new gun design):Parameters (new gun design):

- O2: 400 / CH4: 200 l/min

- Ar: 25 l/min / 400 A

- N2: 250 l/min

- Stand-off distance: 250 mm

- Microhardness: 732 ± 136

Commercial HVOF powder from The NanoSteel™ Company with a

particle size distribution of +15 to -53 m.

SHS7574: corrosion resistance superior to conventional Austenitic

Stainless Steel and Nickel Base Superalloys such as Hastelloy 625 in

extreme corrosive environments/ High bond strength.

Powder Cr B W C Mo Si Mn Fe

SHS7574 < 25% < 5% < 10% < 3% < 15% < 2% < 5% balance

Development of Nanosteel coatings

5. OFI Coatings

Development of Nanosteel-based cermet coatings

Mean hardness value:

974974 ±± 130 130 HV0.3HV0.3

Main features:Main features:

-- Highly homogeneous and dense Highly homogeneous and dense

coatingscoatings.

-- No delamination cracking.No delamination cracking.

-- Very smooth coating interfaces.Very smooth coating interfaces.

5. OFI Coatings


Tailoring the microstructure….

2/3 Nanosteel + 1/3 WC-Co


737 ± 133 HV0.3

½ Nanosteel + ½ WC-Co


729 ± 123 HV0.3

1/3 Nanosteel + 2/3 WC-Co


802 ± 151 HV0.3

5. OFI Coatings

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

WC-17Co OFI Cr3C2-NiCr OFI Nanosteel OFI Hardchorme

Wear

rate

x 1

0-4

[m

m3/N

.m]

Wear on disc

Wear on ball

Wear performance

Could not be

measured

Sliding wear resistance:

Evaluation of the friction friction

coefficientcoefficient and the wear ratewear rate

by ball-on-disk test under dry dry

conditions.conditions.

-- Counter parts:Counter parts: sintered 10 mm sintered 10 mm

WC ballsWC balls

-- Speed: 14, 66 cm/segSpeed: 14, 66 cm/seg

-- Radio: 14 mmRadio: 14 mm

-- Duration: 1 h, Duration: 1 h, -- Load: 50 NLoad: 50 N

-- Measurement of the wear track Measurement of the wear track

by laser profilometryby laser profilometry

Carbon steel

substrates


Sliding wear performance under dry conditions Sliding wear performance under dry conditions

(pin(pin--onon--disc, 10 mm WC ball, disc, 10 mm WC ball, 100 rpm, 60 min)100 rpm, 60 min)

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

Nanosteel 2/3Nano -

1/3WC

1/2Nano -

1/2WC

1/3Nano -

2/3WC

Wear

rate

on

su

bstr

ate

[g

/Nm

]] x

10

-9

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Wear

rate

on

ball

[m

m3/N

m]

x 1

0-9

5. OFI Coatings

6. Examples of Industrial Applications

Valve spindle of marine diesel engine

Application: Prime mover diesel engines in heavy duty marine

fleets (Westport W-410) / Material: F-1252-T (40CrMo4) /

Counter part: CG-25 cast steel liner/ Max. operation T: 300ºC/

600 RPM/ Service life without coating ~ 12.000 h.

Problem: Adhesion and abrasive wear in the stem

sealing area.

Common coating solutions: HVOF sprayed Cr3C2-NiCr and

WC-Co based materials.

Coating material tested:

Cr3C2-NiCr 75/25 (Amperit 584.054, aggl. sint.,-45 +10 m)

Properties:

- Hardness: 800-1200 HV0.3

- Thickness after finishing: ~150-200 m

- Finishing: max. 0.4 Ra0.4 Ra

6. Industrial applications

Valve spindle as sprayed

after finishing


Requirements

Anti-sliding coatings (high

friction coefficient)

Deposition on the Internal

diameter of cylindrical

components

High hardness (WC-Co)

Moderate resistance to

mechanical shock (deposition of

a very thin coating ~80 µm)

New Applications – shafting and stern-tube equipment for ships


20 RPM → 26 cm/s

Relative gun velocity:

2 mm/s

Cooling: air @ 7 bars x two nozzles

470 slpm O2

250 slpm CH4

225 slpm N2

Plasma: 19 slpm Ar / 400 A

Stand-off distance: 300-350 mm

Powder feeding rate: 47 g/min

Thickness (as sprayed):~ 60-80 m.

Process parameters:

Coating deposition in

Internal diameter

Coating in

two steps

Applied coating:

WC-17Co (Amperit 526.074, aggl.

sint., -45 +15 m)


Piston crown Application: Auxiliary motor “GUASCOR” for electricity

generation. Material: CG-25 / Max. operation T: 300ºC

/ 1.500 rpm / Service life without coating ~ 12.000 h.

Problem: Sticking of combustion residues on the

crown.

Coating material applied:

Cr3C2-NiCr 75/25 (Amperit 584.054, aggl. sint., -45

+10 m)

Desired coating properties:

-Hardness: 800-1200 HV0.3

(on flat steel coupons)

- Thickness (as sprayed): ~80 m

- Finishing: not required..


As sprayed

100 RPM: 1/2 + 1/2

Relative gun velocity:

10 cm/s

Cooling: air @ 7 bars x two

nozzles

450 slpm O2

250 slpm CH4

100 slpm N2


Stand-off distance: 250 mm

Powder feeding rate:

40 g/min

Thickness (as sprayed):

60-80 m.

Process parameters:Piston crown


Piston pin Application: Engine “GUASCOR” / Material: F-

1252-T (40CrMo4) / Max. operation T: 200ºC /

600 rpm / Service life without coating ~ 12.000

h.

Problem: localized wear fretting-corrosion on

the surface.

Common solution:

- Re-lapping.

Coating material tested:

WC-17Co (Amperit 526.074, aggl. sint., -45 +15

m)

Coating properties:

- Hardness: 1000-1300.

- Thickness (after finishing): >150 m

- Finishing: max. 0.15 Ra..


Piston pin Linear velocity: ~35 cm/s


nozzles

470 slpm O2

250 slpm CH4

180 slpm N2




Process parameters:6. Industrial applications

Piston rings for diesel engines

Linear velocity: ~35 cm/s


nozzles

470 slpm O2

250 slpm CH4

180 slpm N2




Process parameters:

Applied coating:

Cr3C2-NiCr 75/25 (Amperit

584.054, aggl. sint.,-45 +10 m)

Problem:

Wear protection against cylinder liner.


Characteristics of the OFI prototype

•Achieved production of quality coatings.

•Coating reproducibility, uniformity.

•Reduced usage of gases.

•Reliable, automatic controlled.

7. Conclusions

Supported by European Commission under contract

TST5-CT-200603192

G. Marieux and A. Vardelle from Univ of Limoges

8. Acknowledgements

B-P-E International

http://www.mecanizados-kanter.es/

Thanks for your attention !

[email protected]

1http://www.streamline-project.eu

“STREAMLINE” Research Project

Presentation to MARPOS/CASMARE Conference

12th April 2011, Brussels

Paul Greaves / Oliver Lane – Rolls-Royce

htt

p:/

/www.streamline-project.eu

This document and the information contained are the property of the STREAMLINE Consortium and shall not be copied in any form or disclosed to any

party outside the Consortium without the written permission of the STREAMLINE Management Committee

STREAMLINE Objectives

Strategic Research for Innovative Marine Propulsion Concepts

Demonstrate radically new propulsion concepts delivering a step-change improvement of at least 15% efficiency over the current state-of-the-art.

Investigate how to fully optimise current state-of-the-art systemsincluding conventional screw propeller systems, pods and waterjets

Develop advanced CFD tools and methods to optimise the hydrodynamic performance of the new ship propulsion systems, particularly by analysis of the integrated hull and propulsor.

Characterise the operational aspects of each of the radically new propulsion concepts

2

http://www.streamline-project.eu/

htt

p:/




STREAMLINE Consortium

3


htt

p:/




STREAMLINE Workstreams

Project Coordination

Rolls-Royce / ARTTIC

WP1 (RRAB)

New Propulsion

Concepts

WP11 (RRAB)

Novel Applications of

Large Area Propellers

WP12 (WS)

Biomechanical

Systems

WP13 (DST)

Distributed Propulsion

WP2 (INSEAN)

Optimisation of State-

of-the-Art Propulsion

WP21 (INSEAN)

Advanced Screw

Propeller System

WP22 (RRAB)

High-Efficiency

Waterjet at low speeds

WP23 (SSPA)

Advanced PODs

WP3 (MARIN)

CFD Methods

WP31 (CNRS)

Development of Fixed grid/

Rotating-grid Coupling

WP32 (MARIN)

Grid Adaptation

WP33 (INSEAN)

Prediction of

cavitation nuisance

WP34 (INSEAN)

RANS/BEM

Coupled Method

WP35 (HSVA)

Design and

optimisation

Operational Aspects – Lloyd’s Register, Stena Line, Wilhelmsen

4


htt

p:/




WP11 – Large Area Propellers

Increasing propeller diameter increases propulsive efficiency

STREAMLINE will research different ways to apply a very large

diameter propeller to a vessel, by positioning in novel configurations

5

Behind the Transom, where the

propeller will be in the stern wake

Maximise propeller diameter

Wave resistance can be reduced

The lower velocities in the stern wave may

improve pressure impulse efficiency

Inclined Keel Hull

Maximise propeller diameter

Trim ship to fully submerge propeller in

transit


htt

p:/




WP12 – Biomechanical Systems

6

As a radical move away from conventional propellers, STREAMLINE

will further research and develop the Walvisstaart Pod concept

STREAMLINE will research different drive systems, the stern

hydrodynamics and manoeuvrability of the Inland Waterway Vessel

In comparison with a propeller & nozzle,

efficiency could improve by up to 30%.

Large volume of water with lower velocity

Direct drive system should give excellent

reliability

This system is planned to be built and

tested at full-scale


htt

p:/




WP13 – Distributed Propulsion

7

An alternative to Walvisstaart Pod concept is to distribute thrust

over multiple propulsors arranged around the ship hull

STREAMLINE will study the efficiency benefits that can be obtained

from distributed propulsion using the ‘Futura Carrier’ concept

Such a solution delivers improved

efficiency due to:

Reduced loading of each individual

propulsor

A reduction of the air-suction phenomenon

by arranging multiple propulsors in a

staggered arrangement

Hull resistance can be decreased

because air suction prevention features

(such as tunnels and skirts) become

redundant


htt

p:/




WP 21 – Advanced Screw Propeller

8

STREAMLINE will derive high-performance screw propeller systems

using enhanced simulation and optimisation tools to bring

improvements over the current SoA

Different areas of CFD investigation have been

identified in order to cover all possible

efficiency improving strategies:

Shape optimisation (propeller and hull aftbody)

Unconventional propellers (tip-modified blades,

ducted propellers)

Enhanced rudder-propeller configurations

Propeller-inflow improving devices (vortex

generators, pre-swirl stators)


htt

p:/




WP22 – High Efficiency Waterjets

9

Propulsor choice is dependant on operating speed and waterjets are

mainly used at >25kts due to low efficiency at slow speeds

STREAMLINE will research new conceptual designs which handle dual

design targets at both high and low speed. This challenge requires

novel inlet designs including:

Active variable inlet

Mechanical actuation

Shape Memory Alloys

Passive variable inlet

CFD tools used to design systems

where the effective inlet geometry

changes depending on water speed


htt

p:/




WP23 – Advanced PODs

10

Many benefits of Pods demonstrated in two previous EU projects:

OPTIPOD and FASTPOD, but there are opportunities to increase

propulsive efficiency

STREAMLINE will investigate different implementations of contra-

rotating PODs to improve system propulsive efficiency

Contra-Rotating POD (CRP)

POD mounted behind a conventional

propeller

Integrated Contra-rotating POD (ICP)

Both propellers mounted on the POD

Potentially even more efficient

For both systems, it will be key to

overcome cavitation and ventilation

problems that typically arise


htt

p:/




WP3 –New CFD Tools & Methods

STREAMLINE needs to access new tools and methods for modelling

performance aspects of novel propulsion technologies

Hence, third major objective for STREAMLINE is to continue to

develop advanced CFD tools and methods beyond VIRTUE

New STREAMLINE tools will be applied to the radically new concepts

as well as to the improved SoA propulsors

Significant advance beyond the current SoA capability in Europe

11

WP31 –

Fixed/Rotating grid

Coupling

WP32 – Grid Adaptation WP33 – Prediction of

CavitationWP34 –

RANS/BEM

Coupling Method

WP35 – Design &

Optimisation


htt

p:/




Operational Aspects

Fourth major objective of STREAMLINE is to characterise the

operational aspects of each radically new propulsion concept

Includes analysis of:

operational performance

reliability

safety

economic factors

Carried out by a specialised team of major ship operators,

classification societies and research institutes, to ensure strong

end user focus during the development work

Project will conclude with benchmarking of each concept against

existing State-of-the-Art

12


htt

p:/




Efficiency Improvement Targets

13

Propulsion ConceptTechnology Maturity to be

Achieved in STREAMLINE

Potential efficiency improvement

against current State-of-the-Art

Novel applications of large area propulsion Model demonstration >15%

Biomechanical system Full scale demonstration >30%

Distributed thrust Model demonstration >30%

Advanced screw propeller systems Analysis by CFD and tank testing ~ 5-10%

High-efficiency waterjet at low speedsModel demonstration of variable

actuation functionality

Increased low speed efficiency to

improve total performance across

operational profile.

Advanced pods Model demonstration5 – 20% depending on the Pod

type.

Optimised configurations Analysis by CFDSystematic study of existing

configurations.


htt

p:/




Thank you for listening

For further information visit

http://www.streamlinehttp://www.streamline--project.eu/project.eu/

14





BESST projectBESST project

presentationpresentation

Paolo Paolo GugliaGuglia, BESST Coordinator, BESST Coordinator

OutlineOutline

General information on BESST project

General Information on BESST General Information on BESST

Breakthrough in European Ship

and Shipbuilding Technologies

BESST Launching phaseBESST Launching phase

• R&D FP7 EC funded Large-scaled

Integrating Project

• Initiated by EUROYARDS (European Economic Interest

Group comprising the leading European shipbuilders)

• Following InterSHIP: R&D FP6 EC

funded Integrated Project (Integrated

Collaborative Design and Production of Cruise Vessels)

• Focus on product vs. process

BESST Target and GoalsBESST Target and Goals

To achieve a breakthrough in

Competitiveness

Environmental friendliness

Safety

The project works on two levels:

SYSTEM LEVELSYSTEM LEVEL

R&D for innovation

SHIP LEVELSHIP LEVEL

Better holistic integration

Better optimisation

Concrete ResultsConcrete Results

DecreasedDecreased

life cycle costlife cycle cost

ReducedReduced

environmental impactenvironmental impact

ImprovedImproved

safetysafety

BreakthroughBreakthrough

Cost reduction:Cost reduction:

~120 M~120 M€€ / ship/ ship

over 30 y life time

Emission reduction:Emission reduction:

12.000 CO12.000 CO22eqeq t/yeart/year

( ( --12% )12% )

compared to a standard PanaMax cruise shipcompared to a standard PanaMax cruise ship

Key FiguresKey Figures

6464

PartnersPartners

29 M29 M€€

budgetbudget

>2.000>2.000

ManMonthsManMonths

17,45 M17,45 M€€

EU fundingEU funding

PartnershipPartnership

••88 Shipyards

••55 Classification

Societies

••1010 Universities

••1010 Research Centers

••1414 Technological

Partners

••1717 Technological

Partners SMEs

Shipyard

13%

Universities

16%

Research

Centers

16%

Classification

Societies

8%

Technological

Partners

21%

Technological

Partners SMEs

26%

PartnerSHIPPartnerSHIP

1717

1111

55

44

44

44

33

11

11

11

12

EU

cou

ntries

12

EU

cou

ntries

1010

33

http://www.geographic.org/flags/germany_flags.html

http://www.theodora.com/flags




http://www.theodora.com/flags/


http://www.theodora.com/flags/austria_flag.html

BESST StructureBESST Structure

••SG ISG I Space Optimisation and Easy MaintenanceSpace Optimisation and Easy Maintenance

••SG IISG II Improving Payload to Gross Tonnage RatioImproving Payload to Gross Tonnage Ratio

••SG IIISG III Cost Efficient Building Processes and RefurbishmentCost Efficient Building Processes and Refurbishment

••SG IVSG IV Improved Energy Efficiency and Reduced EmissionsImproved Energy Efficiency and Reduced Emissions

••SG VSG V Noise and vibrationNoise and vibration

••SG VISG VI Impr. Reliability thr. ModelImpr. Reliability thr. Model--Based Design and Condition Monit.Based Design and Condition Monit.

••SG VIISG VII Optimization of Logistic Chains Optimization of Logistic Chains

••SG VIIISG VIII Improving Safety and SecurityImproving Safety and Security

••HAsHAs Life Cycle Performance AssessmentLife Cycle Performance Assessment

The Virtual BESST ShipThe Virtual BESST Ship

M/LargeM/Large

PassengerPassenger

ShipShip

Ultra/LargeUltra/Large

PassengerPassenger

ShipShip

FerryFerry

RoRoRoRo

Virtual showcasesVirtual showcases

Supporting Supporting

ActionsActions

Project ManagementProject Management

Internal Internal

DisseminationDissemination

External External

DisseminationDissemination

Advisory GroupAdvisory Group

HAHA--A resultsA results

• LCPA tool indicators

Life Cycle Costs

NPV

Net Present Value

Environment

GWP

Global Warming Potential

AP

Acidification Potential

EP

Eutrophication Potential

Safety

ΔE(NPV)

KPI linking safety to costs

Society

SWI

Social Welfare Index


System group ISpace Optimization and

easy maintenanceMeyer Werft

System group IIImproving Payload to

Gross Tonnage RatioBVN

System group IIICost Efficient Building Process

and RefurbishmentSTX Finland

System group IVImproved Energy Efficiency and

Reduced Emissions

Fincantieri

System group VMinimization of

Noise and VibrationFincantieri

System group VIImproved Reliability through

Conditioning monitoringBVN

System group VIIOptimization of Logistic Chains

Meyer Werft

System group VIIIImproving safety and security

STX France

WP3 I-1Multipurpose

Public roomsMeyer Werft

WP4 I-2Easy Maintenance

And HousekeepingMeyer Werft

WP5 II-1Using the Potentials of

Laser welding for

Product Performance

BVN

WP6 II-2Innovative Lightweight

Materials and their Application

BVN

WP7 II-3Advanced Methods for

early Structural AssessmentBVN

WP8 III-1Design for easy

RefurbishmentMeyer Werft

WP9 III-2Block Accuracy

ManagementSTX Finland

WP10 III-3Flexible and Modular

Laser EquipmentMeyer Werft

WP11 III-4Alternative Corrosion

Protection SystemsMeyer Werft

WP15 V-2Low Noise and Ecological

Thrusters and PropellersFincantieri

WP13 IV-2Efficient and Flexible

Energy StorageSTX France

WP12 IV-1Total Energy Management

And Alternative Energy Sources

Fincantieri

WP14 V-1Reduced Noise Emissions

Into Air and WaterFincantieri

WP16 VI-1Hybrid-Electric Ship Propulsion

System by Model-Based Design

BVN

WP18 VII-1Toolset for Onboard Logistics

Planning and ManagementMeyerwerft

WP20 VIII-1Integrated Security

Management System

STX France

WP17 VI-2

IT-Solutions for

Condition MonitoringSTX France

WP19 VII-2Efficient Baggage Handling,

Transport and Storage

Meyerwerft

WP21 VIII-2Integrated IT Network for

Essential ServicesMeyer Werft

BESST general structure of work planBESST general structure of work plan

HA B: The Virtual BESST Ship – Integration Case

HA A: Life Cycle Performance Assessment – Methods and Tools

Sub-Project

Technical

Development

Life Cycle “thinking” and an integrated

approach on ship level are applied throughout

the BESST Integrated Framework

Prototype

Lessons

Learned

WP Coordination

Life Cycle “thinking” and an integrated

approach on ship level are applied throughout

the BESST Integrated Framework

• HA-A develops generic tools and guides LCPA

in the technical sub-projects

• SG Sub-Projects develop solutions with optimal

life cycle performance and assess LCP on

system level

• HA-B demonstrates the achievements and

shows optimization potential on ship level,

based on a “Virtual BESST ship”

SA

.1P

roje

ct

Ma

nag

em

en

t

SA

.2In

tern

al

Dis

se

min

atio

n

SA

.3E

xte

rna

l

Dis

se

min

atio

n

SA

.4A

dvis

ory

Gro

up

TimelineTimeline

• Starting date 01-09-2009

• Ending date 28-02-2013

• Duration 42 months

ExamplesExamples

Some R&D examples









Reduced Emissions

Fincantieri






Meyer Werft


STX France

WP3 I-1Multipurpose





Laser welding for

Product Performance

BVN



BVN

















Fincantieri





BVN




Management System

STX France

WP17 VI-2

IT-Solutions for




Meyerwerft



Technical

Development

Lessons

Learned

WP Coordination

Prototype

Energy Efficiency

Design Index (EEDI)

ELECTRIC LOAD ANALISYS

GRT 110200 tons Navigation at

LSA 4890 LSA service

Propulsion power 44 MW speed

Installed diesel power 75.6 MW

kW

"A" 0

"A" 87

"B" 248

"C" 24,637

"C" 921

"D" 5,788

"E" 8,243

"F" 950

"G" 1,434

"H" 1,274

TOTAL POWER REQUIRED 43,582

EXTRAPROPULSION LOAD including PEM excitation 18,945

MCR - kW EFF.

Diesel generator 1 12,600 0.97 1




Diesel generator 5 12,600 0.97

Diesel generator 6 12,600 0.97

NR OF GENERATORS RUNNING

TOTAL POWER AVAILABLE 48,888

ENGINE SERVICE FACTOR 89.1%

HULL AND DECK SERVICE (Thrusters)

PROPULSION SERVICE (Excitation)

HULL AND DECK SERVICE

PROPULSION SERVICE (PEMs)

SAFETY SERVICE

LIGHTING SERVICE

ENGINE SERVICE

AIR CONDITIONING SERVICE

GALLEY SERVICE

ACCOMMODATION SERVICE

P erc entag e of T otal F leet D is tanc e T ravelled with R es pec tive

S peed - S ummer

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Re

lati

ve

fre

qu

en

cy

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

S peed [kn]

Total Energy Management and alternative Energy SourcesTotal Energy Management and alternative Energy Sources

Optimization

Ship Propulsion

Power

Ship Electric Loads

Potable Water Consumption & Production

Waste Water Treatment

Ship Power Station

Fresh Water Generators

Waste Water Pumping System

Pax Vessel Operating Profiles

Design of a New Configuration of Machinery and Aux. Systems

Rules for Gas Fuelled Pax

Vessels

Dual Fuel Engines and

System Components

Design of a Dual Fuel Powered Vessel

New Environmental Balance for a Pax Vessel

WP12WP12

--------------------

FCFC

MWMW

BVNBVN

WFIWFI

CMTCMT

RINARINA

STRSTR

Impr. Energy Efficiency and Red. EmissionsImpr. Energy Efficiency and Red. Emissions









Reduced Emissions

Fincantieri






Meyer Werft


STX France

WP3 I-1Multipurpose





Laser welding for

Product Performance

BVN



BVN

















Fincantieri





BVN




Management System

STX France

WP17 VI-2

IT-Solutions for




Meyerwerft



Technical

Development

Prototype

Lessons

Learned

WP Coordination

WP 21 WP 21 –– Integrated IT Networks for Integrated IT Networks for

Essential ServicesEssential Services

ObjectivesObjectives

Creation of one network to implement

all devices with interfaces based on

standard TCP/IP and Ethernet protocols

Development of a demonstrator with

the above described running network

Implementing of all safety related

systems and all “funny features” in

the network incl. Class approval


Agreed network architecture (upper

picture)

Running Network-Demonstrator

(lower picture)

Installation of devices (done)

Start-Up-Phase, incl. definition of

interfaces (done)

Beginning of test-mode (still running)

Developing of network management

software (still running)

Availability calculation (done)

Overview of demonstrator network:

Figure 2: Overview of demonstrator network

Figure 5: the look of the demonstrator

WP21WP21

--------------------

FCFC

MWMW

STXFrSTXFr

BALBAL

BVBV

MITMIT--EUEU









Reduced Emissions

Fincantieri






Meyer Werft


STX France

WP3 I-1Multipurpose





Laser welding for

Product Performance

BVN



BVN

















Fincantieri





BVN




Management System

STX France

WP17 VI-2

IT-Solutions for




Meyerwerft



Technical

Development

Prototype

Lessons

Learned

WP Coordination

Fatigue Strength of Laser and Laser Hybrid Weld SeamsFatigue Strength of Laser and Laser Hybrid Weld Seams

F 8/5.LA.TF 8/5.LA.T

Hardness distribution of Fillet Weld at 8 mm plate and 5 mm web

Fatigue Strength of transverse loaded Fillet Laser Weld

Micro Section of Fillet Weld Seam

Laser Hybrid Butt Weld Specimens

Laser Fillet Weld Seam series F8/7.2.LA.T

WP05WP05

--------------------

FCFC

MWMW

STXFiSTXFi

BVNBVN

FSGFSG

GLGL

AALTOAALTO

TUHHTUHH

CMTCMT

Using the Potentials of Laser Welding Using the Potentials of Laser Welding

for Product Performance for Product Performance









Reduced Emissions

Fincantieri






Meyer Werft


STX France

WP3 I-1Multipurpose





Laser welding for

Product Performance

BVN



BVN

















Fincantieri





BVN




Management System

STX France

WP17 VI-2

IT-Solutions for




Meyerwerft



Technical

Development

Prototype

Lessons

Learned

WP Coordination

Frame of Knowledge Database for

ensuring access to the high number

of parameters / experiences

Development of prototype

Development of Laser safety concept in

principle (Risk analysis)

Start of welding tests

Flexible and modularFlexible and modular

Laser EquipmentLaser Equipment

WP10WP10

--------------------

FCFC

MWMW

STXFiSTXFi

DSNSDSNS

BALBAL

FORCEFORCE

GLGL

IMGIMG

TLSTLS

CMTCMT

SLV MVSLV MV

FROFRO

BESSTBESST

Thank you for your attention





Tony MorrallECMAR





Research Needs to meet Future ChallengesResearch Needs to meet Future Challenges

Contents:

◦ The MARPOS Approach

◦ Methodology for R&D Needs

◦ Drivers for Research

◦ Research Needs

◦ Future Visions and Targets

◦ Technology Gap Analysis

◦ Conclusions

MARPOS-CASMARE Conference, Brussels, 12 April 2011 2

MARPOS Approach MARPOS Approach

MARPOS has analysed the results of EU Maritime Transport researchprojects (FP5, FP6 and FP7), and established research anddevelopment needs to meet future challenges.

The 5 MARPOS Maritime Transport Research Themes:

Competitiveness

Environmental challenges

Energy challenges

Safety challenges

Human challenges


Methodology for Research & Development needsMethodology for Research & Development needs

MARPOS-CASMARE Conference, Brussels, 12 April 2011

The Research and Development needs were derived in a holistic andcomprehensive process, using the following methodology:

4

Research Drivers for Maritime Transport RTDResearch Drivers for Maritime Transport RTD


Sustainable and Competitive transport infrastructure Safety & SecurityCompetitionQuality of Life

Global Challenges

Societal Needs

Changing Economic Needs

Legislation

Increasing Global CompetitionIncreased exploitation of marine renewable energies

International & EU LegislationClassification Society Rules

Global Warming, Climate ChangeShortage of resources (energy)

5

Example of a EU Policy DriverExample of a EU Policy Driver

White Paper 2011: Preparing the European Transport Area for the Future

In maritime transport, passenger ship safety needs to be proactivelyaddressed.

SafeSeaNet will become the core of all relevant maritime informationtools supporting maritime transport safety and security, as well asthe protection of the environment from ship-source pollution.

The paper calls for a reduction of CO2 emissions from maritimebunker fuels in the EU by 40 per cent by 2050.

The EU will act to regulate emissions from international shipping bythe end of 2011, if the IMO can„t make substantial progress!


Research NeedsResearch Needs

The Research needs were initially derived for each research theme,based on the societal needs and global challenges, andcomplemented by the needs of existing research agendas:


Examples of Technical ChallengesExamples of Technical Challenges

Developing the most energy efficient ship, which can still beoperated safely

Protection against noise aboard ships: Methods are needed tominimise Noise Levels on Board Ships, and for measuring noiselevels

Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships: Development and adaption ofexhaust gas cleaning technologies, and ensuring availability ofdistillate fuels


Visions and Targets (examples)Visions and Targets (examples)

Energy and Environment:

Energy transport in extreme conditions

Increasing the overall energy efficiency of ships by at least 40%;

Reduction of CO2 emissions by 40 per cent by 2050.

Increasing the share of marine renewable energy by 50%;

Increasing the share of environmentally friendly (gas) and renewable energies in ships, by at least 20%.


Technology Gap AnalysisTechnology Gap Analysis

The “Technology Gap Analysis” identified technology gaps whichrequire research and development over the next 5 to 10 years.

The analysis was based on detailed assessment of the outcomes ofEU maritime transport projects, for the five research themes, andincluded:

i. A summary of the technologies developed by projects in specifictechnical areas, in order to assess their implementation, and todescribe the current state of technology;

ii. A description of the technologies which need to be furtherdeveloped, in order to achieve future targets - the developmentneeds;

iii. A description of the impact this technology development willhave on the European maritime industry – the potential impact.


Technology Gaps and Development NeedsTechnology Gaps and Development Needs

Green Shipping Operations (Examples):

Weather forecasting techniques and weather routing as part of

e-navigation,

Slow steaming solutions integrated with port planning,

Advanced simulation tools and prediction methods to ascertainboth, safe and green operations

Overall energy and emission management systems, supported byonboard measurement systems and data communication



Emissions and Alternative Fuels (Examples):

For gas fuelled ships problems of ship integration (onboard storage, overall efficiency, bunkering), and demonstration of the entire gas logistics chain,

The application of new fuels, such as propane, LPG, methanol, ethanol etc. needs to be considered in addition to LNG and other fossil fuels,

Retrofitting of conventional combustion engines with gas fuels, andtechnologies for distribution, storage and power production relatedto gas as a shipping fuel.



Ship Operation (Examples):

Decision support systems to cross the boundary between alarmprioritisation and alarm presentation during emergencies.

e-maritime framework for efficient operation of ships and fleets,including traffic management, route planning, and collisionavoidance,

Unified data structures and communication protocols for ship-shoreand ship-to-ship communications for e-maritime/navigation.

Integrated Navigation Systems (INS) in compliance with the 2007IMO revised performance standards



Human Factors: (Examples):

Human Factors Engineering (HFE) ship design standards for: rules,regulation and legislation, and for operational recommendations.

Methodologies to better predict and assess the impact of motionsickness and fatigue of passengers and crew, and correspondingdecision support systems

Better understanding of the mechanisms which govern comfortperceptions, as well as corresponding rules and standards



Production Techniques and Equipment (Examples):

Further development of low heat input, efficient and low costwelding techniques to bridge the gap between laser assisted andconventional welding,

Adhesive bonding and mechanical joining techniques in particularfor outfitting and new materials,

Assembly and outfitting processes in later assembly stages withcomplex and difficult to assess 3D structures,

Flexible, intelligent and easily adaptable equipment, withoutprogramming



Structural Materials (Examples):

Development and applications of new steels, such as ultra-highstrength steels, fatigue crack arresting steels, fire resistant steels,anti-corrosive steels as well as low temperature transition fillermaterials

Joining, assembly, outfitting and repair techniques specificallyfocused on new structural components using thin metallic or non-metallic materials, to make them more cost efficient.

Materials with improved properties and a reduced environmentalfootprint

Adaptable and intelligent materials and structures, which couldadapt to changing operational conditions, featuring self-healingeffects



Life Cycle Approaches and Services (Examples):

Product Life cycle Management techniques and consistent through-life product data management,

New business models and joint life cycle services for a betterintegration of actors, in particular for emerging maritime markets,

The development of key performance indicators for all life cycleaspects, including safety,

Life Cycle Performance Assessment tool, considering cost,environmental impact, safety and security, as well as socialperception,



Safety & Security (Examples):

Risk based design frameworks for all safety aspects, integrated withother design objectives and tools (greening, cost), towardscomprehensive life cycle assessment tools, implemented by firstprinciples, risk based standards, and regulations.

Advanced simulation tools and prediction methods to ascertainboth, safe and green operations.

Unmanned ship operation .

Integrated concepts and solutions for passenger and cargo securityonboard and in terminals.


ConclusionsConclusions

Research and Development needs were derived in a holistic andcomprehensive process.

The “technology gap analysis” identified over 100 research anddevelopment needs.

Research overlaps were found between “competitiveness”, “energy”,“environment” and “safety” themes.

According to the state-of-technology reviews, EU maritime transportresearch has led to significant technological improvements.

Continued:


ConclusionsConclusions

More focus is needed on the integration of technologies towardsoverall targets, e.g. the integration and assessment of all options toreduce ship emissions, or by a larger initiative: "Towards the ZeroEmission Ship"

The practical application and implementation of research resultsneeds to be improved.

Projects with a "demonstration" part can help show the potential ofintegrated concepts to end users, and provide valuable input for ruleand policy legislation development.

Based on the current update of R&D needs a well founded long-termroadmap is now urgently needed, for implementing R&D topicswithin FP8.



Thank you!Thank you!

www.ecmar.eu

21





Prof. G. A. Giannopoulos

Director, Hellenic Institute of Transport

[email protected]





The Benefits The Benefits

2

Access to additional research capital, advanced equipment, and technical skills;

Greater awareness of advances in technology and practices;

Ability to deploy state of the art and state of the practice technologies and methods of

operation more quickly;

Better relationships among professionals and better conduit for information exchange

and deployment of technologies and innovations with a relatively small investment of

resources;

Better understanding of the issues faced in other countries;

Avoidance of costly duplicative research;

Building of positive multilateral and unilateral relationships between and among

countries;

Benefiting individual researchers by providing international exposure (reputation

building) and additional funding resources for research, and finally

Increasing the chances for “transformative” research results.

The BarriersThe Barriers

3

Transactional Hurdles;

Differences in Intellectual Property Regimes;

High Information Costs;

Cultural Differences;

Conception of “Capacity to Go it alone”;

Institutional inertia and bureaucratic procedures;

Research labor differences (e.g. in employment permit regulations, salaries and

regimes);

Differences in institutional cultures.

The Elements for successful international The Elements for successful international

collaborationcollaboration

4

1. Strategic convergence of individual and collective interests among

partners;

2. Clearly articulated goals and objectives;

3. Clear ground rules for interaction among partners (formal agreement or

detailed MoU);

4. Inclusion of key stakeholders in the research partnership;

5. Existence of champions or advocates who will lead the way;

6. Clearly stated and inclusive participatory decision-making process;

7. Secured initial sources of funding and sustainability over time;

8. Solid organizational structure and procedures for management and

operation of the partnership;

9. Existence of clear criteria for evaluation of the results.

10. Existence of overall benefits (financial or strategic) for participating

organizations.

The most urgent Needs The most urgent Needs

5

1. Formulate and adopt enabling policies;

2. Establish specific (transnational) collaboration mechanisms;

3. Lay the groundwork of joint programming and funding;

4. Improve data management and sharing;

5. Facilitate Mobility of the human capital.

Possible ModelsPossible Models

6

1. Organized, centralized and institutionally-driven collaborative RTD (governmental entities

come together to identify the objectives of the partnership, set strategic goals, identify

research agenda and create the means for accomplishing the agenda, e.g. the EU sponsored

SICA projects of International Cooperation);

2. Flexible, spontaneous, and dynamic scientist-to-scientist RTD collaborative activities (an

international team of researchers takes the lead in developing and providing a specific

technology or jointly managing a research project under the expressed consent of national or

sub-national governments).

3. One-way (or two-way) information exchanges on technologies and best practices involving

one or more host countries and an information seeking technical delegation (e.g.

International Technology Scanning Program sponsored by the Federal Highway

Administration -FHWA).

4. International Information Exchange through Technology Assistance Programs

(cooperation among countries or agencies on technology exchange through various activities

and relationship models including the US “twinning”).

5. Distributed collaboration through joint programming (Combines the top down approach of

institutionally-driven research and the bottom-up approach where needs are usually identified

from bottom-up proposers coupled with an institutional-level identification of strategic

direction, shared or joint funding and shared management structures).

Follow Follow –– up actions possible at up actions possible at many levelsmany levels

Level 1

•Further dissemination – discussion at all levels.

•In-depth analysis and documentation of possible actions , through collaborative research and funded

studies. Funding through existing mechanisms.

•Bottom-up implementation of recommendations through “individual” initiatives

Level 2

•Discussion in official bilateral or multilateral meetings between National delegations with a view to

new research cooperation agreements.

•Gradual formulation of new statutory frameworks for international TR cooperation (joint working

groups by the responsible administrations, study of success stories, etc).

Level 3

•Implementing “drivers” through new enlarged International Agreements (bilateral or multilateral)

•Creating common mechanisms for joint TR programming and funding.

•Creating dedicated International bodies or Organizations (e.g. like the recent EU-US Energy

Council).

The report of the TRB The report of the TRB –– ECTRI ECTRI workingworking Group Group

Posted online at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/general/EU-

USResearch.pdf, and

http://www.ectri.org/

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/general/EU-USResearch.pdf





Project EUTRAIN : Project EUTRAIN : EuEuropean ropean TTransport ransport RResearch esearch AArea rea InInternational cooperation activitiesternational cooperation activities

9

Main objectives :

To contribute towards the establishment of a framework for international transport research

cooperation to be built upon the principles and orientations laid down in the EC Communication “A

strategic European Framework for International Science and Technology Cooperation” COM(2008)

588 final 24-9-08.

Investigate and compare current practices, fields of interest, priorities, as well as barriers, gaps,

and diversions for international transport research cooperation in major regions of importance to the

ERA-T.

Consider and discuss issues of research management including research governance.

Assess the benefits or added value to ERA-T, as well as the prospective synergies from such

closer international cooperation.

Investigate alternative models and tools for carrying out such cooperation in the most effective

and productive way and finally

Disseminate, in the course of doing the above activities, European know how and practices in

transport research.

[1]

EUTRAIN areas of workEUTRAIN areas of work

10

Topics and priorities for international transport research cooperation

Information and data sharing issues

Achieving “global” research infrastructures

Pre-standardization issues and means of harmonizing approaches and

practices

Intellectual Property Regimes

Differences in Institutional cultures and research governance regimes

Research training and human resource issues (Mobility of researchers and

global networking)

More open research programmes (ultimately joint programming).

EUTRAIN Associated EntitiesEUTRAIN Associated Entities

11

Country Organization

U.S.A.Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies

U.S.A. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

U.S.A. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

U.S.A. Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota

Russia Petersburg State Transport University, St. Petersburg

China Beijing Transportation Research Centre

Australia ARRB Group

Latin America (Chile) Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Korea KOTI – Korea Transport Institute

South Africa CSIR – Council for Scientific and Industrial Research

Japan PWRI - Public Works Research Institute

India CRRI - Central Road Research Institute

Network of Network of EutrainEutrain related entitiesrelated entities

12

Country Organization EUTRAIN related projectbeneficiary

Russia VNIIZhT - Russian Railway Research Institute EURNEX

RussiaJSC NIIAS, State Unitary Enterprise Russian Research and Design

Institute for railway information, automation andcommunications, Ministry of Railways, Moscow

EURNEX

Russia MIIT Moscow state Universty of Railway Engineering (A - EURNEX) EURNEX

RussiaPGUPS, Petersburg State Transport University, St. Petersburg (A -EURNEX)

EURNEX

RussiaOmGUPS, Omsk State Transport University, Omsk

(A - EURNEX)

EURNEX

RussiaUrGUPS, Ural State University of Railway Transport,

Jekaterinenburg(A - EURNEX)

EURNEX

RussiaSGUPS, Siberian Transport University

(A - EURNEX)

EURNEX

RussiaIrIIT, Irkutsk State Transport University

(A - EURNEX)

EURNEX

China HKUST HongKong EURNEX

ChinaIRRT, Tongji university - Institute of Railway & Urban Rail Trainsit,Shanghai

EURNEX

China CARS, China Academy of Railway Sciences, Beijing EURNEX

India ANC, Anchorage, Bangalore EURNEX

India Institute of Urban Transport (India) EURNEX

India Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. EURNEX

India AsSYSTEM INDIA EURNEX

India McML Systems Pvt Ltd EURNEX

India McML Group EURNEX

USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology EURNEX

USA California State University, Long Beach EURNEX

USA ENO Transportation Foundation EURNEX

USA Texas Transportation Institute EURNEX

Japan Institute for Transport Policy Studies EURNEX

USA PATH – Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways, University ofCalifornia

ERTICO

Japan Tokyo University ERTICO

Japan Keio University ERTICO

Japan Meijo University ERTICO

Network of Network of EutrainEutrain related entitiesrelated entities

13

Australia Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety - Queensland ECTRI – HIT

Australia Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC) ECTRI – HIT

AustraliaInstitute of Transport and Logistics Studies (ITLS) - University ofSydney ECTRI – HIT

Australia Austroads ECTRI – HIT

Australia Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management ECTRI – HIT

Canada Victoria Transport Policy Institute ECTRI – HIT

Canada Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers (CITE) ECTRI – HIT

Canada L’Institut du transport avancé du Québec (ITAQ) ECTRI – HIT

China China Sustainable Transportation Center ECTRI – HIT

China China Center for Energy and Transportation ECTRI – HIT

ChinaUrban Transport Institute, China Academy of Urban Planningand Design ECTRI – HIT

India Central Institute of Road Transport (CIRT ) ECTRI – HIT

India Institute of Rail Transport [IRT] ECTRI – HIT

International International Association of Public Transport (UITP) ECTRI – HIT

Japan Institution for Transport Policy Studies ECTRI – HIT

Japan MLIT Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism ECTRI – HIT

Korea Korea Transportation Institute ECTRI – HIT

Mexico Instituto Mexicano del Transporte ECTRI – HIT

United Kingdom Rail Research UK ECTRI – HIT

United Kingdom UK Transport Research Center (UKTRC) ECTRI – HIT

USA Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) ECTRI – HIT

USA University of California, Berkeley ECTRI – HIT

USA Transportation Research center - University of Florida ECTRI – HIT

USA Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) ECTRI – HIT

THANK YOUTHANK YOU

14

Prof.dr.ir. Niko WijnolstDutch Maritime Network

European Network of Maritime Clusters

Brussels, 12 April 2011

Maritime by Holland

Marpos 12.4.2011 Dutch Innovation Case 2

Dutch maritime cluster

Monitor 2010• Years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009

• Economy

• Internationalisation

• Labour market

• Innovation

• Clusters can be characterized as networks of production of strongly interdependent firms linked to each other in a value adding chain.

• Clusters of industries create sustainable competitive advantage.

• Identify maritime sectors and understand their interaction.

• Reinforce cluster at various policy levels.

• Look for the enablers that reinforce clusters.

Marpos 12.4.2011 3Dutch Innovation Case

Porter’s theory of competitive advantage of nations and clusters

Intermediate

goods and services

Personell costs

Depreciation

Profit/loss

Import

Direct outp

ut

Consumption

effect

Investment

effect

DirectAdded

value

Intermediate

goodsand services

Value added(indirect)

Direct economic impact Indirect economic impact

…

Direct backflow to the government Indirect backflow to the government

Policy Research Corporation N.V. & ISL

Value added


Production, Added value, Employment 2009 (in € million)

Innovation expenditure increases rapidly

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

Ship

pin

g

Ship

bu

ildin

g

Off

sho

re

Inla

nd

Sh

ipp

ing

Dre

dgi

ng

Po

rts

Nav

y

Fish

ing

Mar

itim

eSe

rvic

es

Wat

ersp

ort

sIn

du

stry

Mar

itim

eEq

uip

men

t Su

pp

ly

(€ million)

• R&D expenditure is double Dutch average: 3.3% versus 1.7%

• 2002 -2009 growth R,D&I expenditure +35%, R&D employees +20%



Research Developmentdiffusion

Innovation


Example of an innovative sub-clusterNavy and naval cluster





Lessons learned

• Maritime networks (clusters) are an enabler of RD&I• Leader firms are essential to provide organisational

and financial strength• National innovation programmes have played an important role

in the cultural change of the SME’s towards RD&I• European Framework Programme’s are often too complicated

and expensive for SMEs• Monitoring Key Performance Indicators of clusters essential

for policy support

JPI "Healthy and Productive Seas and Oceans”

A New Frontier

JPI Oceans State of PlayMARPOS-CASMARE April 12th 2011Kathrine Angell-Hansen

Content of this Presentation

1. Policy context

2. Process and Why a JPI

3. What

4. Stakeholder involvement

5. Next steps


1. Policy context


3. What


5. Next steps

JPI Oceans Policy Context

An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union (2007)

The Marine Strategy framework Directive, GES

Maximising the value of the maritim economy

Com 534(2008) EU Marine and Maritime Research Strategy

EU 20-20 Objectives in particular the Flagship Initiatives:

Innovation Union

Resource efficient Europe

,..

EU 20-20-20 Energy

Landuse

Tourism

Oil &Gas

Coastal

Defence

Ports &

Navigation

Military

Activities

Culture

Conservation

Dredging &

Disposal

Submarine

Cables

Fishing Renewable

Energy

Marine

Recreation

Mineral

Extraction

Mariculture

COMPETING CLAIMS

Public Funding for Research (Source : ERA Key Figures 2007, EC)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000

Ge

rma

ny

Fra

nce

UK

Ita

ly

Sp

ain

EU

Co

mm

un

ity

Ne

the

rla

nd

s

Sw

ed

en

Be

lgiu

m

Fin

lan

d

Au

str

ia

De

nm

ark

Po

rtu

ga

l

Ire

lan

d

Po

lan

d

Gre

ece

Cze

ch

re

p.

Hu

ng

ary

RO

ma

nia

Slo

ve

nia

Slo

va

kia

Bu

lga

ria

Lu

xe

mb

ou

rg

Lith

ua

nia

Esto

nia

Cyp

rus

La

tvia

Ma

lta

Ch

ina

Ja

pa

n

Un

ite

d S

tate

s

Mio

Eu

ro

A A compartmentalisedcompartmentalised ERA ERA –– 85% in85% in--kindkind

EU27 + EC


1. Policy context


3. What


5. Next steps

Competitiveness Council May 2010:

Based on template confirmed Seas and Oceans as a Grand Challenge

Commission recommendation

State representative Task force/ IMB- Core Group: NO, ES, BE

Secretariat establishment

Prepare for Commission’s recommendation in 2011 - maturity

Commitments from MS / sufficient and cover all seabasins

Vision including

Mapping

ToR

Prepare for Management board 2011

Draft vision document

FP8 links

Consult - Investigate synergy with Other ERA actions: ERANETS, TECH. PlATFORMS, MARCOM, BONUS, EMARES

WHY a JPI• Respond to societal and policy needs

(EU 2020/Innovation Union…, Com

(534)2008, in annexes 1 and 5)

• Grand Challenges & innovation &

governance (MSFD obligations)

JPI is a long process..a leg to

build the ERA towards

providing knowledge-based

solutions to Grand challenges

SEASERA

BONUS? ?

??


1. Policy context

2. Process and Why the JPI

3. What


5. Next steps

Member state driven

Observers

Bonus

Commitment from MS and AC Covering all European Seabasins

Secretariat

In Brussels

Members

The added value

•MS-Driven - High-level commitment

•Long term perspective & capacity building

• Different typologies of actions, EOOS,

KIC, In-kind, funds, networks..- FP8

• Variable geometry (global approach vs local

solutions)

• Stakeholders participation (multi-sectorial)

• Research to policy mechanism

• Common strategic agenda

• Visibility

JPI Oceans - Goals presently in the vision

Enable the advent of a knowledge based maritime economy, maximising its value in a sustainable way

Ensure Good Environmental Status of the seas and optimise planning of activities in the marine space

Optimise mitigation of climate change impacts on coastal areas

Vision and early gap analysis - SRIA

Marine

EnvironmentClimate

Change

Maritime

Economy

and

Human activities

Examples:

• Climate change impact

on spatial Planning

• Impact of climate change

on maritime transport

(sea level rise, Artic ice

sheet melting, extreme

events, inland rivers )

Examples:

• Climate change impact on

oceans

Examples:

• Design of vessels & offshore

structures to meet the chal-

lenges and opportunities

of extreme conditions

• Converging maritime

technologies, Blue

Biotech, Renewable, deep sea

EIT/KIC

Marine System

Research, & Data

Infrastructure

EOOS

Human capacities,

Crosscutting

technologies

Marine environment is underhuge pressure from humanactivities and climate changeWe need a more comprehen-sive knowledgebase

Knowledge on interactionsOceans and climate tounderstand, predict and mitigate harmful impacts like global warming

Unlock the potential of our maritimeconomy and new promissing fieldsrenewables, bioeconomy while preserving the environment and the oceans as a source of wealth

Area Political driverEconomic and Societal

driverJPI

Impact

TG1 TG2 TG3

RE

WN

EW

AB

LE

EN

ER

GY

Energy Policy forEurope COM(2007) 120 20 by 2020 Directive 2009/28/

By 2020, 20% renewable energy from sea, by 2050 Europe could get up to 50%

MediumTG1 TG3

MA

RITIM

E S

EC

TO

RS

Maritime transport policy until 2018, COM (2009) 8

Initiative, Innovation Union, COM (2010) 546

By 2018, the world fleet could count some 100,000 vessels ,…Europe’s maritime leadership should be maintained by quality shipping

MediumTG1 TG3

Drivers and Target Groups

Mapping

Funds per person

(€)

Institutional Funds on marine research

(M€)


1. Policy context


3. What


5. Next steps

Policy makers&

Society

Industry&

Services

Researchers&

Technologists

HOW: Economy-Science-Governance interface

The JPI will foster a science-policy-industry P-P-P-dialog,

bringing stakeholders into the governance structure.

Secretariat

ToR - Governance structure

Management Board

(high level MS/AC representatives)

Foresight

& think

tank

Strategic

Advisory

Board

JPI Goals

Strategic

Implementation

Agenda

Variable Geometry

Action Plan

Strategic

Research & Innovation

Agenda - Consultation

Stakeholders

• Science

• Industry

• Policy

• Societal org

• Geogr. levels

Activity 1 Committee

variable geometryActivity 2 Committee

variable geometryActivity 3 Committee

variable geometry

Executive committee

(MS/AC representatives)

Stakeholder Interaction

Spanish Presidency Event Gijon May 20th 2010:JPI Oceans 1st public event at EU Maritime Day:

1250+ participants (maritime sectors, researchers)

In presence of Commissioners:

- Potočnik and Damanaki

Belgian Presidency EurOCEAN2010 October :

- + 300 “Ostende Declaration” calls for:1. Joint programming as an integrating framework2. European Oceans and Observation system3. Research to Knowledge mechanism for Policy

- Endorsed by the conference and welcomed by:- Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn- The Belgium EU Presidency, Federal Minister for Science

Policy, Sabine Laurelle

http://www.esf.org/?id=7602


1. Policy context


3. What


5. Next steps

ToR - governanceEstablishment of SAB

Vision doc

Mapping Commission reccomen-

dation

First SAB meeting

First MB meeting

Nominees MB

Gap analysis

JPI impact

SAB criteria

Interim MB meeting

March I April I May I Juin I July I Aug I Sept I Okt I Nov I Dec I Jan

Timetable 2011

Stakeholder Dialog• ERANets• Tech. Platforms• Art. 185• JTI• ,…

Stakeholder Dialog• ERANets• Tech. Platforms• Art. 185• JTI• ,…

Thank you for your Attention!Kathrine [email protected]

“A New Frontier”

IMO’s work on air pollution and IMO’s work on air pollution and

control of GHG emissions from shipscontrol of GHG emissions from shipsFuture Future challngeschallnges

Eivind S. VagslidHead, Air Pollution and Climate Change Section

Marine Environment Division - IMO

http://search.kvasir.no/query?what=show_image&imgurl=http://merrac.nowpap.org/img/k1/03_img.gif&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmerrac.nowpap.org%2Fhtml%2Fk_3_center.html&img=http://merrac.nowpap.org/img/k1/03_img.gif&w=88&h=87

2

IMO – specialised UN agency

• London headquarters

• Secretary General:

Admiral Efthimios Mitropoulos, Greece

• Annual budget £24+ M

• Secretariat – 300 staff

• 50 Nationalities

Safe, secure and efficient shipping Safe, secure and efficient shipping

on clean oceans!on clean oceans!


3

IMO Convention

• Adopted Geneva 1948

• Entered into force 1958

• First IMO meeting 1959

• Shipping is international and underpins world trade

• Assets move between jurisdictions

• Universally applicable standards

The need for IMO


4

Application to real shipsApplication to real ships

• SOLAS 98.79% world tonnage

• Load lines 98.76%

• MARPOL 97.55%

• COLREGS 97.92%

• STCW 98.78%

5

Application to real shipsApplication to real ships

• More than 50 IMO Conventions

• Hundreds of codes, guidelines and recommendations

• Almost every aspect of shipping covered:Design

Construction

Equipment

Maintenance

Crew

Ship emissions one of the last major ship Ship emissions one of the last major ship

pollutants to be regulatedpollutants to be regulatedWork started at IMO in the late 1980’s

Annex VI adopted in 1997, in force in May 2005,

revised 2005 – 2008

Revised Annex VI in force 1 July 2010

Prohibits ODS in line with the

Montreal Protocol

Regulates exhaust gas: NOx &

SOx (PM), and cargo vapours

from tankers (VOC)

Energy Efficiency or CO2

emissions not covered

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/pubs/Core_Slides/images/slide019.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/pubs/Core_Slides/sources.htm&h=436&w=669&sz=67&tbnid=R9fC_SHABjUJ:&tbnh=88&tbnw=136&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dship%2Bair%2Bpollution%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG


Source: Fearnley's Review

World seaborne trade 1968World seaborne trade 1968--2008 2008

Baseline efficiency improvement in historic prespective

0

40

80

1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050

Year of construction

g C

O2

/ to

n-n

m (

ind

ica

tive

va

lue

) '

Gen cargo

Container

Bulk

Tanker

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Fu

el C

on

su

mptio

n (

Mill

ion

to

ns)

This study

IMO Expert Group (Freight-Trend), 2007

Endresen et al., JGR, 2007

Endresen et al (Freight-Trend)., JGR, 2007

EIA Total marine fuel sales

Point Estimates from the Studies

This study (Freight trend)

Efficiency improvements

Fuel Consumption World Fleet

Second IMO GHG Study 2009Second IMO GHG Study 2009

Scenarios for CO2 emissions from International Shipping from

2007 to 2050 in the absence of climate policies

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

CO

2 e

mis

sio

ns fro

m s

hip

s (

millio

n to

ns C

O2

/ y

r) '

A1FI

A1B

A1T

A2

B1

B2

Max

Min

B2

B1

A2

A1T

A1B

A1F

I

Other

Bulk

General Cargo

Container

RoRo /Vehicle

Ropax Cruise

Tank

0 50 100 150 200 250

CO 2 emissions (million tons / yr)

Deep sea ships

Regional ships

Other

Bulk

General Cargo

Container

RoRo /Vehicle

Ropax Cruise

Tank

Other

BulkBulk

General CargoGeneral Cargo

ContainerContainer

RoRo /VehicleRoRo /Vehicle

Ropax CruiseRopax Cruise

TankTank

0 50 100 150 200 250


Deep sea ships

Regional ships

0 50 100 150 200 250


Ocean going

Coastwise

2007 shipping CO2 emissions 870 million tons

Future CO2 emissions: Significant increase predicted – 200 300%

by 2050 in the absence of regulations

Demand is the primary driver

Technical and operational efficiency

measures can provide significant

improvements but will not be able to

provide real reductions if demand continues

Manufacturing

Industries and

Construction

18,2 %

Other Energy

Industries

4,6 %

Unallocated

Autoproducers

3,7 %

Main Activity

Electricity and

Heat Production

35,0 %Transport

21,7 %

Other Sectors

11,6 %

International

Shipping

2,7 %

International

Aviation

1,9 %

Domestic

shipping &

fishing

0,6 %

9

Energy Efficiency Design Index - EEDI

Requires a minimum efficiency level (grams CO2/tonne-mile)

Will stimulate continued technology development

Complex formula to accommodate most ship types and sizes

Enables comparison of ships able to move the same cargo

10% reduction for ships built between 2015 – 2020



wrefi

neff

i

MEFMEieffieffAEFAE

nPTI

i

neff

i

iAEeffieffiPTI

M

j

jAEFAEAEiMEiFME

nME

i

iME

M

j

j

fVCapacityf

SFCCPfSFCCPfPfSFCCPSFCCPf1

)()(

1 1

)()()(

1

)()(

1

)(

1


190 190 –– 240 million 240 million tonnestonnes CO2 reduced annually CO2 reduced annually

compared with BAU by 2030compared with BAU by 2030

-

50

100

150

200

250

300

2013 2015 2020 2025 2030

An

nu

al t

on

nes

CO

2 r

edu

ced

Estimated CO2 emission reduction [mill tonnes].

A1B B2


11

Ship Energy Efficiency Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan Management Plan -- SEEMPSEEMP

Onboard management tool to include:

Improved voyage planning (Weather routeing/Just in time)

Speed and power optimization

Optimized ship handling (ballast/trim/use of rudder and autopilot)

Improved fleet management

Improved cargo handling

Energy management


Energy Efficiency Operational Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator Indicator -- EEOIEEOI

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

Cargo OnboardCargo Onboard x x (Distance traveled)(Distance traveled)

Fuel Consumption in OperationFuel Consumption in Operation=

Actual FuelActual FuelConsumptionConsumption

IndexIndex


MEPC 61 MEPC 61 –– 27 September to 1 October27 September to 1 October

Further progress made on all three elements of IMO’s GHG work

Technical and operational measuresIntersessional meeting on energy efficiency measures (June/July 2010)

Regulatory text on EEDI and SEEMP finalized

Adoption by MEPC 62 (July 2010)?

In force 1 January 2013?

Market-based measuresReport by MBM Expert Group

Intersessional meeting in March/April 2011


Future Annex VI developments• New part to MARPOL Annex VI to incorporate energy

efficiency measures

– Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) new ships

– Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) all

ships

• Monitoring of sulphur in fuel oil extended to include

distillates i.e., fuels used in ECAs

• CG established by MEPC 61 to consider how to establish a

methodology to determine the availability of fuel oil to

comply with the 0.5% standard by 2020

• Alternative fuels to achieve compliance, e.g. LNG

Shipping under UNFCCC

Consultations in the lead up to and at Copenhagen

were constructive but did not lead to an agreed text.

In 2010 the negotiations have not moved much as

there are three challenging obstacles:

• Should a reduction target be set for international shipping, and if so, what should the target be and should it be set by UNFCCC or IMO?

• Should the new UNFCCC treaty state how revenues from a market-based instrument under IMO should be distributed and used (climate change purposes in developing countries)?

• How should the balance between the basics principles under the two conventions be expressed in the new treaty text (UNFCCC and its fundamental CBDR principle, and on the other hand, the IMO constitutive Convention with its non discriminatory approach)?

No text on international transport in the Cancun Agreement

Other challenges for IMO

• Ballast Water Management

• Invasive species other than in ballast water

• Recycling

• Noise

• Collisions with marine mammals

• Shipping in polar regions

• Continued work on traditional pollutants such

as oil (biodegradable lubricants) and HNS

17

Does it work? Does it work? –– annual casualtiesannual casualties

• 1966 to -85: more than 300 ships lost annually.

• (1978 and -79: 938 losses at 6.7 ships per ’000)

• 1959 (IMO starts working): vessels lost at 5 per ’000

1980: losses dip - downward curve ever since.

1990: losses under 200, at 2.4 per ’000 ships

2000: 167 losses at 1.9 per ’000 ships

18

Does it Does it

work?work?Reduction in serious oilReduction in serious oil

spills spills -- ITOPFITOPF

Thank you for your attention!

For more information please see: www.imo.org


http://www.imo.org/

Trends and Scenario

Planning

Del Redvers,

Head of Sustainability

BMT Group

12th April 2011

Sustainability Trends

• Competition for natural resources

• Energy security

• Global and regional security and political stability

• Poverty

• Climate change

“Before you have finished eating

breakfast this morning you have

depended on more than half the world”

Martin Luther King

REGIONAL GLOBAL

EC

ON

OM

YE

CO

LO

GY

Trend towards regional co-operation

contributes to a decreasing demand

for extensive global trade. Clean-tech

industries are developing rapidly.

Technological development in other

areas is less pronounced. Population

continues to grow but more slowly.

Technological and policy

developments are easing the

pressure on natural resources. High

levels of technology transfer from

developed to developing nations.

Globalisation is driving economic

growth but with an emphasis on

information and service industries.

Greater regional interactions and

increased competition between

regions for global hegemony. Natural

resources continue to be intensively

exploited and development of

alternative energy sources is limited.

International agencies become

progressively weaker.

Ongoing industrialisation in

developing countries continues to

drive global trade. Population growth

continues apace. Extensive

exploitation of natural resources and

continued dependence on non-

renewable energy sources.

A1

B2B1

A2

2030

Trade Routes

• Economic development

• Population distribution

• Extreme weather

• Sea level

• Cargo types

• Conflict & security

• Natural resource location

Trade Routes

• Transport infrastructure

• Modality

• Vessel design

• Procurement timescales

• Specialist vessels

• Short sea shipping

Efficiencies

• Money and emissions

• Fuel price & availability

• Carbon price

• Marginal abatement cost curves

• Operational decisions

• Retrofitting & modification

• Ship design

• Innovation

• Ship building

New Build

Existing Fleet

Consumer Demand

Automation

• Crewing

• Remote monitoring

• Safety

• Freight handling

• Security

Summary

Drivers Changes Impacts

• Climate events

• Demographic

change

• Natural

resource

availability

• Economic

development

• Trade routes

• Efficiencies

• Bunker prices

& availability

• Short sea

shipping &

modal impacts

• Legislation

• Consumer

behaviour

• Ship design

• Shipyards

• Ship operations

• Infrastructure

investment

• Innovation

Thank you

MARitime POlicy Support - TRIMIS

Documents