Ship efficiency over time and slow steaming Tripartite 2008 Beijing 8-9 November
Feb 01, 2016
Ship efficiency over time and slow steaming
Tripartite 2008
Beijing
8-9 November
Ship efficiency
Question:
Have ship become more efficient over time?
SFOC for Diesel Engines
Fuel consumption trends
• Statement:
• When freight rates are low:
• Yards have thin order books
• Competition between yards tough
• Innovative designs win the day
• When freight rates are high:
• Owners queue up to order ships
• Yards reluctant to change Standard Designs
• No incentive for innovation
Fuel consumption trends
• Early 1980’s to early 1990’s:• A few ups and downs but otherwise a relatively stable
period.
• Early 1990’s to 2002 (incl. Asian Crises 1997):• Poor freight rates. • Tough times for the yards• Many EU yards close
• 2002-2008:• High freight rates• Ordering boom• New yards emerge• Emphasis on cargo intake
Fuel consumption trends
• In 2008 the Shipping Industry initiated a study on fuel trends.
• Lloyd’s Register Marine Consultancy Services carried out the study.
• Following ships were used:
Fuel consumption trends
• Following formulas were used to calculate the fuel consumption and related Energy Efficiency Index:
Aframax trend
VLCC trend
Handy Size Bulker trend
Panamax Bulker trend
Cape Size Bulker trend
1800 TEU Containership trend
4500 TEU Containership trend
Historical trend - Containerships
•Example – Economy of Scale:
•Sealand SL-7 vs. Maersk E-type
•Sealand McClean: Built 1973 1968 TEU 88 MW 31 knots450 t HFO/24h (Steam turbine)
•Emma Maersk: Built 2006 15,000 TEU 80 MW (88 MW incl. shaft motor) 25 knots 350t HFO/24h (Diesel engine)
Emma vs. McClean
Emma vs. McClean
• Energy Efficiency Index:
• SL-7: 950 g CO2/TEU*NM
• Maersk E-type: 115 g CO2/TEU*NM
• New 2000 TEU: 270 g CO2/TEU*NM
Slow Steaming
Container ships
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Speed (knots)
To
tal o
il c
on
s. (
t/2
4 h
)
2000 TEU
4000 TEU
6000 TEU
8000 TEU
10000 TEU
Slow Steaming
8000 TEU Containership:
Reduce speed from 25kn -> 20kn = 20% =>
Fuel saving from 260 t/d –> 128 t/d = 51%
Slow Steaming
Scenario:
Move 10 mill TEU 5000 NM within one year (250 sailing days):
Transport work: 50 billion TEU*Miles
An infinite number of 8000 TEU ships available!
Slow Steaming
SPEED Sailing days Req. Nos. F.O.consumption Total CO2 index
of ships per 24 hours consumption gCO2/TEU*NM
per ship
6 250 174 13 564236 35,0
8 250 130 18 585938 36,3
10 250 104 27 703125 43,6
12 250 87 39 846354 52,5
14 250 74 56 1041667 64,6
16 250 65 77 1253255 77,7
18 250 58 95 1374421 85,2
20 250 52 119 1549479 96,1
22 250 47 159 1882102 116,7
24 250 43 212 2300347 142,6
26 250 40 285 2854567 177,0
Slow Steaming
CO2 Index
Slow Steaming
Slow Steaming
Paper for WMTC Mumbai January 2009:
Optimized speed from a economical viewpoint, considering:
- Capital Cost- Operating Cost- Voyage Cost
On a route between Ningbo (China) and Bremerhaven (Germany) with a 6600 TEU containership the study gives an optimized speed of 17 kn (compared to 24 kn).
Ship efficiency
Questions?