Stewart - Reducing Emissions in the Marine Transportation Sector

1,345 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,345
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Stewart - Reducing Emissions in the Marine Transportation Sector

  1. 1. Reducing  Emissions  in  the  Marine  TransportaAon  Sector   Richard  D.  Stewart,  Ph.D.,  CTL   May  02,  2012       www.glmri.org
  2. 2. Oil:  The  marine   fuel  of  the  future!    From  1880s  unAl  1950s  coal  was  the  principal  fuel  for  Great  Lakes  vessels.    Special  built  coal  docks  were  common  around  the  Great  Lakes.    A  fuel  oil  supply  chain  had  to  be  developed  to  provide  oil  to  the  vessels.  
  3. 3. Vessel  conversion  to  use  oil  was  expensive  and  Ame  consuming  At  the  start  of  1954  the  William  G.  Mather  entered  the  shipyards  of  Manitowoc  Shipbuilding.    The  vessel s  coal-­‐fired  boilers  and  quadruple  expansion  steam  engine  were  removed  and  replaced  by  a  steam  turbine  engine.    Her  steam  auxiliaries  were  replaced  with  electric  ones  along  with  the  enAre  electrical  system  being  updated.    Installing  new  fuel  oil  storage  tanks  in  the  SS  William  G.  Mather     At  the  same  Ame  building  new  coal  fired  vessels!    SS  Badger  and  SS  Spartan  
  4. 4. Common  Methods  to  Reduce   Emissions  in  TransportaAon  Systems  •  Modal  shiX  to  more  energy  efficient  mode   –  Supply  chain  issues  ~  speed,  unit  size     –  Infrastructure  issues  •  Larger  loads  to  reduce  energy  per  ton-­‐mile   –  Supply  chain  issues  ~  speed,  unit  size  –  not  air   –  Infrastructure  issues    •  Reduce  speed  =  reduced  energy  consumpAon   –  Supply  chain  issues  ~  speed  •  Clean  what  comes  out  of  the  stack   –  CatalyAc  converters,  scrubbers    ~  waste,  costs,  efficiency  •  Change  the  fuel  type  that  goes  into  the  engine   –  Availability,  BTU  content,  cost  
  5. 5. Emissions  reducAons:  A  driver  of  change  
  6. 6. Vessels  need  to  reduce  air  emissions  
  7. 7. Carrier  opAons  to  meet  emissions  regulaAons  
  8. 8. EPA  Clean  Diesel  Grant  •  EPA  Clean  Diesel  Grant  $750,000  •  First  repowering  of  a  Great   Lakes  vessel  –  Two  9.7  thousand   Significantly  reduced  NOX,  SOX,  CO,   horse  power  main  engines   parAculate  emissions!  •  $14.5  Million  match  from  Key   Lakes  1,  Inc.  •  $15  Million  plus  vessel   repowering  in  Bay  Ship  Sturgeon   Bay,  WI.  •  Completed  ahead  of  schedule            M/V  Edwin  H.  Go:  
  9. 9. Lower  BTU  =  more  to  go  same  distance   Just  one  factor  to  consider!  
  10. 10. What  is  Natural  Gas?  Most  gases  except  Methane  stripped  out  as  they  have  value:  
  11. 11.  Boiling  Point  of  Gases  not  the  same  This  makes  it  easy  to  strip  out  non-­‐methane  gases  with  liquefacAon  
  12. 12. Is  all  Natural  Gas  the  same?  
  13. 13. So  what  does  the  Methane  Number  mean?   Supplier  delivers  what  you  need  for  your  engines:  70  MN   considered  minimum  for  most  internal  combusAon  engines  
  14. 14. Do  I  use  CNG  or  LNG????  •  Compressed  natural  gas  –  Unlikely  for  vessels   –  Must  be  compressed  –  cost  –  ini9al  and  long  term   –  High  pressure  containment  –  4500  PSI   –  Lower  BTU  content  for  same  volume   –  High  pressure,  asphyxiant  and  flammability  safety  issues  •  Liquefied  natural  gas   –   Must  be  liquefied  –cost-­‐  ini9al  and  long  term   –  Cryogenic    Stored  at  Minus  160  degrees  cen9grade   –  Stored  at  low  pressure  3.6  –  6  PSI   –  Higher  BTU  content  for  same  volume   –  Cryogenic,  asphyxiant,  however  non  toxic  not  flammable   as  a  liquid   – The  selecAon  of  CNG  or  LNG  is  very  case   specific!  
  15. 15. LNG  vs.  Diesel  Discount  Prices  
  16. 16. LNG  Cost  Breakdown  (February  2012)   Commodity   TransportaAon   LiquefacAon   These  percentages  can  vary  depending  on  locaAon  and  volume  .    
  17. 17. What  about  Engines?  Two  Types  •  Dual Fuel •  Fuel Flexibility Diesel, Gas, HFO or mix •  Requires more sophisticated controls •  Fuel savings limited by need for diesel •  Durability similar to diesel•  Spark Ignited •  Expected to meet Tier 4 standards without after treatment •  Simple and proven engine controls •  Durability better than diesel •  Slower response than diesel •  Needs a reliable gas supply
  18. 18. Europe  has  been  using  LNG  fueled  ships  for  a  decade!    $15  Million  US  for  LNG  Supply  Chain  Study  
  19. 19. Some  of  the  New  LNG  vessels    Fueling  an  LNG  vessel:  hTp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ3tqifW9nA&feature=related        
  20. 20. US  Flag  LNG  Powered   Offshore  Supply  Vessels  Building  four  U.S.  flag  vessels:      2-­‐  2,700KW  Internal  CombusAon  Engines:  Total  LNG  fueled  engines  7,500  KW    LOA  302 ,    DraX  20  4.5  Beam  64  
  21. 21. U.S.  Natural  Gas  Fuel  Projects  and  Studies  •  Motor  Carriers  starAng  to  use  LNG  and  CNG  as  a   primary  fuel  on  appropriate  routes.  •  Clean  Energy  invesAng  $150  million  for  truck   fuel  staAons.  •  Washington  State  Ferries  study  use  of  LNG  as  a   primary  fuel.  •  In  late  2011  a  $3.4  Million  grant  Federal   Highway  AdministraAon  grant  to  convert  Staten   Island  Ferry  
  22. 22. U.S.  Natural  Gas  Fuel  Projects  and  Studies  •  Two  LNG-­‐Powered  Ferries  for  Tadoussac,   Quebec,  to  be  built  in  Quebec.  Delivery  is   planned  for  the  fall  of  2013  and  spring  of  2014.    •  Lake  Michigan  Car  Ferry  studied  the  use  of   compressed  natural  gas  (CNG)  as  a  fuel  for  the   SS  Badger.    •  Great  Lake  MariAme  Research  InsAtute  (GLMRI)   in  collaboraAon  with  MARAD  and  the  mariAme   industry  is  engaged  in  feasibility  studies  on   using  natural  gas  as  a  primary  fuel.  SS  Badger  
  23. 23. BNSF  Main  Line  LNG  Powered  Engines  1991-­‐1996    Conversions  worked  1600  mile  coal  route  -­‐  800  mile  range      1.  Economical   1. BN  determined  that  natural  gas  to  provide  a  10%  to  20%  cost  savings  over  DO     2. Es9mated  it  could  save  $200  million  a  year  in  fuel  if  it  converted  its  en9re   locomo9ve  fleet  of  engines   3. Using  natural  gas  reduces  engine  maintenance  costs   4. It  is  es9mated  that  engine  life  cycle  can  be  improved  by  as  much  as  40  percent   5.  engines  can  go  2  to  3  9mes  as  long  between  lubrica9ons,  oil,  and  filter  changes.  2.  Not  adopted  because  LNG  supply  chain  not  mature  3.  Experiments  done  prior  to  current  discovery  of  natural  gas  reserves    
  24. 24. Short  Haul  Locomo9ve   Pacific  Harbor  Line  Inc.  Long  Beach/LA   Why  it  worked  well…   Why  it  didn t  work  so  well…  •  LNG  locomo9ve  cost   •  Logis9cs  &  mechanical  issues   approximately  23%  less  to  fuel  on   associated  with  fueling   an  energy-­‐equivalent  basis   nega9vely  impacted  the  •  EmiTed  an  es9mated  81%  less   locomo9ve s  service  capability   oxides  of  nitrogen  (NOx)  &  57%   –  Needed  to  be  refueled  every  3  days   less  par9culate  maTer  (PM)   compared  to  once  a  week   compared  to  new  Tier  2   –  Lacked  a  reliable  fuel  gauge   locomo9ve   –  Difficult  requirements  imposed  by   the  local  fire  department     •  Extra  labor  during  fueling   •  Fee  paid  to  LAPD  for  fire  inspector   –  Out  of  service  approximately   15-­‐20%  more  oien  than  the  diesel   fleet  due  to  refueling   –  Low  main  air  pressure,  failed  spark   plug  transformer   Experiments on 1200 HP Switch Engine 2008-2009
  25. 25. Mining  Industry  Conversion  of  Trucks          Converts  CAT  777C  to  60%  Liquefied  Natural  Gas  –  2010  Bi-­‐Fuel  conversion  system  Operates  in  coal  mines  Harlan  County,  KY  Preparing  to  convert  fleet  for  KY  and  WV    
  26. 26. What  is  an  LNG  supply  chain  like?  
  27. 27. LNG  Truck  sta9on  Seville,  OH   Par9ally  funded  by  OH  grants  Clean  Energy  InvesAng  $150  Million    in  LNG  staAons  in  the  US.       Kwik Trip Sets Up 3-State Natural GasFueling  a  truck   Fuelling Infrastructurehsp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-­‐8zCUPoxu0&feature=related     http://www.ngvglobal.com/kwik-trip-sets-up-3-state-natural-gas-fuelling-infrastructure-0424
  28. 28. LiquefacAon  Plant  in  the  Twin  Ports  •  Community  open  to  industrial  development  •  ExisAng  Peakshaving  liquefacAon  plant  within   40  miles  in  Wrenshall,  MN    •  Natural  gas  pipelines  in  place  •  TransportaAon  hub  •  Mining  industry  heavy  user  of  diesel  •  Skilled  workforce  and  industrial  base  •  Market  of  4.3  million  people  within  250  miles  
  29. 29. Twin  Ports  LNG  Terminal  MarkeAng  Region   Transit Trucking Pipeline 4.3 Million People Marine Transportation Mining Rail250-­‐Mile  Radius  of  Duluth  and  Chicago  
  30. 30. LiquefacAon  Plant  in  the  Twin  Ports  •  PotenAal  customer  base:  1. Marine  fueling  2. Rail  yards  –  switch  engines  3. City  busses  4. Mining  industry  5. Trucking  industry  6. Delivery  to  other  communiAes  by  truck,   rail  or  water  
  31. 31. Intermodal  LNG  System  Twin Ports Liquefaction Facility Exploration Meeting -June 19, 2012 www.glmri.org
  32. 32. Containerized  LNG  supply  chain  
  33. 33. BalAc  using  marine  LNG  supply  chain     European Union Spent $15 Million on marine LNG Supply Chain study
  34. 34. MARAD  five  year  funding  with  Lake  Carriers  and  industry  support  • A  feasibility  study  to  look  at  fuel  alternaAves  (natural  gas  –  primarily  LNG,  with  consideraAons  for  CNG)  for  repowering  the  Great  Lakes  vessels.  • A  demonstraAon  project  to  consider  engineering  design  implicaAons  for  a  selected  ship.    (S.S.  Badger  –  car  and  passenger  ferry  with  service  between  Manitowoc,  WI  and  Ludington,  MI)  
  35. 35. •  Literature  review  of  studies  related  to  natural  gas   fueling  of  transportaAon  assets  in  general  and   specifically  the  marine  mode.  •  Study  to  look  at  converAng  the  ten  exisAng  Great  Lakes   steam-­‐powered  ships  to  reduce  air  emissions  and  fuel   consumpAon.      •  Engineering  study  to  assess  the  tradeoff  between  a   CNG  and  a  LNG  conversion  for  the  S.S.  Badger  •  Study  to  look  at  the  transportaAon  modeling  of  the   S.S.  Badger  route  to  evaluate  fuel  usage,  air  emissions,   and  other  environmental  factors.  
  36. 36. •   Supply  Chain  Study  of  regional  gas  availability,  and   accessibility,  liquefacAon  faciliAes  and  capacity,   transportaAon  and  rouAng  of  gas  supplies  in  the  Great   Lakes  region.      •  Research  into  the  regulatory  requirements  for  fueling   vessels  with  LNG  and  CNG  at  terminals,  docks  and   midstream.        •  EducaAon  and  Outreach  with  Industry-­‐       –  Great  Lakes  Waterways  Conference,  hosted  an  LNG  studies  panel     –  Society  of  Naval  Architects  and  Marine  Engineers  meeAng,  2-­‐day  agenda   –  Twin  CiAes  TransportaAon  Club   –  InsAtute  of  Supply  Management   –  Twin  Ports  Propeller  Club   –  CSCMP  –  Green  Bay,  WI  
  37. 37. Acknowledgement    for  InformaAon  My  field  is  transportaAon  educaAon  and  transportaAon  management  not  LNG.    Material  for   this  PresentaAon  came  from    the  following  experts  and  researchers.  •  Gary  Van  Tassel  &  Frank  Duffield–  Agent  Marine  •  Dr.  Mike  Parsons  –  U  of  Michigan  •  Bob  Kamb,  Mys9c  River  Partners  -­‐  Clean  Energy  Fuels  •  Claus  Emmer  -­‐  Chart  Industries  –    •  Odd  Magne  Horgen,  Rolls-­‐Royce  Engines  •  Jonas  Nyberg  -­‐  Caterpillar  Inc.,    •  Tony  Teo  –  DNV  •  Stephen  Gumpel  –  ABS  •  Peter  Jacobs  (Wartsila)    •  Chad  Varret  (VP  –Harvey  Gulf)    •  Student  Researchers:  Kenneth  Chong,  Brady  Peterson,   Hiroko  Tada  
  38. 38. www.glmri.org            Research  -­‐  Natural  Gas     Re-­‐Powering  Study    

×