This document summarizes Rolls-Royce's presentation on LNG propulsion systems for short-sea shipping vessels. It discusses the benefits of LNG in reducing emissions compared to diesel, examples of new-build and conversion projects using LNG, and key considerations for conversions including feasibility studies, engine choices, fuel tank options, and estimated costs ranging from $40-65 million depending on the scope of work. A case study of converting the container vessel Pachuca to LNG propulsion is provided as an example.

1. © 2013 Rolls-Royce plc
The information in this document is the property of Rolls-Royce plc and may not be copied or communicated to a third party, or used for any
purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of Rolls-Royce plc.
This information is given in good faith based upon the latest information available to Rolls-Royce plc, no warranty or representation is given
concerning such information, which must not be taken as establishing any contractual or other commitment binding upon Rolls-Royce plc or
any of its subsidiary or associated companies.
LNG propulsion (conversion and new-building)
for short-sea.
Oslo 20 Juni 2013.
Stein Ruben Larsen
Vice President System Sales and Marketing of Cargo Vessels
stein.ruben.larsen@rolls-royce.com

2. Agenda
 Some basic knowledge
 New-building example
 Conversions example
 Different solutions for conversion
 Financial

3. Some basic knowledge
Tromsø Aug 2012

4. Why LNG ?
0,38
0
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
C-diesel C-gas
SO2 (0,1%)
598
420
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
C-diesel C-gas
CO2 (g/kWh)
8,2
1,2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
C-diesel C-gas
NOx (g/kWh)
0,25
0
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
C-diesel C-gas
Particles

5. Vessels to be delivered in 2013/14
 Ro-Ro vessel built in China for Norwegian Norlines
 Winner of “Next Generation Shipping Award” 2011

6. Case study analysis environship
Operation Diesel LNG Unit
Annual operating hours 5500 5500 hrs
Installed power 4500 3940 kW
Engine Speed 750 750 rpm
System installation cost $10m $15.25m
HFO LNG
Fuel price USD 700/ton USD 700/ton
Add. capex USD 5,25 mill
Fuel consumption 0,198 kg/kWh 0151 kg/kWh
Lube oil consumption 0,80 g/kWh 0,40g/kWh
NPV USD 466.628
IRR 28%

7. Conversions (to LNG propulsion)
 What needs to be done ?
 What to chose ?
 To what cost ?
 Some examples.

8. What needs to be done ?
 Feasibility study
 Age of vessel
 Technical issues (Space, stability, classification, redesign etc)
 Timeframe (technical documentation, yard capacity, off-hire)
 Business case (Capex, Opex, Charter-agreement)
 Technical agreement
 Engine type
 LNG fuel-tank
 Backup-systems
 Scope of design-work
 Yard-work and testing/verification
 If NOx fund sopport, testing verification period

9. What to chose ?
 Scrubber, SCR, Low-sulphur, MDO
 Type of engine
 Lean burn gas engine
 Dual fuel engine
 LNG fuel tank
 C-type (Pressurized)
 A-type (Atmospheric pressure)
 Backup system (PTI)

10. Engines
 Lean burn gas engines
 IMO Tier III compliant
 High efficiency (49%)
 Low fuel-consumption
 Good tolerance for low methane
number
 Not 1A1 approved (Backup needed)
 Dual fuel gas engines
 IMO Tier III compliant
 Fuel flexibility
 No need for back-up
 Complex
 High maintenance cost
 Sensitive for methane-number

11. LNG tanks
 C-type
 Handles Boil-off
 Simple system (Coldbox)
 References as fuel-tank
 Take space
 Expensive
 A-type
 Space-friendly
 Less cost
 Boil-off issue
 Few references as fuel-tank
 Need of submerged pumps

12. Backup systems
 LNG Mechanical with PTI
 Gas-Electric

13. Cost
 Between 40 and 65 MNOK
 Depending on:
 Size of fuel-tank(s) : 2 * 250 cbm. C-Tank : 16 MNOK
 Engine type and power: Example : 5 MW engine: 10-15 MNOK
 New gearbox incl. PTI and HSG : 5 – 10 MNOK
 Design : 2 – 4 MNOK
 Yard-work : 10 – 20 MNOK ?

14. Conversion (Case study Pachuca)
 GL classed Container feeder
 Built in 2004/2005
 8,4 MW Medium speed engine
 Trade: Netherland, UK, Norway
 Member of NOx-fund (MS Lyspoint)
 Subject for NOx-fund support based on
CO2 emission (reduction) in Norwegian
waters

15. Conversion (Case study Pachuca)
 Possible LNG tank installation
 Vertical to avoid sloosh
 2 tanks for stability and
redundancy
 Bunkering available in Norway

16. Conversion (Case study Pachuca)
 Example of LNG tank stern
placed.
 MS Høydal

17. Conversion (Case study Pachuca)

18. Thank You !