Samskip is a globally active transportation company offering services by land, sea, rail, and air. It has over 1,200 employees and operates out of 55 offices in 23 countries. Samskip provides multimodal transportation solutions utilizing short sea shipping, rail, road, and barge to reliably and sustainably transport goods across its network in Europe, North and South America, and Asia. Key services include temperature controlled transport, international forwarding, and storage.
Baker Hughes is a leading supplier of oilfield services and technology. The document discusses Baker Hughes' operations in Norway, including its revenue, employees, facilities, and supply chain logistics. It notes that Baker Hughes is testing the use of sea transport between its Stavanger and northern Norway locations to reduce the number of trucks needed and improve sustainability, as the activity in the northern regions is increasing. Key considerations for using sea transport include reliability, flexibility, price, and environmental impact.
- Europe is short on diesel fuel and a net importer, with demand expected to grow strongly. Refineries are struggling and some have closed.
- The switch to low-sulfur diesel for ships in Emission Control Areas will increase tightness in the distillate markets and likely lead to higher prices, though the impact will be less in North America which exports distillates.
- Availability of very low sulfur marine gasoil is currently good in Northern Europe and the Mediterranean is expected to have sufficient supplies, though the Nordic countries could see tighter markets depending on refinery production.
1) The document discusses installing an exhaust gas cleaning system called a scrubber on the pilot vessel MV Tarago to comply with sulphur regulations. It will cost $10 million to install and could save $7 million per year in ECA areas by allowing the vessel to continue using cheaper high-sulphur fuel.
2) Key points examined in the pre-study included loss of cargo space, weight and stability impacts, retrofit challenges, power consumption, fresh water usage, and operational impacts. Extensive piping and cabling would be required.
3) Installation of the large scrubber unit, weighing 45 tons, is underway on the vessel. Third-party testing and verification will begin
This document discusses methanol as a potential future fuel for shipping to meet new sulfur regulations. It presents four options for compliance, including running on low-sulfur fuel, using liquefied natural gas (LNG) or methanol, or installing exhaust scrubbers. Methanol is highlighted as an easier-to-handle alternative to LNG that could be produced from various feedstocks. The document summarizes tests conducted on the Stena Scanrail ship converting its auxiliary engines to run on methanol and outlines Stena's plans to gradually convert more of its short-sea fleet to methanol by 2025 to reduce emissions and fuel costs.
Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs) are sea areas where stricter requirements exist for the sulphur content of bunker fuel used by ships. SECAs are defined in MARPOL Annex VI and currently include the North Sea, Baltic Sea, and areas within 24 miles of the California coast. The document discusses the sulphur limits that apply in SECAs according to MARPOL Annex VI, including a limit of 1% until 2014, 0.1% beginning in 2015, as well as the global cap outside of SECAs of 3.5% until 2020 and 0.5% beginning in 2020. It also notes that the EU Sulphur Directive is aligned with
This document is a feasibility study by Det Norske Veritas (DNV) assessing options for a shipping company to comply with stricter emission regulations in Emission Control Areas (ECAs). DNV evaluated converting the main engines of a case ship to run on liquefied natural gas (LNG), installing a scrubber system, or switching to low-sulfur fuel. Conversion to dual-fuel engines and installing LNG tanks was estimated to cost $6.5-8.3 million. Charts show the cumulative costs over time of each compliance option if the case ship spent 55% or 100% of its time operating in ECAs. LNG appears cost competitive compared to fuel switching or a
This document summarizes a presentation by Clean Marine AS on their exhaust gas cleaning system. Some key points:
- Clean Marine AS is a pioneering company in exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS) with over 20 employees and USD 20 million invested in development.
- They have a proven EGCS technology and a contract to install systems on two Samsung/AET shuttle tankers delivering in late 2014 and early 2015.
- With new sulfur regulations coming into effect from 2015, EGCS presents a viable option for vessels to continue using less expensive high-sulfur fuel and avoid costly low-sulfur fuel.
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.
This document discusses sustainable shortsea shipping, both currently and in the future. It presents a shortsea shipping calculator that calculates emissions door-to-door based on actual routes and ship information. Currently, shortsea shipping results in 40-70% lower CO2 emissions per ton-km compared to trucking. Future improvements aim to cut CO2 emissions in half through ship design upgrades like hull modifications, hybrid technologies, new fuels like LNG and biofuels, as well as optimizing logistics. With support through policies like CO2 taxes and research funding, shortsea shipping's future potential for carbon neutrality is promising.
Emd sustainable shipping by market based measures spc norway
Shortsea nord-2010-transportutvikling-tor-husjord
1. Containerflyt i Nord - Vridning av last fra vei til sjøMaritimt Forum Nord – SeminarNarvik 10. 6. 2010v/Tor Husjord
2. 70 siders rapport finansiert av Landsdelsutvalget og de 3 nordligste fylkeskommunene Vurderer driftskonsept og økonomi for en mulig containerførende rute fra Narvik og nordover
3. ”Tege” Bodø-Tromsø-Alta ”Ny båt” Hovedstruktur mellom Narvik og Tromsø Koplinger mot Vesterålen via Lødingen Utvidelse fra Tromsø til Finnmark Mulighet for synergi mellom de to fartøyene
4. Markedsgrunnlag ny rute Dagens containere med ARE-toget Vekst i eksisterende volumer over Narvik Andre volumer som kan gå over Narvik, men som ikke kommer inn/ut med tog i dag. Gods som kan tilknyttes ruten ved synergi med ”Tege” eller andre transportmidler Dagens ARE-tog alene har over 60.000 TEU (tot. tur og retur). Tilsvarer ca. 50.000 25ft. containere -- Potensialet er anslått til 50.000 TEU på sikt (ca. 140 pr dag) -- Kalkylene er basert på færre enn 30.000 TEU-FCL pr.år (ca. 80 pr. dag, 40 FCL nord+40 FCL sør)
5. Fartøy og produksjon Fartøy Containerførende (65-70 / 25ft) Omtrent samme størrelse som ”Tege” 18 knop, service Gearet Nybygg NOK 100 mill Litt for stort i forhold til markedskalkylene, dvs kostnaden er noe overvurdert (15-20) Rute Basis: Daglige rundturer Narvik-Tromsø Litt under 8 timer hver vei Total årlig produksjon ca. 100.000 n.m.
6. Økonomi – i utgangspunktet negativt resultat Havnerelaterte kostnader står for 25% av totalkostnaden
7. Økonomi – havneavgifter Hovedtyngden av avgiftene er relatert til de kommunale Havnedistriktene Med bare to anløpshavner og daglig skipsrotasjon utgjør havneavgiftene nærmere 13 millioner (omsetn.: 43 mill) 10% av avgiftene (1,2 mill) er skipsrelatert (anløpsavgift og kaiavgift) 90% er knyttet til vareavgift/lasting-lossing Avgiftene bidrar til å bremse utviklingen av nye rutekonsepter, spesielt når avstandene er korte (nærskipsfart)
8. Ny båtrute – en miljøvinner Miljøregnskap etter EU’s standard, anvendt på dette konseptet, viser betydelig gevinst i favør av skip
9. Utfordringer og muligheter Noen utfordringer: Havneavgifter ARE-togets regularitet (logistikkjeden) Endringer av dagens transportmønster (bane-bil) Risikovillige aktører Noen muligheter (risikoreduksjon) Reduserte kostnader (avgifter, mindre båt m.v.) Honorere miljøeffekten – poltiskmålsetting- hvordan ? Marco-Polo finansiering i en oppstartsfase?