A converted Norwegian ferry now working in Stockholm, Seagas is the world’s first dedicated LNG bunkering vessel
A SIGTTO/GIIGNL commemorative issue LNG shipping at 50I 109I 109
service in the US and three for Canada. The availability of plentiful supplies of competitively priced gas in the two countries and their ECA status will spur further orders in the region in the years ahead.
The US orderbook includes 10 large container ships – both newbuildings and conversions – that are taking LNG fuelling into new realms in terms of installed horsepower, gas consumption and bunkering arrangements.
One country that is currently only marginally represented on the list of LNG-fuelled vessels in service and on order is China. However, that situation is poised to change dramatically. The government is supporting the use of LNG as a transportation fuel in an effort to tackle the air pollution that beleaguers the country.
The current tally shows that China has two Chinese-built, LNG-powered tugs in service and two similar vessels on order. However, the country has in place a wide-ranging and growing LNG distribution infrastructure which includes a larger number of cryogenic road tankers, tank containers and vehicle fuel tanks than any other nation.
Modified versions of these vehicle LNG fuel tanks have been fitted to a number of fishing and inland waterway vessels in China as part of a trial programme to assess the viability of dual-fuel running. Numerous local companies are reportedly on the verge of constructing fuelling stations for the Yangtze and other rivers as well as LNG-fuelled river vessels that will utilise these depots. In addition domestic shipyards are currently building three coastal LNG carriers of 30,000m3 each for
use in carrying LNG to small shoreside distribution terminals and riverside fuelling stations planned for the country.
The current, fast-changing situation for LNG-powered vessels worldwide begs the question as to how big this fleet will be five or 10 years from now. However much research is carried out to underpin a forecast, any estimate has to be qualified by the plethora of variables that come into play. Will any new ECAs will be created? Will the reduced global sulphur cap for heavy fuel oil be implemented in 2020 or 2025? How will the prices of competing fuels evolve and what impact will refinery technologies have on their ability to increase the production of middle distillate fuels? When will individual sectors of the world shipping fleet fall due for rejuvenation?
In DNV GL’s own analysis of the
global potential for LNG fuel, the class society concludes, in its median case scenario, there will be 1,800 LNG- powered vessels in service by 2020, comprising 1,100 newbuildings and 700 conversions. MAN Diesel & Turbo believes there could be as many as 2,000 gas-powered vessels consuming 15 million tonnes of LNG by 2020. In this, the “most likely” of the MAN outcomes, LNG would displace approximately 8 per cent of the global shipping fleet’s current consumption of liquid oil fuel.
In March 2014 Lloyd’s Register (LR) issued the results of its own investigation into the worldwide potential for LNG as bunker fuel. EntitledGlobal Marine Fuel Trends 2030, the study encompassed three major global economic scenarios and concluded that, in its ‘status quo’ scenario, LNG will account for about 11 per cent of the world bunker market in 2030. Heavy fuel oil will remain the dominant driver of ship engines, commanding a market share of about 66 per cent.
LR points out that the use of LNG would be greater but for the comparatively young age of much of the world fleet. One sector that is ageing and has not experienced any notable infusions of newbuilding tonnage of late is that comprising chemical and small product tankers. LR states that LNG could be powering over 30 per cent of small tankers by 2030.
It is vital that this nascent LNG- fuelled vessel fleet is provided with an internationally agreed set of rules governing LNG bunkering, including aspects such as ship design and equipment, transfer arrangements and operational safety. Harmonised requirements will give shipowners the level playing field they need to
underpin their investments and provide users of LNG-fuelled ships with a base upon which they can build a safety performance record every bit as exemplary as that established by the LNG carrier sector.
A unified regulatory regime will also assist maritime authorities in dealing with the extremely diverse industry that is beginning to emerge. Administrations are being requested to review an ever- increasing number of LNG-fuelled vessel concept designs that span a full range of vessel types and encompass different types of gas-burning engines, gas treatment equipment and bunker tank design and location. Port and coastal state authorities charged with verifying the safety of a ship’s LNG bunkering arrangement and its ability to perform as required also have a vested interest in the availability of a single, common regime against which they can test compliance.
The maritime industry is working hard on the development of such an instrument – in the form of IMO’s
International Code for Ships using Gas or other Low Flash-Point Fuels (IGF Code). Efforts to finalise the IGF Code have been prioritised and a spring 2015 adoption date has been targeted. This would allow the new regime to become mandatory some time in the first half 2017. Once the work on the use of LNG, methanol and low flash point diesel fuels is complete, other fuels such as LPG and hydrogen will be addressed.
The causes of global harmony, sound design and reliable operations will be greatly facilitated by the Society for Gas as a Marine Fuel. SGMF is a new non-governmental organisation (NGO) established to promote safety and industry best practice in the use of LNG as a marine fuel. MC
Gasnor has carried out approximately 20,000 LNG bunkering operations in Norway over the past decade
A SIGTTO/GIIGNL commemorative issue 110 I
110 ILNG shipping at 50
T
he Arctic Pilot Project (APP) was launched to determine if there was a technically and economically feasible way of delivering gas from the Canadian Arctic islands by ship. The shipping component of the scheme was to comprise two 140,000m3 icebreaking LNG carriers, operating year round. Loading was to take place at a terminal on Melville Island’s Bridport Inlet while the delivery voyage would be across Lancaster Sound and between Baffin Island and Greenland across Baffin Bay and the Davis Strait out into the North Atlantic.Panarctic Oils of Calgary had discovered the Drake field, with its 110 billion m3 of gas, in the Melville
Island region in the late 1960s. Although Melville is not considered to be in the High Arctic, it does fall within what the Canadian Arctic Shipping Pollution Prevention (ASPP) regulations specify as Zone 6. Vessels navigating in this zone are required to be able to move unaided through ice 2-2.5m thick during the winter months.
APP was initiated by Petro Canada, as the overall project operator and manager, in early 1977. Melville Shipping Ltd, a consortium of three
shipping companies, joined the venture to provide technical resources and expertise for the shipping segment. The shipowners were Federal Commerce and Navigation of Montreal, Upper Lakes Shipping of Toronto and Canada Steamship Lines of Montreal.
The APP project itself had a precedent. In 1969 Exxon had converted its crude oil tanker Manhattan into an icebreaking vessel to prove the viability of North West Passage transits. More specifically the oil major had sought to evaluate the potential for Arctic tanker operations as a means of exploiting Alaska’s North Slope oil field. In the event, although the tanker successfully navigated the route, carrying a single, token barrel of oil on the return voyage, it was an expensive exercise and a pipeline across Alaska was deemed to be more economically feasible.
The challenge of discovering a sea route along the North West Passage through the Canadian Arctic has excited entrepreneurs and explorers alike for centuries. The challenge was just as real for the interests behind APP, bearing in mind the need for a year-round solution for large, sophisticated ships.
Shipbuilders, consultants, ice specialists and equipment manufacturers with experience in LNG ship construction flocked to Canada to promote their capabilities. This frenzied competition prompted a range of research programmes worldwide in the search for the optimum icebreaking LNG carrier design.
Because there were no class or regulatory rules in place governing the design and construction of LNG carriers for operations in such a hostile environment, designers were left to formulate their own specifications. No LNG ship of the proposed size had yet been built and the cargo sloshing phenomenon was not understood to anything like the extent it is today.
An additional challenge was the choice of material and thickness for the low-temperature steels to be used for the hull ice belts. Another design consideration was the fact that the vessels would spend 70 per cent of their time in open water en route to and from the proposed Canadian east coast receiving terminal.
Not surprisingly under the