• No results found

DUAL FUEL ENGINES LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "DUAL FUEL ENGINES LATEST DEVELOPMENTS"

Copied!
73
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

DUAL FUEL ENGINES

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Oskar Levander, Director, Concept design, MLS

HAMBURG, 27.9.2011

27 September 2011

(2)

Content

Environmental and market drivers

LNG as a marine fuel

DF engines

RoRo concept design

Machinery and fuel comparison

(3)

Factor trends: Environment

27 September 2011 3 © Wärtsilä

LOCAL

GLOBAL

LOCAL

LOCAL

Acid rains

Tier II (2011)

Tier III (2016)

NO

x

Greenhouse effect

Under evaluation by IMO

CO

2

Acid rains

Sulphur content in fuel

SO

x

Direct impact on humans

Locally regulated

Particulate

matter

(4)
(5)

From now on….

Established Emissions Controlled Areas

Emissions Controlled Areas under consideration

27 September 2011

(6)

NOx reduction – IMO requirements and methods

0

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2

0

Specific NO

x

emissions (g/kWh)

Rated engine speed (rpm)

Tier II (global 2011)

Ships keel laid 2011 onwards

Engines > 130 kW

Tier III (ECAs 2016)

Ships in designated

areas, keel laid 2016

onwards

Engines > 130 kW

Tier I (present)

Ships built 2000 onwards

Engines > 130 kW

Retrofit: Ships built

1990 – 2000

Engines > 90 litres/cylinder

and > 5000 kW

Wärtsilä: RTA, W46, W64

Dry methods (engine optimization)

- Concepts are ready

4

-

SCR Catalyst

-

Alternative pathways under

(7)

IMO Sulphur Limits

0,1%

4,5%

3,5%

1,5%

1,0%

0,5%

2008

2009

2010

20

1

1

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

World

EU in ports

ECA

27 September 2011

(8)

Machinery options

Main options for operations inside ECA

MGO + SCR

HFO + Scrubber + SCR

(9)

Greenhouse emission reductions

The society is demanding lower CO

2

emissions from ships

IMO is trying to respond the demand by introducing guidelines for:

Energy Efficiency Design Index (

EEDI

)

Energy Efficiency Operational Index (

EEOI

)

Market based instruments

27 September 2011

(10)

Fuel prices

Sources: www.lngoneworld.com, www.bunkerworld.com, LR Fairplay

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Oct -01 Feb-0 2 Jun-0 2 Oct -02 Feb-0 3 Jun-0 3 Oct -03 Feb-0 4 Jun-0 4 Oct -04 Feb-0 5 Jun-0 5 Oct -05 Feb-0 6 Jun-0 6 Oct -06 Feb-0 7 Jun-0 7 Oct -07 Feb-0 8 Jun-0 8 Oct -08 Feb-0 9 Jun-0 9 Oct -09 Feb-1 0 Jun-1 0 Oct -10 Feb-1 1 Jun-1 1

U

S

D

/M

B

tu

LNG Japan average [USD/MBtu]

NG Henry hub [USD/MBtu]

HFO 380cst Rotterdam [USD/MBtu]

MGO Rotterdam [USD/MBtu]

(11)

Cleaner Exhaust Emissions with LNG

25-30% lower CO

2

Thanks to low carbon to hydrogen ratio of fuel

85% lower NO

X

Lean burn concept (high air-fuel ratio)

No SO

X

emissions

Sulphur is removed from fuel

when liquefied

Very low particulate emissions

No visible smoke

No sludge deposits

27 September 2011

(12)
(13)

Fuel spray

Otto or Diesel cycles: effects on NO

X

Nikolaus August

Otto

Rudolf Christian Karl

Diesel

Flame front propagation

NO

X

formation

27 September 2011 13 © Wärtsilä

(14)

Otto or Diesel cycles: effects on NO

X

Big temperature

difference

 NOx formation!

Otto,

max flame temp.

(15)

Select the right technology

* *

* *

*

*

* * * *

*

* *

* *

*

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

*

* *

* *

*

* *

GAS INJECTION

GAS INJECTION

GAS INJECTION

DUAL-FUEL (DF)

Meets IMO Tier III

SPARK-IGNITION GAS (SG)

Meets IMO Tier III

No redundancy

No HFO flexibility

GAS-DIESEL (GD)

Does NOT meet IMO Tier III

High gas pressure

27 September 2011

(16)

DUAL-

FUEL (DF)

GAS-DIESEL

(GD)

Gas burning technologies

SPARK-IGNITION

GAS (SG)

(17)

The marine favourite technology?

* *

* *

*

*

* * * *

*

* *

* *

*

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

*

* *

* *

*

* *

GAS INJECTION

GAS INJECTION

GAS INJECTION

DUAL-FUEL (DF)

Meets IMO Tier III

SPARK-IGNITION GAS (SG)

Meets IMO Tier III

No redundancy

No HFO flexibility

GAS-DIESEL (GD)

Does NOT meet IMO Tier III

High gas pressure

27 September 2011

(18)

Wärtsilä‘s choice

* *

* *

*

*

* * * *

*

GAS INJECTION

DUAL-FUEL (DF)

Meets IMO Tier III

1

IMO Tier III compliant

2

Low pressure gas

(19)

Dual-fuel engine characteristics

High efficiency

Low gas pressure

Low emissions, due to:

High efficiency

Clean fuel

Lean burn combustion

Fuel flexibility

Gas mode

Diesel mode

Three engine models

Wärtsilä 20DF

Wärtsilä 34DF

Wärtsilä 50DF

27 September 2011

(20)

Dual-fuel engine range

0

5

10

15

34DF

20V34DF 9.0 MW

12V34DF 5.4 MW

9L34DF 4.0 MW

6L34DF

2.7 MW

16V34DF 7.2 MW

18V50DF 17.55 MW

16V50DF 15.6 MW

12V50DF 11.7 MW

9L50DF 8.8 MW

8L50DF 7.8 MW

6L50DF 5.85 MW

50DF

Higher output for 60Hz / Main engines

20DF

9L20DF 1.5 MW

8L20DF 1.4 MW

6L20DF 1.0 MW

(21)

Wärtsilä successfully tests new

2-stroke dual-fuel gas engine technology

Wärtsilä Corporation, Trade & Technical press release, 23 September 2011:

“Wärtsilä successfully tests new 2-stroke dual-fuel gas engine

technology to comply with IMO Tier III emission limits“

“The on-going tests show that the Wärtsilä 2-stroke gas engine

performance is in compliance with the upcoming IMO Tier III NOx

emission limits, thereby setting a new benchmark for low-speed

engines running on gas.”

27 September 2011 Oskar Levander

(22)

Dual-Fuel advantages

Main advantages of the Dual-Fuel 4-stroke engine compared to SG:

Redundancy, backup without interruptions in power or speed.

Able to operate on liquid fuel outside ECA-area (incl HFO)

Simple system, no PTI/”take me home” or double gas system needed.

(23)

Dual-Fuel applications –

References

 4 segments  140 installations  > 3’000’000 running hours

Power

Plants

DF Power Plant

49 installations

155 engines

Online since1997

Merchant

LNGC

68 vessels

254 engines

950’000 rh

Conversion

1 Chem. Tanker

2 engines conv.

Complete gas

train

Complete design

Offshore

PSVs/FPSOs

22 vessels

78 engines

Online from 1994

Cruise

and Ferry

LNG ferries

1+1 vessels

4 engines per

vessels

Complete gas

train

2800 passengers

In service in 2013

Navy

Costal Patrol

Coming…

27 September 2011

(24)

The industry's most environmentally

sound and energy efficient large

passenger vessel to date.

Main particulars:

Overall length:

214.0 m

Breadth, moulded: 31.8 m

Cruising speed

22 knots

Passengers:

2800

Class:

LR

Ice class:

1A

In service:

2013

Shipyard:

STX Finland Oy

Ship Owner:

Viking Line

Viking Line

2800 Pax Cruise Ferry

Machinery:

Main Engines:

4 x Wärtsilä 8L50DF

Output:

4 x 7600 kW

LNGPac 200

2 x 200 m3

Integrated tank – and aux. rooms

Bunkering system, Safety systems

GVU in enclosure

(25)

Conversion of Bit Viking

27 September 2011 Oskar Levander

(26)
(27)

LNGpac Main Components

27 September 2011 27 © Wärtsilä

GVU

Bunkering

Station

Tank room

Main Engine Room

Gas

Valve

Bunkering line,

insulated pipes

Bottom tank

filling

Pressure build

up evaporator

LNG – gas evaporator

Water/Glycol

system

Oskar Levander

(28)

Gas Valve Unit in enclosure

Main features

Can be located in the same engine

room

, dedicated compartment not

needed

Compact design

and easy installation

(plug-and-play concept)

Integrated ventilation

system when

combined with LNGPac

(29)

LNGPac: A turn key solution

Tank room –

All cryogenic valves

Auxiliary equipment

room

Length minimized

27 September 2011

(30)
(31)

LNG storage

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

Diesel

LNG (10bar)

Volume relative to MDO in DE

Fuel

Tank

Tank Room

Storage volume (Relative)

27 September 2011

(32)
(33)

LNG tanks located outside

The LNG tanks can be located outside

Does not take up space inside ship

Good ventilation

No ventilation casing needed

trough accommodation

Visible location for good PR

27 September 2011

(34)
(35)

LNG Container feeder

LNG Ferry

LNG Ro-Lo

LNG Tug

LNG Feeder

LNG Terminal

LNG distribution chain

LNG logistics is a key

question for introduction

of LNG as a marine fuel

27 September 2011

(36)

Marine LNG terminals

Existing or

under construction

Proposed

(37)

Bunkering from LNG truck

27 September 2011

(38)
(39)

LNG barge carrier – operation principle

27 September 2011

(40)
(41)

LNG distribution

NG pipe line

Large scale LNG liquefaction plant

/ LNG import terminal

Local LNG

liquefaction plant

Local distribution

LNG terminal

LNG tank in port

LNG tank on barge

Small ships

Small & large ships

POR

T

DIST

RIBUT

IO

N

LNG

27 September 2011

(42)

Total Concept Optimization

Wärtsilä engineers solutions for LNG delivery, storage, transportation and

utilization onboard.

(43)

RORO CONCEPT FOR ECA

27 September 2011 Oskar Levander

(44)
(45)

RoRo trends

Growing capacity

Efficiency of scale

Slowing down

Reducing fuel costs

Flexible cargo intake

Designed for operation inside ECA areas

27 September 2011

(46)

RoRo concept

RoRo vessel for European routes in ECA

Operation area: European SECA area

RoRo cargos

Double stack containers on main deck

Trailers and mafis on upper deck and in lower hold

Containers on upper deck

Focus on environmental and economical performance

Operation inside SECA area

(47)

RoRo main particulars

Size

22 000 GT

Length

190.0 m

Length, bp

180.0 m

Beam, wl

26.6 m

Draft (design)

6.5 m

Depth, main deck

8.3 m

Speed, service

~19 knots (incl. 15% SM)

Lane meters

2 800 m

Deadweight (desgin)

10 500 tons

Propulsion power

10 800 – 11 400 kW (installed)

Aux power

~2 100 kW (installed)

Drivers

12 pax

27 September 2011

(48)

Propulsion

Single screw

Simple and well proven

Good ice performance

Low cost

(49)

Machinery alternatives for comparison

1.

MGO

Operates on MGO

SCR to reduce NOx to tier III limit

27 September 2011 Oskar Levander

49 © Wärtsilä

MDO HFO

2.

HFO + Scrubber

Operates on HFO

Scrubber removes SOx

SCR to reduce NOx to tier III limit

MDO HFO

MDO

LNG

3.

DF - LNG

Operates on LNG

(50)

MGO

MDO

G

6L20 PTO 3 MW

G

6L20

MSB

2 x 1 MW 1 MW Auxpac 1 050 kW GEAR EnergoPac rudder 9L46F 10 800 kW SCR SCR SCR

SCR needed for IMO

tier III compliance

9L46F

Auxpac 1 050 kW

Installed propulsion power:

10.8 MW

Installed aux power:

2.1 MW

(51)

HFO + Scrubber

27 September 2011 51 © Wärtsilä

MDO

HFO

G

6L20 PTO 3 MW

G

6L20

MSB

2 x 1 MW 1 MW Auxpac 1 050 kW GEAR

SCRUBBER

10 800 kW SCR SCR SCR

SCR needed for IMO

tier III compliance

9L46F

Auxpac 1 050 kW EnergoPac

rudder

Installed propulsion power:

10.8 MW

Installed aux power:

2.1 MW

(52)

Marine Fresh Water Scrubber System

Scrubber

pH pH

NaOH unit

Fresh water

Water Treatment

Cooling

Exhaust

Gas

Seawater

Closed loop works with

freshwater

, to which

NaOH

is added for the

neutralization of SOx.

CLOSED LOOP

=

Zero discharge

in enclosed area

Process tank Holding tank Sludge tank

(53)

Containerships VII - scrubber installation

27 September 2011

(54)

DF - LNG

MDO

G

6L20DF PTO 3 MW

G

MSB

2 x 1 MW 1 MW 6L20DF 1 056 kW GEAR 11 400 kW EnergoPac rudder

12V50DF

6L20DF 1 056 kW

L N G

6L20DF

Installed propulsion power:

11.4 MW

(55)

LNG storage in trailers

27 September 2011

55 © Wärtsilä

3 x LNG trailers = 150 m3 of LNG

(56)

LNG tank capacity (LNG trucks on deck)

Target for autonomy

2

days

Daily consumption (acc. to profile)

19 tons

Total consumption

38 tons

84 m

3

+ 15% Margin

+ 13 m

3

Total tank capacity demand

97 m

3

Volume capacity of one truck

50 m

3

Two LNG trucks loaded every second day

27 September 2011

(57)

LNG storage in trailer

27 September 2011

(58)

Assumed fuel prices

USD/ton

EUR/ton

USD/MBtu

HFO

635

455

16.5

MGO

950

680

23.4

LNG

740

530

16.0

Source:

www.bunkerworld.com

(September 2011), LNG price estimated

1 EUR = 1.4 USD

(59)

Operation profile

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Port

Man

12,0

18,5

R

unning

hours

Operation mode

27 September 2011

(60)

Annual fuel consumption and cost (relative)

100,0 %

105,4 %

100,6 %

100,0 %

77,1 %

68,8 %

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

120 %

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

(61)

Annual fuel, lube oil and consumables cost (k€)

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

Senitec

chemicals

Fresh Water

NaOH

Urea

Lube oil

Fuel

27 September 2011

61 © Wärtsilä Oskar Levander

10 years

6% interest

(62)

Machinery Investment cost

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

Mac

hi

ner

y

f

ir

s

t

c

os

t

Scrubbers

SCR

Fuel system (LNG

tank etc.)

HFO system

Steering

Propulsion train

Engines

Propulsion engine

(63)

Annual machinery cost

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

Ann

ual

mac

hine

ry

rela

ted

c

os

t

[k

EUR

]

Scrubber operating

costs (NaOH + FW +

Senitec Chem)

SCR operating costs

Maintenance costs

Lubrication oil costs

Fuel costs

Annual capital costs

27 September 2011

(64)

Concept payback time (compared to MGO)

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

Pay

bac

k

T

im

e

[Y

ears

]

(65)

Net present value (NPV) – 10 years of operation

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

N

et

Pres

ent

V

alue [

k

EU

R

]

27 September 2011

(66)

Exhaust emissions

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

120 %

HFO - IMO tier II

MGO

HFO + Scrubber

LNG

CO2

NOx

SOx

Inside ECA, IMO tier III compliant

REF. outside ECA

(67)

IMO Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)

27 September 2011

(68)

EEDI

0

5

10

15

20

25

(69)

Operating part time in SECA

27 September 2011

(70)

Machinery alternatives for comparison – part time in ECA

1.

MGO - HFO

Operates on

MGO inside SECA

and

HFO outside SECA

SCR used only in port and inside NECA

MDO HFO

2.

HFO + Scrubber

Operates on HFO

Scrubber only used inside SECA

SCR used only in port and inside NECA

MDO HFO

MDO

LNG

3.

DF - LNG

Operates on LNG all the time

(71)

Annual fuel costs – part time in ECA

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

HFO - MGO HFO + Scrubber

DF-LNG

A

nn

ua

l

c

os

ts

[k

€]

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

HFO - MGO HFO + Scrubber

DF-LNG

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

HFO - MGO

HFO + Scrubber

DF-LNG

A

n

n

u

a

l

c

o

s

ts

[k

€]

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

HFO - MGO

HFO + Scrubber

DF-LNG

27 September 2011 71 © Wärtsilä

Inside ECA

33%

67%

Outside ECA

100%

100%

67%

33%

Oskar Levander

(72)

Annual costs – part time in ECA

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

HFO - MGO

HFO +

Scrubber

DF-LNG

A

nn

ua

l

c

os

ts

[k

€]

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

HFO - MGO

HFO +

Scrubber

DF-LNG

SCR operating costs Scrubber operating costs Maintenance costs Lubrication oil costs Fuel costs

Annual capital costs

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

HFO - MGO

HFO +

Scrubber

DF-LNG

SCR operating costs Scrubber operating costs Maintenance costs Lubrication oil costs Fuel costs

Annual capital costs

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

HFO - MGO

HFO +

Scrubber

DF-LNG

A

nn

ua

l

c

os

ts

[k

€]

Inside ECA

33%

67%

Outside ECA

100%

100%

67%

33%

(73)

Conclusions

DF engines – a well proven technology

DF engines running on LNG has great potential

Best NPV

Lowest emissions

Short payback time

27 September 2011

References

Related documents

Lastly, there is a need to develop methods for monitoring underrepresented species using novel methods and approaches, especially within the vast group of squamate reptiles

Differences in species composition of some zooplankton groups, and the occurrence of the oceanic species in the eastern Adriatic indicate the influence of the Mediterranean and

[r]

Among pairwise combinations, Silver Carp populations in the Des Moines, Illinois, and Wabash rivers consisted of either highly negative (ρ < -0.70) or positive (ρ >

[r]

[r]

sem ti paguhet qmimi ne teresi.kurse bleresi dety ti paguhet qmimi ne teresi.kurse bleresi detyrohet qe shitesit tia paguaj qmimin ne keste pra rohet qe shitesit tia paguaj qmimin

This research presents the results of a case study carried out in Switzerland to test a method, based on statistical wind resource assessment, to map the spatio-temporal