1 / 19

AIR EMISSIONS from OCEANGOING VESSELS INTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007

AIR EMISSIONS from OCEANGOING VESSELS INTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007. Keith Michel Herbert Engineering Corp. Transport Mode Efficiency (assumes Aframax Tanker burning 2.6% Sulfur Fuel with return voyage in ballast). Shipping is the most efficient mode for moving cargo.

jena
Download Presentation

AIR EMISSIONS from OCEANGOING VESSELS INTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AIR EMISSIONSfromOCEANGOING VESSELSINTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007 Keith Michel Herbert Engineering Corp.

  2. Transport Mode Efficiency(assumes Aframax Tanker burning 2.6% Sulfur Fuelwith return voyage in ballast) • Shipping is the most efficient mode for moving cargo

  3. Air Emissions from Cargo Ships • Over 90% of world trade is moved by the international commercial shipping industry. • Oceangoing ships are responsible for a significant percentage of total worldwide emissions: 18-30% of NOx, 6-10% of SOx, 3-5% of CO2. • Studies clearly demonstrate the health hazards of NOx and PM pollutants. • Anthropogenic input now widely accepted as a major contributor to global warming.

  4. Regulations: ANNEX VI • Maximum 4.5% sulfur content. • Established limits for NOx(example: 17 g/kW h applicable to slow speed diesel engines) • Established concept of SECA’sInitially in Baltic; North Sea in Aug 2007(max. 1.5% sulfur or equivalent)

  5. Proposal for Revision of Annex VIINTERTANKO (BLG-WGAP 1/2/5) • A Global Sulfur Emission Control Area(applicable worldwide) • From 2010, distillate fuels with a 1.0% sulfur cap. • For ship engines installed from 2015, a maximum 0.5% sulfur cap.

  6. Proposal for Revision of Annex VIUnited States (BLG 11/5/15) • Sulfur Emission Control Area(applicable within 200 nm of coastlines)--Use distillate with 0.1% sulfur cap or comply with SOx and PM limits • For new engines > 30 liters / cylinder:Tier II: 15-25% NOx reduction in 2011Tier III: 80% NOx reduction in 2016 • 20% reduction in NOx for certain existing engines by 2012.

  7. Proposal for Revision of Annex VINORWAY(BLG 11/5/22, 11/5/23, 11/5/24 ) • Global sulfur emission area -- a 0.5% sulfur cap by 2015 applicable to all ships • NOx reduction for new shipsTier II: 20% reduction in 2010Tier III: 40% reduction in 2015 • NOx reduction for existing S/S diesel shipsTier I: in 2010 for ships built 1980-2000(to ANNEX VI limit of 17 g/kW h)

  8. California (CARB) Regulation for Auxiliary Engines • Applicable to vessels operating within 24nm of coast of California • As of Jan. 1, 2007, requires burning of MGO or MDO with a maximum sulfur content of 0.5%. • As of Jan. 1, 2010, requires burning of MGO with a maximum sulfur content of 0.1%.(subject to review in 2008)

  9. EPA Regulations forU.S. Flag Vessels - Tier 2 • For newbuildings after Jan 1, 2007, Tier 2 requirements for Category 1 & 2 engines (<30 liters per cylinder). • Tier 2 levels add particulate (PM) limits, and includes hydrocarbon (HC) in the allowable NOx levels that are lower than Annex VI requirements. • Tier 2 PM + NOx limits have been obtained only by burning MGO. Native ash + sulfur in MDO are higher than allowed in exhaust. Engine modifications to meet NOx requirements are needed (or equivalent after-treatment) • Applicable to new US Flag vessels worldwide. • Over the next 10 years, reduction from U.S. flag oceangoing vessels will impact total emissions of Sox, PM, and NOx within U.S. coastal waters by less the 0.25%.

  10. EPA Regulations forU.S. Flag Vessels - Tier 3 • For newbuildings beginning in 2009 - 2014, EPA has proposed Tier 3 requirements for Category 1 & 2 engines. • Tier 3 further reduces PM by 50% and NOx by 20% and returns to separate HC and NOx limits. • Tier 3 limits are expected to be made by engine modifications and low sulfur distillate fuel.

  11. EPA Regulations forU.S. Flag Vessels – Basis • For newbuildings beginning in 2014-2017, EPA proposes Tier IV requirements for Category 1 & 2 engines. Tier 4 reduces PM, and lowers all NOx to 1.8 g/kW-hr and all HC to 0.19 g/kW-hr. (NOx by 80% and PM by 90%). • Tier 4 limits are based on 0.0015% S distillate and after treatment of exhaust. • Proposed rules for Category 3 engines (>30 liters) originally expected in April, 2007 have been delayed. Conjecture is that these will resemble the proposal to IMO (BLG 11/5/15)

  12. Drygas <80%RH In stack exhaust gas monitoring for NO NO2 CO2 & SO2…… SWS Funnel Space 1 MW Exhaust Discharge water monitor pH 7.0 Oil <0.5ppm Engine Room HC 50t/hr CCS 10 kg dry sludge/day Scrubbers • Seawater is the scrubbing medium • SOx reduction to 99% • NOx reduction to 5% • Particulate reduction to 80% • Currently have designs to 9MW; designs for range 25MW to 50MW under development • Web based emissions monitoring KRYSTALLON SCRUBBING SYSTEM

  13. Selective Catalytic Reduction(SCR) • Urea carried as 40% solution • Injection rate 5% to 8% by weight of the fuel • NOx reduction 80- 99% • With additional oxidation catalyst HC reduction 70- 90% • Exhaust gas temperature must be maintained between 320 and 500 oC for reaction • Not tolerant of high sulfur. As sulfur increases, temperature must increase. • Not tolerant of used lube oil mixed into fuel. • Catalyst life is 10,000 to 40,000 hours with max of 100,000 hours SCR Urea Injection Urea Tank Urea Pump MUNTERS –SCR CONVERTER

  14. SCR Retrofit onMatson Containership Mokihana SCR Connection toInjection Pipe Injection Pipe Connectionto Turbocharger

  15. Emulsified Fuel Oil • 5 to 25% fresh water (by weight) added to fuel • Fuel water emulsion has higher viscosity than fuel alone • Higher fuel delivery temperature is required to achieve proper viscosity • Fuel pressure must be higher than the saturation pressure of the water at delivery temperature • Addition of water without increasing pump sizes limits maximum power output • NOx reduction of 20% expected with 20% fresh water injection • Manufacture claims PM reduction of 40% to 60% • No affect on SOx and CO2 Sea to Sky Emulsifier unit

  16. Comparison of Emission Control Methods Reductions for MDO & MGO based on comparison to 2.7% S HFO* assumes SCR arranged with oxidation catalyst stage ** assumes 20% water injection (reduction estimates per manufacturer literature)

  17. Expected Emission Reductions • A global SECA with MDO (1% S Cap) will lower overall oceangoing vessel SOx and PM emissions by approx. 45%. With MGO (0.5% S Cap), reduction in Sox and PM will be approximately 65%. • A 200nm worldwide SECA with 0.1% S fuel will reduce SOx and PM in SECA’s by about 75%. Overall, reductions of about 40% can be expected.

  18. Open Questions • Should low sulfur fuel caps be mandated, or should emission limits be set and alternative technologies permitted? • Should a global SECA be established, or should emission standards be applied for defined regions?

  19. Need for Comparative Study There is a need for a comparative study that: • Considers all pollutants of concern (SOx, NOx, PM, GHG, effluent into water, disposal of waste, …). • Considers emissions over the complete chain from manufacture of equipment and refinement of crude through recyling & disposal. • Accounts for all relevant costs (capital, operating, M&R, etc.) • Account for the relative safety and performance risk of the different technologies. • Also, further research is needed on the fate and transport of emissions from ships.

More Related