1 / 18

LNG READY SOLUTION USING A MARK FIT LNG FUEL TANK OPERATING UP TO 2 BARG: THE CASE OF VLOC

LNG READY SOLUTION USING A MARK FIT LNG FUEL TANK OPERATING UP TO 2 BARG: THE CASE OF VLOC. Jacques Danton– GTT. Introduction. Emission control area coming into effect -> LNG fuel interesting alternative for marine propulsion GTT offering new solutions for the use of LNG as a fuel:

lisagriffin
Download Presentation

LNG READY SOLUTION USING A MARK FIT LNG FUEL TANK OPERATING UP TO 2 BARG: THE CASE OF VLOC

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. LNG READY SOLUTION USING A MARK FIT LNG FUEL TANK OPERATING UP TO 2 BARG: THE CASE OF VLOC Jacques Danton– GTT

  2. Introduction • Emission control area coming into effect -> LNG fuel interesting alternative for marine propulsion • GTT offering new solutions for the use of LNG as a fuel: • New Mark FIT technology -> better use of space inside the ship • New approach regarding the installation of LNG tanks on ships • Raising of pressure inside the tank to 2 bar -> more flexibility • LNG fuel especially interesting for Australia due to local ressources

  3. Mark FIT: design philosophy

  4. Mark FIT: volumetric efficiency • Mark FIT allows a wide range of possible angles • Mark FIT optimizes the space dedicated to LNG fuel thanks to unmatched volumetric efficiency

  5. VLOC • LNG interesting for Very Large Ore Carrier • Several possibilities regarding the retrofit philosophy • Typical VLOC: LOA = 300m; up to 250000 dwt • Range: 12000 nm -> 5000m3 of LNG required • One specifity: 1 additional cargo for use for LNG containment

  6. Newbuild • Identical approach as LNG Carriers • Membrane installed directly on the hull during construction • Maximization of the LNG volume • Cheapest solution for LNG use

  7. Retrofit • Several option for retrofit operation: • Installation of membrane inside the hold n°8 • Jumboisation • Installation of an exoskeleton inside the hold n°8 • Installation of an exoskeleton on deck • Necessity to prepare LNG conversion at design stage to insure feasibility and avoid additional cost during retrofit operation • Retrofit of engines (if not dual fuel) must also be considered and anticipated

  8. Retrofit by jumboisation • Section containing fully equipped LNG tank and fuel gas handling system is added to the ship • No loss of cargo space

  9. Retrofit using an exoskeleton • A self standing tank equipped with membrane is installed on the ship • Work mostly done in the shipyard before ship immobilization -> reduced immobilization time • Possibility to include the fuel gas handling system in the structure

  10. Exoskeleton on deck • First option: install the exoskeleton on deck • Easy and quick operation • Minimal welding work • No additional hold is needed by room on deck is required

  11. Exoskeleton inside the hull • Other option is to install the tank inside a hold • More complex operation • No wasted space • Weight optimization by integrating the tank to the hull

  12. Impact of retrofit operations

  13. Cost of using LNG • 20% more CAPEX for newbuilding LNG fuelled ship compared to conventional • 5% more compared to ships with scrubbers and EGR / SCR • LNG ready ship a little more expensive than conventional but most of the cost comes from the retrofit operation • Loss of cargo space depending on LNG tank location • Loss of vessel time due to retrofit operation to be taken into account

  14. Why 2 barg? • Longer holding time, with or without spraying, during blackout periods or extended period at anchor -> more flexibility during ship operation • Boil-off gas generated during bunkering operations is kept inside the tank for future use -> more flexibility • Ability to bunker warmer LNG -> More flexibility toward LNG supply Holding time for a small tank; Larger tanks will result in longer holding time

  15. IGF and 2 barg • Pressure inside LNG tanks historically limited to 0.7 barg in IGC Code • MARVS usually at 0.25 bar on LNGC -> decision not justified by the code but by other consideration (additional weight, operational needs…) • FEA now extremely common and reliable -> no problem in dimensioning a structure supporting 2 barg • No problem for membrane technology • 2 possibilities in the code to go to 2 barg • Alternative design • Limit state design

  16. Impact of 2 barg on the ship • No impact on GTT membrane • No impact on the ship if exoskeleton is on deck but around 50% more steel in the exoskeleton • If tank integrated to the hull, impact on the ship is dependant of the scantling. In case of VLOC, scantling are important enough due to heavy cargo loads

  17. Impact of 2 barg on cost • CAPEX: • Only related to additional steel weight • Not significant on VLOC (already very strong hull) • 15 additional tons for liquid and gas dome • OPEX: • No need to use Boil-off gas management solution thanks to longer holding time

  18. Conclusion • Mark FIT is an interesting option to comply with new norms: • Based on reliable and sea-proven technical choices • Maximization of the volume of LNG stored • Retrofit options for all configurations • Abundance of LNG in Australia make supply easier and cheaper • Most significant problems regarding flexibility solved by raising pressure to 2 bar: • LNG supply • Ease of use by the crew

More Related