Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Hong Kong
0,5-0,05%?
ECA Limit
1st July 2010
1% Sulphur
Max
Global Limit
1st Jan 2012
3.5% Sulphur Max
ECA Limit
1st Jan 2015
0.1% Sulphur Max
Global Limit
Jan 2020 OR 1st Jan 2025
0.5% Sulphur Max
Subject to 2018 Feasibility
Study
1st
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
New ECA
August 2012
Coastal USA & Canada
1st
Demand for 0,1% Sulphur max. will be met mainly by the use of middle distillate
fuels (Low Sulphur MGO/MDO)
Other solutions :
-Use of SOx scrubbing technology
-HFO can respect 0,1% S such as Exxon mobile ECA 50 but have still a very limited
availability
2020-2025
ECA 1% S
ECA 0.1% S
2010
2015
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Residual Max 1.5%
Distillate Max 0.1%
HFO consequences:
Higher demand for middle distillates fuels (Low Sulphur MGO/MDO) will further deteriorate
provided HFO due to severer conversion methods required to meet additional market
demands (deteriorated ignition + combustion + fuel stability properties)
Fuel change over from Jan 2015 being between HFO and middle distillate L.S. MGO/MDO is a
higher risk to compatibility
Souring HFO prices dictate slow steaming operation further challenges the ignition and
combustion
Use of middle distillate fuel within ECA results to prolonged storage times of HFO challenging
its stability
LS MGO/MDO
M/E operation with middle distillate L.S. MGO/MDO will require additional storage space for
sufficient ship range within ECA regions. Change of tank allocation will require costly cleaning
procedures
Middle distillate L.S. MGO/MDO expected increased use is associated with proportionally
increased risk for poor lubricity issues.
Prolonged storage of middle distillate L.S. MGO/MDO does increase the risk for fuel
destabilization.
Interest for more light fraction products, not in residual fuel oil = deeper
conversion!
FIA/FCA
Fuel ignition/combustion
analysis
Combustion Pressure Trace
D=density at 15C
V=viscosity (cst)
t= viscosity temperature C
10.0
ECN = 13
ECN = 8
8.0
good fuel?
6.0
4.0
2.0
problem fuel?
Ignition delay
0.0
0
10
15
20
25
Time (msec)
ROHR (bar/msec)
4.0
ECN = 13
ECN = 8
Efficient
combustion
3.0
2.0
Long combustion
period
1.0
0.0
0
10
15
Time (msec)
20
25
Improve spray pattern exposing more fuel to charge air (improve atomization)
Release free radicals for more vapor production (influence earlier ignition)
Reduce droplet size (less mass) allowing faster heat up and earlier ignition
Smaller coke particles require less time for complete burn through
2+
Carbon
particle
Iron oxide
Iron oxide
2 Fe2O3 + 3C 4 Fe + 3 CO2
FeO + C Fe + CO
Iron oxide
Pressure Trace
EC
EC
EMC
ABP
PMR
MCP
AR = Accumulated ROHR
EC = End of Combustion
ID = Ignition Delay
Bar/ms
Max PI
Bar
Max ROHR
0.9 Max PI
EC = End of Combustion
AR
PCP
ID
0.1 Max PI
0.01 Max PI
Time
Time
Basefuel
with
Octamar
F35
16
6.29
7.90
14.58
22.82
Parameter
ECN
ID
MCD
EMC
EC
Description
Estimated Cetane Number
Ignition Delay
Main Combustion Delay
End of Main Combustion
End of Combustion
Unit
msec
msec
msec
msec
Basefuel
13.3
6.74
8.54
17.28
26.74
Repeatability (r)
+/N/A
0.13338
0.19574
0.57508
1.16480
PCP
MCP
ABP
msec
msec
msec
1.80
8.73
9.47
0.13271
0.54353
0.95310
1.61
6.68
8.24
maxROHR
PMR
AR
bar/msec
msec
-
1.35
10.14
7.54
0.11478
0.4593655
0.92280
1.89
9.14
7.89
KEY
Source Cimac
2,341 Hours
2.07%
Fuel cost is a major operational cost and cuurent trend is that fuel
prices may further increase.
8
2
Figure 2.1 gives the relative distribution of the day-to-day running costs by vessel type
of vessels operating between Finland and other countries and sailing under the Finnish
or a foreign1 flag, according to the Finnish Vessel Costs Survey 2006. Cost factors are
proportionately tied to vessel type and size. Seven vessel types are examined: container,
container feeder2, conventional dry cargo, dry bulk and ro-ro vessels, car and passenger
ferries and tankers. The comparisons given here were made by vessel type according to
the mean value for their draught categories3. It will be seen from the diagram that fuel
costs account for the largest share of the vessel costs for all vessel types now, and especially container vessels (fuel prices as at 2006: container vessels 54%, conventional dry
cargo vessels 38%, dry bulk vessels 40%, tankers 33 %, ro-ro vessels 36%, and car and
passenger ferries 30%)4.
100 %
90 %
80 %
70 %
Fuel
60 %
Overhead
Insurance
50 %
40 %
Capital expenditure
30 %
20 %
10 %
0%
Container
Conventional dry
cargo
Dry bulk
Tankers
Ro-ro
Easiest and most popular measure for reducing the vessel fuel cost is
via reducing vessel speed /engine load
According to Tests carried out by Maersk Line
Reduce vessel speed by 20% (60% engine load) results in Fuel Consumption and
CO2 emissions reduction of 10%.
Reduce vessel speed by 50% (10% engine load) results in fuel consumption and
CO2 emissions reduction of 30%.
Emma Maersk:
Slow steaming can save 4000 ton of fuel
on a one way voyage from Europe to
Singapore. This with todays HFO price is
around 2,4$ million saving!
Exhaust gas economiser Low exhaust flow and poor combustion leading to
increased depositing. Can result in uptake fire.
Risk of cold corrosion in combustion chamber and exhaust gas system Lower
exhaust gas temperatures at low load. 1,05
1
0,95
0,9
0,85
0,8
0
0,5
1,5
2,5
1,01
1
0,99
0,98
0,97
0,96
0,95
0,94
0
0,5
1,5
2,5
TC Cutout?
No Additive
With
Octamar
F35C
Diff %
*Daily
Saving
47%
No
182.13
180.27
1.02%
$681
41%
Yes
170.73
168.88
1.67%
$1055
50%
25%
be g/kWh
192.8
214
189.7
206.8
%-Satz
98.39
96.64
% Improvement
1.61
3.36
HFO HS Tank
95C
Mixing
Column
100% HFO HS
100% HFO LS
HFO LS Tank
95C
Quicker change
over may cause
fuel pump
thermal shock,
or gassing up
in changeover
column.
Mixing
Column
100% HFO
100% MGO
LS MGO Tank
20C
Function of a Stabiliser:
Simulate natural resins that have
been removed by secondary
refining which keep the asphaltenes
emulsified.
Function of a Dispersant:
Re-emulsify the existing
agglomerations - clean up effect,
make good fuel
from sludge.
Legend
Flocculation and
deposits due to
large
agglomerates
Asphaltenes
Resins
Aromatics
Saturated
Asphaltene kept
in suspension by
the help of
dispersant
Resins
Aromatics
Saturated
Dispersant
test (compatibility)
-P-value test (reserve stability)
Hot Filter tests (Max: 0.10% m/m )
0 min
1 min
2 min
3 min
4 min
Without additive
5 min
6 min
0 min
60 min
With additive
Turbiscan (RSN)
No Additive
50ppm
Octamar
BT-25
No Additive
50ppm
Octamar BT25
HFO 1
0.03
0.50
70%HFO
30%MGO
0.13
0.03
10.63
0.60
HFO 2
0.03
10.2
70%HFO
30%MGO
0.18
0.04
11.2
Source Lintec
2.00
1.80
Note - Vessel in
Drydock Jan 2011.
1.60
Slugde %
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Pre Trial
Sep-11
Oct-11
Nov-11
Dec-11
Feb-11
Month
2.0000
1.5000
1.0000
0.5000
month
Dec-08
Nov-08
Oct-08
Sep-08
Aug-08
Jul-08
Jun-08
May-08
Apr-08
0.0000
Mar-08
Sludge/Fuel x 100
Monthly Total
60 mg/kg
Source - DNVPS
Middle distillate fuel tank capacities are designed according to the auxiliary engines
fuel consumption requirements. When used to feed main engine the vessels cruising
range is reduced to around 3 days!
Typical ship fuel tank arrangements VS sea cruising range when using distillate fuel on M/E)
Source ABS
T1
ENGINE RM
T2
T3
T4
T5
C2
C3
LS MGO/ MDO
What is Lubricity?
Stribeck curve
Upper
specimen
Lower Specimen
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Overall Averages (182 Samples)
WSD = 372
Viscosity = 2.93cSt
Sulphur = 660ppm (0.066%)
7.2% of fuels failed specification
(>520m)*
Failed samples were bunkered:
from Long Beach, USA
from Augusta, Sicily
from Rostock, Germany
from Taranto, Italy
from St Croix, Virgin Islands
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
Lubricity
Additive
Lower Specimen
0
50
100
500ppm Sulphur
50ppm Sulphur
150
200
350ppm Sulphur
10ppm Sulphur
250
Next revision of ISO8217 will include Biofuel Grades for distillate Fuels
These will contain a maximum limit of FAME at 7% (as per EN590
automotive diesel)
This could further negatively impact:
Price
Stability
Cold flow properties
Resistance to microbial activity
3
30
25
Basefuel
Basefuel
+ Additive
LI5 Plus
2
20
15
1
10
5
0
Lubricating Oil Selection during change over between HFO 3,5%S and
middle distillate MGO 0,1% S
The current change over practice is between 3,5% and 1 % Sulphur HFO fuels
(2,5% Sulphur difference)
Post January 2015 the change over will be between 3,5% S HFO and 0,1% MGO
(3,4% Sulphur difference)
In general Low TBN cylinder oils should be chosen for low sulphur fuels, and high
TBN oils for high sulphur fuels.
The tolerance period for which the engine can be run on low sulphur fuel and high
TBN cylinder oil is very dependent on engine cylinder oil feed rate and the
difference between two sulphur contents of used fuels.
Post January 2015 change over procedure will result in a + 36 % higher sulphur
difference
Evaluate the engines actual cylinder condition after the first operating period on
low sulphur fuel, and act accordingly. If excessive piston crown deposits are seen
to be forming, operate at low lubricating oil feed rate or change to a low BN
cylinder oil.
In all cases the engine manufacturers recommendations need to be followed.
MARINE
HEATING
REFINERY
PERFORMANCE
POWER
FBC