View
213
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
22/09/2011
1
LNG as a fuel: Case studies in Korea & Sweden and partially from TEN T project
LNG Fuel Forum 21st September 2011
partially from TEN‐T project
Johan Gahnströmjog@sspa.se+46 31 772 90 04
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
SSPA provides maritime solutions
Ship DesignShip Design Maritime OperationsMaritime OperationsResearchResearch
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
22/09/2011
2
Agenda
• Risks associated with LNG bunkering
• New standards and• New standards and guidelines, how do they influence developments?
• Various scenarios for distributing LNG
• Future outlook for LNG as a f l
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
fuel
Overview of LNG as a fuel project in Korea
Task 1Study of current status of fuel
supply for Domestic shipsKOGAS
International regulations review on LNG bunkeringSwedish Party
Forecast on LNG fuelled vessels in
KoreaSwedish Party
Produce a schematic
distribution system for different ship
typesSwedish Party
Risk and safety analysis of LNG
bunkeringSwedish Party
Application feasibility of international regulation to
Korean RegulationKOGAS
KOGAS PROJECT PARTNERS
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
KOGAS PROJECT PARTNERS
22/09/2011
3
’A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure and test of recommendations’
• The aim of the project is to set up recommendations on the establishment of a marine LNG infrastructure encompassing a “hard” on filling stations and a “soft” on regulation and industry standards etc.
• The study Started in May and be finalized in early 2012. It is part of the Trans‐European Transport Network (TEN‐T) – Motorways of the Seas (MoS) and the project, with a budget exceeding 1 million Euros, will end
d
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
up in a strategic decision paper.
LNG hazards –another focusDifferent from bunker hazards:
• Oil related hazards –environment impact
• LNG related hazards –human risks/public health
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
22/09/2011
4
Hazards with LNG bunkering
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Consequences
Categories of Outcomes after LNG Release:
• Cryogenic Damagey g g
• Asphyxiation
• Pool Fire
• Vapour Cloud Fire
• Explosions
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Explosions
• Rapid Phase Transition (RPT)
22/09/2011
5
LNG Bunkering ‐ Identified risks ID risk index hazard description
1.1 6Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - resulting in leakage from bunker vessel
1.2-1.4 5Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - resulting in leakage from LNG fuelled vessel
1.23, 2.1, 2.18, 3.1, 3.2
3-4Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - damage to facilities onshore
1 18 1 22 2 13
ID risk index hazard description
1.1 6Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - resulting in leakage from bunker vessel
1.2-1.4 5Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - resulting in leakage from LNG fuelled vessel
1.23, 2.1, 2.18, 3.1, 3.2
3-4Manoeuvering errors causing hard collision - damage to facilities onshore
1 18 1 22 2 131.18, 1.22, 2.13, 2,17, 3.5, 3.20
2-4 Lack of standards/preventative measures
1.5, 1.17, 2.12 5 Inadequte safety management1.6, 1.26, 2.5, 3.4,
3.85-6
Incorrect connection/disconnection causing damage to bunkering equipment/leakage of LNG
1.12, 2.6, 2.7, 3.11 3-4 Mismatch in BOG handling
3.21, 3.22 5Excessive pressure/pressure surge causing failure in equipment/tank
1.7, 1.8, 1.11, 1.27, 2.3, 3.6, 3.10
5-6 Pipe rupture or valve failure due to human/technical error
3.9 3 Leakage from underground pipes1.9, 1.10, 2.4, 3.7 4 Incorrect handling caused by human facor
1.13, 2.8, 3.12 3-4 Blackout onboard LNG fuelled vessel1.14 3 Blackout onboard bunker vessel3 13 3 Bl k t i l d b d b k f iliti
1.18, 1.22, 2.13, 2,17, 3.5, 3.20
2-4 Lack of standards/preventative measures
1.5, 1.17, 2.12 5 Inadequte safety management1.6, 1.26, 2.5, 3.4,
3.85-6
Incorrect connection/disconnection causing damage to bunkering equipment/leakage of LNG
1.12, 2.6, 2.7, 3.11 3-4 Mismatch in BOG handling
3.21, 3.22 5Excessive pressure/pressure surge causing failure in equipment/tank
1.7, 1.8, 1.11, 1.27, 2.3, 3.6, 3.10
5-6 Pipe rupture or valve failure due to human/technical error
3.9 3 Leakage from underground pipes1.9, 1.10, 2.4, 3.7 4 Incorrect handling caused by human facor
1.13, 2.8, 3.12 3-4 Blackout onboard LNG fuelled vessel1.14 3 Blackout onboard bunker vessel3 13 3 Bl k t i l d b d b k f iliti
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
3.13 3 Blackout in land based bunker facilities2.10, 3.14 5 Mooring failure due to wind/waves
1.15, 1.16, 2.11, 3.15-3.17, 3.19
4 External factors - Forces of nature
3.18 5 Sabotage/terror attacks1.20, 2.15, 2.19 3-4 Cargo handling equipment/cargo damaging LNG tank1.19, 1.21, 1.24,
2.14, 2.165-6
Cargo/passenger handling causing damage or leakage of LNG at bunkering station or LNG carrier
1.25, 2.20 6 Successive escalation 2.9 4 Engine or pump breakdown on tank truck
3.13 3 Blackout in land based bunker facilities2.10, 3.14 5 Mooring failure due to wind/waves
1.15, 1.16, 2.11, 3.15-3.17, 3.19
4 External factors - Forces of nature
3.18 5 Sabotage/terror attacks1.20, 2.15, 2.19 3-4 Cargo handling equipment/cargo damaging LNG tank1.19, 1.21, 1.24,
2.14, 2.165-6
Cargo/passenger handling causing damage or leakage of LNG at bunkering station or LNG carrier
1.25, 2.20 6 Successive escalation 2.9 4 Engine or pump breakdown on tank truck
Risk control options, RCO
Risk treatment
• ESD/ERS systems to prevent LNG release and to / y pminimize released quantity quantities
• Cryogenic material – mitigating consequences of release on deck
• Fire protection
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
• Prevention of human error and organizational weaknesses
22/09/2011
6
Accidents at sea
• Relatively small risk of groundings according to earlier studies
• Risk is connected to the relative speed
• Local conditions always important to examine
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Qatar, Ras Laffan: The worlds largest LNG exporting port
So…. is it dangerous?5 July 2011, NMD (Norwegian Maritime Directorate) will Equal the regulations governing the carriage of refrigerated gas on ships with the regulations that apply to other types of gases and hazardous materials.
“Compared with the transport of other dangerous goods, it is found that the transport of cooled gas in a controlled manner does not pose any significant increase in risk. It is also pointed out that the transport of other goods, not marked as dangerous, may pose a greater risk when requirements for vehicles, training and procedures are lower for this type of transport. For example, a fire in a vehicle transports ordinary combustible materials have a greater chance of developing
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
ordinary combustible materials have a greater chance of developing into a major fire than a fire in the ADR unit has to spread to the LNG tank.”
22/09/2011
7
New standards and guidelines
How do they influence development?
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
ISO standard(28460‐2010) Installation and equipment for liquefied natural gas — Ship‐to‐shore interface and port operations (December 2010)
SCOPESCOPE:• Pilotage and vessel traffic services (VTS);
• Tug and mooring boat operators;
• Terminal operators;
• Ship operators;
S li f b k l b i d d h
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
• Suppliers of bunkers, lubricants and stores and other providers of services whilst the LNG carrier is moored alongside the terminal.
22/09/2011
8
Gudielines for ship to ship transfer
• Published March 2011, Scope: Applies to seagoing ships.
• Information exchange before, during, after LNG transfer
• Ship compatibility: Mooring, ESD, ERS, parallel body, vapour management etc.
• Procedures alongside: Cool down, Cargo transfer etc.• Equipment: Cargo hoses, fenders etc.
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Selection of other rules and guidelines• GIIGNL (The International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers )
– LNG Custody Transfer Handbook (2010)
• OCIMF (The Oil Companies International Marine Forum )
– Design and Construction Spec for Marine Loading Arms
– Int. Safety Guide for Oil Tankers & Terminals, ISGOTT
– Mooring Equipment guidelines
• PIANC (Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses)
– Approach Channels, a Guide for Design
– Guidelines for the Design of Fender Systems
• CEN (European Committee for Standardization)
– EN 1532, 2009 Installation and Equipment for LNG ‐ Ship to Shore Interface
– EN 1473, 2007, Installation and equipment for liquefied natural gas Design of onshore installations (and EN 13645)
• NFPA (National Fire Protection Association, USA )
– NFPA 59A,Standard for the Production, Storage, and Handling of LNG
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
NFPA 59A,Standard for the Production, Storage, and Handling of LNG
• SIGTTO (Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators )
– Site selection and design for LNG ports and jetties
• EU (European Union)– SEVESO Directive, Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major‐accident
hazards involving dangerous substances
22/09/2011
9
Future
• IMO ‐ IGF code, rules for the receiving ship, the ship using LNG as fuelusing LNG as fuel
• ISO Committee working on bunker station standards
• TEN‐T project to work on small scale LNG/Bunkering from sea side perspective.
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
• BunGas
End users
ShipsT kLarge LNG
IntermediateLNG
Truck
Truck
LNG Bunker/feeder vesselFeeder vessel
Truck
TrucksCarsPower generationGas gridEtc.
Large LNGterminal
Gas pipelineSmall scale liquefaction plant
Feeder vessel terminal Truck
LNG Bunker/feeder vessel
Pipeline/direct filling
Photo: Gasun
ie
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Photo: Gasun
ie
Photo: SSPA
Photo: SSPA
22/09/2011
10
Distribution system, South Korea
LNG Terminal
LNG Terminal
Planned LNGTerminal
l
LNG TerminalTong Yeong
Planned LNG Terminal
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
LNG TerminalNot KOGAS
Tong Yeong
Relative small distance between LNG terminals and large portsRelative small distance between LNG terminals and large ports
Focus on large ports initiallyFocus on large ports initially
LNG infrastructure in Northern Europe
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
22/09/2011
11
Where is the bottleneck?
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Vessels in the Northern Europe, 2011Type of shipsin % of total number of ships Age of ships in % of all ships
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
22/09/2011
12
Potential of LNG as a fuel 2020
• 180,000M3/week in Northern Europe (Case A) (4.2 milj. ton /Year)
6 000 000
LNG demand SECA-area
Case ACase BCase C
• Approximately 1000 LNG fuelled shipsAppr. 10% of the whole fleet
2 000 000
3 000 000
4 000 000
5 000 000
t per
yea
r
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 20200
1 000 000
LNG and SSPA • Terminal layout and operations
• Logistics and Infrastructure
developmentdevelopment
• LNG as fuel, technology
• Risk analysis, Formal safety assessment
• Environmental Assessment
• Simulations
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
• Regulations
• Fairways and aids to navigation design
• Ship design (HULL)Full Full mission simulation by SSPA on LNG terminalmission simulation by SSPA on LNG terminal
22/09/2011
13
LNG Projects at SSPA
LNG terminals and LNG as a fuel• Feasibility study on LNG as a Fuel in Europe, DMA, EU TEN‐T 2011‐• AGA, bunkering Viking Line ferry in Stockholm, 2011
I f t t d l t f iti f LNG S di h G
Design, LNG Vessels• Centromor, Poland• Chantiers de l'Atlantique, France
• Infrastructure development for maritime use of LNG, Swedish Gas Association, 2010
• Feasibility study for LNG bunkering in South Korea, KOGAS, 2010‐2011
• Simulation study of new LNG terminal at Nynäshamn, AGA Gas AB, 2009
• Nautical qualitative risk assessment for the LNG terminal inOrlovka Bay/ Russia, n.n, 2008
• HAZID for LNG‐Bunkering in Stockholm, n.n, 2010• Maritime risk analysis for LNG handling in the port of Gothenburg,
Risks associated with bunkering of LNG, Simulations for alternative locations for an LNG terminal, Alternative to bunker ship, LNG GOT, 2009‐
• Baltic Supply, EU‐funded research project, 2009‐• Effship, Efficient shipping with low emissions, EU‐funded research
project, 2010‐• MAGALOG, Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) as a fuel for ships, EU‐
• Daewoo Shipbuilding• Drammen Slip & Verksted, Norway• Engenavi, Brazil• Gdynia Shipyard, Poland• General Dynamics, USA• Halla Heavy Industries, Rep. of Korea• Hudong/Chantiers de l'Atlantique, China/France• Hyundai Heavy Industries, Rep. of Korea• Industrias Reunidas Caneco SA• IZAR (AESA), Spain• Jiangnan, China• Kockums Varv AB, Sweden• Malmros, Sweden• Moss Rosenberg Verft, Norway
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
funded research project, 2008• Safedor, Hazid for LNG tankers, EU‐funded research project, 2005• Efficient, Safe and Sustainable Traffic at Sea – EfficienSea, European
Union, 2009‐2011• Maritime Safety in the Baltic sea, 2010
g , y• Samsung Heavy Industries, Rep. of Korea• Sun Shipbuilding, USA• Svendborg Skibsvaerft, Denmark• Valmet Oy, Finland• Wärtsilä, Finland
Knowledge ‐driven developmentMarket driven applied R&D
Commercial Assets Commercial Assets for the Maritime Clusterfor the Maritime Cluster
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Scientific Scientific AchievementsAchievements
22/09/2011
14
SSPA provides maritime solutions
Ship DesignShip Design Maritime OperationsMaritime OperationsResearchResearch
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Some of our clients…
YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER
Recommended