Ship efficiency over time and slow steaming

Ship efficiency over time and slow steaming

Tripartite 2008

Beijing

8-9 November

Ship efficiency

Question:

Have ship become more efficient over time?

SFOC for Diesel Engines

Fuel consumption trends

• Statement:

• When freight rates are low:

• Yards have thin order books

• Competition between yards tough

• Innovative designs win the day

• When freight rates are high:

• Owners queue up to order ships

• Yards reluctant to change Standard Designs

• No incentive for innovation

Fuel consumption trends

• Early 1980’s to early 1990’s:• A few ups and downs but otherwise a relatively stable

period.

• Early 1990’s to 2002 (incl. Asian Crises 1997):• Poor freight rates. • Tough times for the yards• Many EU yards close

• 2002-2008:• High freight rates• Ordering boom• New yards emerge• Emphasis on cargo intake

Fuel consumption trends

• In 2008 the Shipping Industry initiated a study on fuel trends.

• Lloyd’s Register Marine Consultancy Services carried out the study.

• Following ships were used:

Fuel consumption trends

• Following formulas were used to calculate the fuel consumption and related Energy Efficiency Index:

Aframax trend

VLCC trend

Handy Size Bulker trend

Panamax Bulker trend

Cape Size Bulker trend

1800 TEU Containership trend

4500 TEU Containership trend

Historical trend - Containerships

•Example – Economy of Scale:

•Sealand SL-7 vs. Maersk E-type

•Sealand McClean: Built 1973 1968 TEU 88 MW 31 knots450 t HFO/24h (Steam turbine)

•Emma Maersk: Built 2006 15,000 TEU 80 MW (88 MW incl. shaft motor) 25 knots 350t HFO/24h (Diesel engine)

Emma vs. McClean

Emma vs. McClean

• Energy Efficiency Index:

• SL-7: 950 g CO2/TEU*NM

• Maersk E-type: 115 g CO2/TEU*NM

• New 2000 TEU: 270 g CO2/TEU*NM

Slow Steaming

Container ships

0

40

80

120

160

200

240

280

320

14 16 18 20 22 24 26

Speed (knots)

To

tal o

il c

on

s. (

t/2

4 h

)

2000 TEU

4000 TEU

6000 TEU

8000 TEU

10000 TEU

Slow Steaming

8000 TEU Containership:

Reduce speed from 25kn -> 20kn = 20% =>

Fuel saving from 260 t/d –> 128 t/d = 51%

Slow Steaming

Scenario:

Move 10 mill TEU 5000 NM within one year (250 sailing days):

Transport work: 50 billion TEU*Miles

An infinite number of 8000 TEU ships available!

Slow Steaming

SPEED Sailing days Req. Nos. F.O.consumption Total CO2 index

    of ships per 24 hours consumption gCO2/TEU*NM

      per ship    

6 250 174 13 564236 35,0

8 250 130 18 585938 36,3

10 250 104 27 703125 43,6

12 250 87 39 846354 52,5

14 250 74 56 1041667 64,6

16 250 65 77 1253255 77,7

18 250 58 95 1374421 85,2

20 250 52 119 1549479 96,1

22 250 47 159 1882102 116,7

24 250 43 212 2300347 142,6

26 250 40 285 2854567 177,0

Slow Steaming

CO2 Index

Slow Steaming

Slow Steaming

Paper for WMTC Mumbai January 2009:

Optimized speed from a economical viewpoint, considering:

- Capital Cost- Operating Cost- Voyage Cost

On a route between Ningbo (China) and Bremerhaven (Germany) with a 6600 TEU containership the study gives an optimized speed of 17 kn (compared to 24 kn).

Ship efficiency

Questions?