Norwegian Maritime Use of LNG - GLMRI

Norwegian Maritime Use of LNG

GLMRI Research Team

Dr. Michael Parsons, Professor Emeritus, University of Michigan

Mr. Pat O’Hern (shipyard background) Mr. Rick Harkins (ship operations background)

Mr. Randolph Helland (USCG retired) Ms. Carol Wolosz, GLMRI Executive Director

Trip Overview 12-18 August 2012

Purpose: to provide a first-hand

assessment of maritime applications of LNG fuel on-going in Norway

Meetings and Facilities

• Rolls Royce Gas Engine Manufacturing

• Fjord1 LNG ferry operations and LNG bunkering

• Nearly completed Eidesvik LNG Platform Supply Vessel

• Kleven shipyard – builder of Eidesvik PSV

• Fiskerstrand shipyard – builder of latest Fjord1 LNG ferry

• Norwegian Maritime Authority

• Det Norske Veritas Ship Classification Society

Objectives of Trip • Include independent parties with extensive Great Lakes experience

• Tour propulsion plants of single fuel and dual fuel LNG fueled vessels

• Visit shipyards that have built both types of plants

• Observe LNG bunkering

• Visit Norwegian Maritime Authority (Coast Guard)

• Visit DNV Classification Society

The Gang

Approach

• Principal contacts and facilitators (thanks!) – Odd Horgen, General Sales Manager Merchant/Naval Engines, Rolls-Royce Bergen – John Hatley, Americas Vice President, Ship Power, Wärtsilä North America

• Strategy – make contacts at CEO level if possible

• Result – all objectives were accomplished – reception far exceeded expectations

Fjord1 Ferry Raunefjord • Single fuel Rolls

Royce Bergen plant • Delivered in 2007 • Emergency shut-

down safety design • Integrated electric

plant • 130m; 21 knots • 212 cars; 587 pax; 22 trailers • 6180 ekW total

Eidesvik’s PSV Viking Princess

• Dual fuel Wärtsilä plant

• Four weeks from delivery (9/14/12)

• Integrated electric plant

• Inherently safe engine room design

• 89.6 m long • 7,332 ekW total

The Shipyards Perspective of “LNG Fuel and Great Lakes Steamships”

Presented by: Great Lakes Maritime Consulting LLC

Initial Concern • Define the “Hazardous Zone”

– All ER/BR space? – Select spaces within?

Hazard Zone does not go away! • The “Space”, large or small, has,

– Redundant ventilation – Gas detection – Double wall boundaries Air locks / double wall pipe

*Slide Courtsey of Fiskerstrand Blrt As



“Protecting the path of Liquid/Gas”

From: • Bunker station, to: • LNG storage tank, to: • Cold box, to: • Gas valve unit, GVU, to: • Propulsion / Generator engine,

to: • Exit of exhaust stack

*Slide Courtsey of Fiskerstrand Blrt As



“Goals for Great Lakes Steamships”

• Minimize distance between units, and,

• Minimize volume of spaces protected

Inherently Safe Engine Room – Use double wall piping – Use containment structures – Separate ventilation systems – Appropriate gas detection

points



“Challenges” • Delivery, handling and lifting of 90 ton plus tanks • Double wall piping (including everything within path)

• Additional and separate ventilation systems • Addition of nitrogen generator for purging • Addition of water spray at bunker station • Additional gas detection systems (in pipe / spaces)

• Mid season layup – winter layup – remaining bunker levels • Being the “Pioneer”

– Engineering / regulatory / production • Cost justification?



“Advantages” • Elimination of ALL HFO related equipment • CLEAN engine room • Less engine maintenance requirements • Less dynamic machinery – fewer moving parts • CLEAN EMISSIONS

RAUNEFJORD LNG Bunkering Operations

•LNG tank truck refueling the land-side storage tanks

•Off-loading and loading of vehicles, trucks and passengers

•On-board during vessel transit

•LNG Bunkering Operations

RAUNEFJORD LNG Bunkering Operations

•LNG Bunkering Operations Fixed Piping Manifold/Bunkering Berth Operations during non-operating hours Purging/bunkering process •Next Steps Safety Work Permit NMA/DSB: Common Risk Assessment Refueling during loading/offloading?

Agenda •Trip Overview/Purpose

•Ferry Raundestaun LNG Fuel/Bunkering Operations

•Norwegian Maritime Authority

•Det Norske Veritas





























Some General Observations

• Young and talented officers • Crews preferred being on LNG ferries • Viking Princess had LNG onboard and was using one of its

smaller dual fuel generators for ship’s power dockside 4 weeks before delivery

• Norwegian LNG vessels are dry docked with LNG onboard • The nation appears proud of environmental implications

of LNG use – a marketable item • All vessels had modules built in a partner shipyard

Overall Conclusion

While the use of LNG fuel involves new, higher technology and additional safety considerations, the use of LNG as a marine fuel for non-LNG cargo vessels is now routine practice in Norway after the introduction of the ferry MV Glutra 12 years ago.

Special Thanks to • Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration: Dr. Carolyn Junemann, Michael Carter & Daniel Yuska • Michael Hitt, Odd Horgen, Jakob Nielsen, & Sindre Haberg, Rolls-Royce

Bergen, Bergen, NO • John Hatley, Paul Glandt, & Pete Jacobs, Wärtsilä North America, Inc. • Rolf Fiskerstrand & Ronny Kristiansen, Fiskerstrand Verft, Alesund, NO • Oscar Bergheim & officers and crew of Raunefjord, Fjord1 • Oystein Djupvik & Peter Husoy, Kleven Verft, Ulsteinvik, NO • Jan Fredrick Meling, Helge Vespestad & other officers and crew of Viking Princess, Eisdesvik, Bomlo, NO • Michael Aasland, Marius Leisner & Lars Petter Blikom, Det Norske Veritas, Hovik, NO • Lasse Karlsen & Oyvind Vormedal , Norwegian Maritime Authority,

Haugesund, NO

47

Documents

Norwegian Maritime Use of LNG - GLMRI