Sname 19 September 2015 Impact to marine fuels Lefteris Capatos - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sname 19 September 2015 Impact to marine fuels Lefteris Capatos

ECA = Emission Control Area Hong Kong 0,5-0,05%?

Global Limit ECA Limit Global Limit ECA Limit 1 st Jan 2020 OR 1 st Jan 2025 1 st July 2010 1 st Jan 2012 1 st Jan 2015 0.5% Sulphur Max 1% Sulphur 3.5% Sulphur Max 0.1% Sulphur Max Subject to 2018 Feasibility Max Study 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 New ECA EU Ports & Californian Coast 1 st August 2012 1 st Jan 2010 ECA = Emission Control Area Coastal USA & Canada 0.1% Sulphur Max 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

Projected Bunker Demand according to applied regulations Global 0.5% S Global 4,5% S Global 3.5% S 2012 2020-2025 SECA 1.5% S ECA 1% S ECA 0.1% S 500 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% Residual Max 1.0% Residual Max 4.5% Residual max 3.5% Distillate Max 0.1% Distillate Max 0.5% Distillate - Other

Impact of new 2015 legislations 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! Source BP statistical research

Fuel Ignition + combustion

Most common methods for measuring ignition and combustion FIA/FCA CCAI=Calculated Carbon Aromatic index Fuel ignition/combustion CII= Calculated Ignition Index analysis Combustion Pressure Trace D=density at 15C 10.0 V=viscosity (cst) "Normal fuel" , ECN = 29 ECN = 13 ECN = 8 t= viscosity temperature C 8.0 Pressure increase (bar) “good” fuel? 6.0 4.0 2.0 “problem” fuel? Ignition delay 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time (msec) Rate of Heat Release - ROHR 5.0 "Normal fuel" , ECN = 29 ECN = 13 ECN = 8 4.0 Efficient combustion ROHR (bar/msec) 3.0 2.0 Long combustion 1.0 period 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Time (msec)

Organic Combustion Improvers • 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

Effect of Fe has been extensively evaluated in several studies . Oxidation of Carbon Particulates during combustion is 16 times faster with Fe catalysts Fe catalysts reduce the ignition temperature of Carbon by approximately 125 ºC. 2+ Carbon particle Iron oxide Iron oxide Iron oxide 2 Fe 2 O 3 + 3C  4 Fe + 3 CO 2 FeO + C  Fe + CO

Response in FIA/FCA Test (IP541) – Example of Combined Fe catalyst + organic combustion improver (ignition + combustion ) EC EC EMC ABP PMR MCP Max PI Bar/ms 0.9 Max PI Max ROHR Bar MCD AR PCP ID 0.1 Max PI 0.01 Max PI Basefuel with Octamar™ Repeatability (r) Parameter Description Unit Basefuel +/- F35 ECN Estimated Cetane Number - 13.3 N/A 16 ID Ignition Delay msec 6.74 0.13338 6.29 MCD Main Combustion Delay msec 8.54 0.19574 7.90 EMC End of Main Combustion msec 17.28 0.57508 14.58 EC End of Combustion msec 26.74 1.16480 22.82 PCP Pre Combustion Period msec 1.80 0.13271 1.61 MCP Main Combustion Period msec 8.73 0.54353 6.68 ABP After Burning Period msec 9.47 0.95310 8.24 maxROHR Maximum Rate of Heat Release bar/msec 1.35 0.11478 1.89 PMR Position of maxROHR msec 10.14 0.4593655 9.14 AR Accumulated ROHR - 7.54 0.92280 7.89 KEY Positive Response - Outside r No Response - Within r

Improved ignition & combustion properties lead to less deposits = improved efficiency & reliability

Preservation of efficiency between maintenance intervals (Field Experience Example – Indonesian Power Station) Reduced deposit formation especially of Turbocharger / nozzle ring preserves efficiency overtime. • Deterioration of efficiency in non additised engine equates to 2.07% over 2,341 hours. • Test on 2x Warstila 9 TM620 engines Engine No 1 Engine No 2 (additised) 2.07% 2,341 Hours Source Cimac

Fuel cost is a major operational cost and cuurent trend is that fuel prices may further increase. 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % Fuel Overhead Insurance 50 % Repairs and maintenance Crew (navigation) 40 % Capital expenditure 30 % 20 % 10 % 0 % Container Conventional dry Dry bulk Tankers Ro-ro Car and passenger cargo ferries

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 CO 2 emissions reduction of 10%. • Reduce vessel speed by 50% (10% engine load) results in fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions reduction of 30%. Studies have linked CO2 emissions to HFO consumption at a rate of Emma Maersk: 1: 3.1144 meaning that for each Slow steaming can save 4000 ton of fuel consumed ton of fuel 3,1144 tons of on a one way voyage from Europe to CO2 are emitted! Singapore. This with today’s HFO price is around 2,4$ million saving!

Slow steaming with poor ignition + combustion fuels • Reduced efficiency of turbocharger and increased deposit formation (Low exhaust flow means inability to maintain sufficient boost pressure) • Poor combustion leading to deposits on pistons, cylinder heads, valves, injectors, scavenge spaces etc. • 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 1,5 2 2,5 3

Various Solutions to slow steaming side effects Slow steaming side effects mostly orientate from T/C poor efficiency! • Sequential turbocharging • Variable pitch turbines and nozzle rings • Turbocharger cut-out • Cylinder cut-out Combustion improver / catalysts • To enhance fuel ignition (critical for slow steaming) • To enhance fuel droplet oxidation • To maintain T/C optimum efficiency (deposit free) T/C efficiency vs deposits Source - MAN Diesel 1,01 1 0,99 0,98 0,97 0,96 0,95 0,94 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5

S.F.C. reductions are obtained by releasing more energy from every droplet of fuel SFOC Case Study – European Container Line SFOC (g/kWhr) Engine TC Cutout? No Additive With Diff % *Daily Load Octamar™ Saving F35C 47% No 182.13 180.27 1.02% $681 41% Yes 170.73 168.88 1.67% $1055 * Daily saving includes additive cost 11,000 TEU vessel – MAN B&W 12K98ME-C Mk7 – 72,240kW Approach to measuring SFOC on a ship Many short 6 hour test runs, alternating between additive use and not to build large data set All testing completed where steady operation can be maintained for whole test period One fuel in constant use for whole test Fundamentally calculated by accurate recording of: Engine Power Volumetric fuel flow converted to Mass via Volume Correction Factor

SFOC Results Conducted by Caterpillar Motoren - Kiel • In response to their client request, Caterpillar Motoren (MaK) tested Octamar F35 on their engine test bed, under reduced load operating conditions . Innospec Fuel additive F35 6M43C HFO-Betrieb Motorleistung / Engine Power - Load 50% 25% be g/kWh 192.8 214 be g/kWh mit Additiv 189.7 206.8 %-Satz 98.39 96.64 % Improvement 1.61 3.36

Summary : Combustion additive advantages to severely converted residual fuels burned under slow steaming operation Fuel ignition • Optimize fuel spray pattern (reduce droplet mass – increase fuel surface) • Faster carbon oxidation with Fe combustion catalysts ( reduce fuel ignition temp) critical for engines under slow steaming Fuel combustion • Provide more time for complete combustion • Complete burn out of fuel / Utilize all carbon into energy – not deposits = Specific fuel consumption reduction Deposit reduction • Preserve engine efficiency between scheduled maintenances and reduce SFC by keeping deposit free: • Piston crowns, rings, injector nozzles and valves • Economiser • Turbocharger – Nozzle Ring and blades