Marine fuel Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Considering that the use of oil today is the dominant marine fuel within the maritime domain, this paper will explore the effort to preserve the arctic environment by limiting the use of marine fuel oil. In August 2011, International... more

Considering that the use of oil today is the dominant marine fuel within the maritime domain, this paper will explore the effort to preserve the arctic environment by limiting the use of marine fuel oil. In August 2011, International Maritime Organization (IMO) amended International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) to include Chapter 9 of Annex I, prohibiting the use of heavy grade oils as fuel (as well as cargo carriage) in the sea area south of latitude 60° South. This, along with the recent adoption of the Polar Code, is a clear indicator of increased global interest to establish safer practices. The intent of this analysis will be to explore the use of alternative fuels, specifically in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG), in order to reduce the environmental impact of oil spilled within the pristine Arctic waters in the event of an accidental discharge as well as decrease air pollutants.
When using a fuel that has the physical properties of oil, sea trade being its largest modal consumer, there is inherent pollution associated with emissions and routine maintenance/operations. Furthermore, in case of an oil spill, the consequences can be devastating and the resources needed to combat the effects are extremely demanding. Although there are many alternatives to oil, in today’s contemporary energy portfolio, LNG has become the most viable and promising fuel alternative. This industry has grown exponentially over the last few years, with technical capabilities steadily improving.
In summary, the authors envisage that further regulations strictly limiting the use of oil within the Polar Regions will significantly reduce the environmental impacts in terms of pollution (accidental or operational). As data has shown today, LNG is scientifically proven to reduce emissions released into the atmosphere. Moreover, LNG’s composition is such that when spilled, it will evaporate rapidly causing negligible effects normally associated with oil: therefore, the resulting in the protection of a sensitive ecosystem, minimizing clean-up efforts and subsequently curbing the need for expensive pollution response inventories.

Pre-combustion onboard carbon capture could be part of lowering the environmental impact from the shipping sector.

This project was on the impacts of the new sulphur emission regulations that came into force in January 2015 in North Western Europe and their effects on coastal dry bulk shipping. This has been achieved by identifying the means of... more

This project was on the impacts of the new sulphur emission regulations that came into force in January 2015 in North Western Europe and their effects on coastal dry bulk shipping. This has been achieved by identifying the means of implementation along with their drawbacks, with particular attention paid to scrubbers. This was done by contacting European coastal dry bulk companies and port authorities to evaluate the situation and then, using available information, looking at the environmental impact of the reduction in sulphur emissions and what is expected to happen in the future. From here, the future of the coastal dry bulk market was analysed, with projections and possible scenarios of what is to be expected. From this, it was concluded that although coastal shipping will survive, smaller companies will struggle to stay afloat over the next decade, with the rise of capital-costs and operational costs push-ing up freight rates and making other modes of transport more attractive over sea-based transportation.

The GHG footprint of LNG is worse than this of the current conventional fuels, argues Mr. Panos Zachariadis, Technical Director of Atlantic Bulk Carriers Management. With this respect, LNG should be viewed only as a SOx and NOx compliant... more

The GHG footprint of LNG is worse than this of the current conventional fuels, argues Mr. Panos Zachariadis, Technical Director of Atlantic Bulk Carriers Management. With this respect, LNG should be viewed only as a SOx and NOx compliant fuel and those that invest in it 'should proceed on these grounds', he noted. Panos Zachariadis | Opinions | 29/06/18 LNG as marine fuel can comply with the new IMO requirements for sulfur oxides and NOx tier III emissions without the use of messy scrubbers and NOx reducing catalysts, both of which immensely increase the size and complexity of ships' engine-rooms as well as the crews' workloads. Not to mention the nasty inputs (e.g. urea) and outputs involved. However, with regards to its global warming effect, LNG-knowingly or not-has been credited with Global Warming reducing capability which is simply false. There are enough inconvenient truths in the maritime regulations already, but this one is the most important of all: it relates to our continued survival. I submit the stakes are higher with LNG and those of us who " know " should stop pretending, while those that don't should educate themselves. Most have heard the claim that LNG shipboard use as fuel results in " about 20-25% less CO2 " and that methane is, pound for pound, 25 times worse than CO2 in warming the atmosphere. Well, none of the previous two figures is really accurate. LNG is 95-98% methane, a very potent greenhouse gas. How potent? If we look toward a 100 year future time span, LNG is 34 times worse than CO2 (not just 25 times)*. But 100 years is erroneously used in this case. That time horizon started being used because this is the lifespan of CO2 in the atmosphere. But this is irrelevant. We should care what LNG does to the atmosphere for the next few years. Plus, our

The paper presents the consequences of LNG usage as a marine fuel. The restrictions of harmful substances emission to atmosphere from marine engines, especially in controlled emission areas (ECA and SECA areas) of nitrogen oxides and... more

The paper presents the consequences of LNG usage as a marine fuel. The restrictions of harmful substances emission to atmosphere from marine engines, especially in controlled emission areas (ECA and SECA areas) of nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides, forces the engine makers to use additional installations, which operation may fulfill the purification requirements of exhaust gases. The option is a usage gaseous fuels, especially liquid natural gas (LNG) or compressed natural gas (CNG). There is no an alternative – only gaseous fuels may fulfill the Tier3 level without exhaust gases purification process. In prognosis about 650 ships (in high scenario about 2000) will be fuelled LNG in the year 2025. It was written why the liquid fuels stay unattractive. The basic problem is still the limited network of LNG distribution in ports and the lack of small vessels or barges for LNG bunkering. The proposition of design of LNG tank and barges were presented. The next problem is a deficiency of ...