A Techno-Environmental and Energy Efficiency Investigation of Marine Dual-Fuel Engines

Abstract

The ship-based greenhouse gas emissions along with the volumetric growth in maritime transportation have increased significantly over the years. International Maritime Organization (IMO) has tightened the emission limits by putting new regulations into effect to overcome the environmental impacts and therefore, the maritime industry has focused on energy-efficient ship design and operation, recently. Regarding the latest developments, dual-fuel engines operated with different fuels have been installed and new technological developments in emission control have been implemented onboard ships. In this context, the selection of engine systems where there are many options available has been a substantial problem in the design process of a ship, recently. The latest marine engines are capable of operating with various types of fuels at different emission control modes, therefore, energy efficiency and emission performance of the prime movers should be analyzed in detail. In this study, VLSFO, methanol, LPG, LNG and MDO-fueled engines with the same power output are investigated and the NOX reduction device integrated engines’ technical specifications are compared. Then, the selected dual-fuel engines are thermodynamically analyzed and the environmental impacts are evaluated under different engine loads, Tier II, Tier III modes and ambient conditions. Moreover, EEDI calculations are conducted under the case study of powering a medium-range tanker and engine options are evaluated in terms of energy efficiency. Finally, a sensitivity analysis of engine performance is carried and the results are validated. According to the results, the energy efficiency of the ship can be increased by up to 20% by selecting the LNG-fueled engine as the prime mover while it requires more space and equipment compared to other engines.

Keywords

• Energy efficiency
• Emission control
• Marine engine
• Dual-fuel
• EEDI

References

1. ABS. (2020). ABS Advisory on NOx Tier III Compliance.
2. Akman, M., & Ergin, S. (2019). An investigation of marine waste heat recovery system based on organic Rankine cycle under various engine operating conditions. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 233(2), 586–601. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475090218770947
3. Akman, M., & Ergin, S. (2021). Energy-efficient shipping: Thermo-environmental analysis of an organic Rankine cycle waste heat recovery system utilizing exhaust gas from a dual-fuel engine. The 34th Asian-Pacific Technical Exchange and Advisory Meeting on Marine Structures, Türkiye. pp. 329-335.
4. Akman, M., & Ergin, S. (2022). Greener shipping: An investigation of an ORC-based waste heat recovery system for a methanol-fueled marine engine. A.Yücel ODABAŞI Colloquium Series 4th International Meeting - Ship Design & Optimization and Energy Efficient Devices for Fuel Economy, Türkiye, pp. 81-86.
5. Bureau Veritas. (2022). Alternative Propulsion and Future Fuels. https://marine-offshore.bureauveritas.com/sustainability/alternative-propulsion-and-future-fuels
6. Dere, C., Zincir, B., Inal, O. B., & Deniz, C. (2022). Investigation of the adverse effects of slow steaming operations for ships. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 236(4), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1177/14750902221074191
7. DNV. (2022). Maritime Forecast 2050. https://www.dnv.com/maritime/insights/topics/MRV-and-DCS/index.html
8. Elkafas, A., Rivarolo, M., & Massardo, A. F. (2022). Assessment Of Alternative Marine Fuels from Environmental, Technical, and Economic Perspectives Onboard Ultra Large Container Ship. International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 164(A2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.5750/ijme.v164ia2.768

9. EPA. (2014). Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories. http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/reporters/subpart/c.html
10. Evans, J. H. (1959). Basic design concepts. Journal of the American Society for Naval Engineers, 71(4), 671-678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-3584.1959.tb01836.x
11. Feng, S., Li, Z., Shen, B., Yuan, P., Ma, J., Wang, Z., & Kong, W. (2022). An overview of the deactivation mechanism and modification methods of the SCR catalysts for denitration from marine engine exhaust. Journal of Environmental Management, 317, 115457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115457
12. Feng, S., Xu, S., Yuan, P., Xing, Y., Shen, B., Li, Z., Zhang, C., Wang, X., Wang, Z., Ma, J., & Kong, W. (2022). The impact of alternative fuels on ship engine emissions and aftertreatment systems: A review. Catalysts, 12(2), 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal12020138
13. Garcia, L., Gehle, S., & Schakel, J. (2014). Impact of low load operation in modern low speed 2-stroke diesel engines on cylinder liner wear caused by increased acid condensation. Journal of the JIME, 49(1), 100-106.
14. Grljušic, M., Medica, V., & Radica, G. (2015). Calculation of efficiencies of a ship power plant operating with waste heat recovery through combined heat and power production. Energies, 8(5), 4273–4299. https://doi.org/10.3390/en8054273
15. Güler, E., & Ergin, S. (2021). An investigation on the solvent based carbon capture and storage system by process modeling and comparisons with another carbon control methods for different ships. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103438
16. Han, F., Wang, Z., Ji, Y., Li, W., & Sundén, B. (2019). Energy analysis and multi-objective optimization of waste heat and cold energy recovery process in LNG-fueled vessels based on a triple organic Rankine cycle. Energy Conversion and Management, 195, 561–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.05.040
17. Harris, R., Conlan, M., & Simon, J. (2022a). Review of LNG and Methanol Marine Fuel Options. IGP Energy. https://igpmethanol.com/igpmwp/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Review-of-LNG-and-Methanol-Marine-Fuel-Options-Exec-Summ-03-10-2022.pdf
18. Harris, R., Conlan, M., & Simon, J. (2022b). Summary of LNG and Methanol Marine Fuel Options. https://igpmethanol.com/2022/03/21/summary-of-lng-and-methanol-marine-fuel-options/
19. Huang, J., Fan, H., Xu, X., & Liu, Z. (2022). Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emission Assessment for Using Alternative Marine Fuels: A Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) Case Study. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(12), 1969. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10121969
20. IMO. (2012). Guidelines for Calculation of Reference Lines for Use with The Energy Efficiency Design Index -MEPC.215(63).
21. IMO. (2013). MARPOL Annex VI. https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/environment/pages/air-pollution.aspx
22. IMO. (2019). Emission Control Areas (ECAs). https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Emission-Control-Areas-(ECAs)-designated-under-regulation-13-of-MARPOL-Annex-VI-(NOx-emission-control).aspx
23. IMO. (2020). Fourth IMO GHG Study 2020 Executive Summary.
24. IMO. (2021). Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 76). https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/Pages/MEPC76meetingsummary.aspx
25. JASNAOE. (1980). On the optimization of aft-part of fine hull forms (first report).
26. Johnson, H., & Styhre, L. (2015). Increased energy efficiency in short sea shipping through decreased time in port. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 71, 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.11.008
27. Konur, O., Yuksel, O., Korkmaz, S. A., Colpan, C. O., Saatcioglu, O. Y., & Muslu, I. (2022). Thermal design and analysis of an organic Rankine cycle system utilizing the main engine and cargo oil pump turbine based waste heats in a large tanker ship. Journal of Cleaner Production, 368, 133230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133230
28. Köseoğlu, M. C., Akman, M., & Çınar, F. (2021). Environmental cost-benefit analysis of cold ironing systems in green container ports for 2020-2030: A case study in Turkey. Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on Ship and Marine Technology, Türkiye. pp. 13-22.
29. Law, L. C., Foscoli, B., Mastorakos, E., & Evans, S. (2021). A comparison of alternative fuels for shipping in terms of lifecycle energy and cost. Energies, 14(24), 8502. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14248502
30. Law, L. C., Mastorakos, E., & Evans, S. (2022). Estimates of the decarbonization potential of alternative fuels for shipping as a function of vessel type, cargo, and voyage. Energies, 15(20), 7468. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15207468
31. Liu, L., Tang, Y., & Liu, D. (2022). Investigation of future low-carbon and zero-carbon fuels for marine engines from the view of thermal efficiency. Energy Reports, 8, 6150–6160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.04.058
32. Livaniou, S., Chatzistelios, G., Lyridis, D. v., & Bellos, E. (2022). LNG vs. MDO in Marine Fuel Emissions Tracking. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(7), 3860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14073860
33. Lu, D., Theotokatos, G., Zhang, J., Zeng, H., & Cui, K. (2022). Comparative Assessment and Parametric Optimisation of Large Marine Two-Stroke Engines with Exhaust Gas Recirculation and Alternative Turbocharging Systems. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(3), 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10030351
34. MAN. (2014). Using Methanol Fuel in the MAN B&W ME-LGI Series. https://www.mandieselturbo.com/docs/default-source/shopwaredocuments/using-methanol-fuel-in-the-man-b-w-me-lgi-series.pdf
35. MAN. (2015). Tier III considerations. https://safety4sea.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/5.4-D.Tsalapatis-COSTAMARE.pdf
36. MAN. (2016a). MAN Alpha Unique Kappel Propellers – Radical Fuel Savings.
37. MAN. (2016b). MAN B&W G-Engines. https://www.mandieselturbo.com/docs/default-source/shopwaredocuments/man-b-w-g-engines-green-ultra-long-stroke-engines15fbf9a55cda459c8d405548eea8e7e1.pdf?sfvrsn=3
38. MAN. (2016c). Medium-speed engines for cleaner air. https://www.man-es.com/docs/default-source/document-sync/technology-for-ecology-eng.pdf?sfvrsn=bc606d0a_0
39. MAN. (2021a). Managing methane slip. https://www.man-es.com/campaigns/download-Q1-2023/Download/managing-methane-slip/d34a34a1-cc03-4d99-a4e1-30385cf12518/Managing-Methan-Slip
40. MAN. (2021b). Propulsion trends in tankers. https://www.man-es.com/docs/default-source/marine/tools/propulsion-trends-in-tankers_5510-0031-03ppr.pdf?sfvrsn=399654ef_4
41. MAN. (2022a). Emission project guide MAN B&W Two-stroke marine engines. www.marine.man-es.com
42. MAN. (2022b). Technical Documentation Project Guide. https://man-es.com/applications/projectguides/2stroke/content/printed/G50ME-C9_6.pdf
43. MAN. (2023). CEAS engine calculations. https://www.man-es.com/marine/products/planning-tools-and-downloads/ceas-engine-calculations
44. MEPC.308(73). (2018). Guidelines on The Method of Calculation of The Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for New Ships.
45. Napolitano, P., Liotta, L. F., Guido, C., Tornatore, C., Pantaleo, G., la Parola, V., & Beatrice, C. (2022). Insights of selective catalytic reduction technology for nitrogen oxides control in marine engine applications. Catalysts, 12(10), 1191. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal12101191
46. Perčić, M., Vladimir, N., & Fan, A. (2021). Techno-economic assessment of alternative marine fuels for inland shipping in Croatia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 148, 111363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111363
47. Singh, D. V., & Pedersen, E. (2016). A review of waste heat recovery technologies for maritime applications. Energy Conversion and Management, 111, 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.12.073
48. Turan, B. I., & Akman, M. (2021). Modeling and comparison of Bodrum Gulets’ hull forms with round and transom sterns. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 9(2), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.4274/jems.2021.09327
49. Vidović, T., Šimunović, J., Radica, G., & Penga, Ž. (2023). Systematic overview of newly available technologies in the green maritime sector. Energies, 16(2), 641. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020641
50. Wang, K., Yan, X., Yuan, Y., Jiang, X., Lin, X., & Negenborn, R. R. (2018). Dynamic optimization of ship energy efficiency considering time-varying environmental factors. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 62, 685–698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.04.005
51. Wärtsilä. (2022). Rotor Sail Technology. https://www.wartsila.com/marine/products/propulsors-and-gears/energy-saving-technology/rotor-sail
52. Woodyard, D. (2004). Gas-diesel and dual-fuel engines (pp. 48–63). In Woodyard, D. (Ed.), Pounder’s Marine Diesel Engines and Gas Turbines (8th ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-075065846-1/50003-1
53. Zou, J., & Yang, B. (2023). Evaluation of alternative marine fuels from dual perspectives considering multiple vessel sizes. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 115, 103583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103583