Dual-fuel-electric LNG carriers

Mumbai, September 17, 2004

 Agenda

Agenda:
 Introduction
 Project review
 Dual-fuel-electric LNG carriers
 Technical presentation
 Review of advantages
 Comparison of machinery alternatives
 Dual-fuel engine references
 Dual-fuel engines in operation
 Viking Energy and Stril Pioneer
 Endurance test engine
 Gaz de France Energy and Atlantique #N32
 Operations and maintenance support
 Conclusion

© Wärtsilä 2
 Gas burning engines

Wärtsilä 50DF

Wärtsilä 180SG

Wärtsilä 220SG

Wärtsilä 32DF

Wärtsilä 28SG

Wärtsilä 34SG

Wärtsilä 25SG

Wärtsilä 46GD

Wärtsilä 32GD

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

© Wärtsilä 3
 Dual-fuel engines

Key facts:

High efficiency
(44 - 47%)

Lean burn combustion

Low emissions
(NOx, SOx, CO2)

Fuel flexibility:
 Gas mode
 Diesel mode
(MDO)

Low-pressure gas

Two bore sizes

© Wärtsilä 4
 Wärtsilä dual-fuel engines

Power ranges
6L32DF 2.1 MW

9L32DF 3.2 MW

12V32DF 4.2 MW

18V32DF 6.3 MW

6L50DF 5.7 MW

8L50DF 7.6 MW

9L50DF 8.6 MW

12V50DF 11.4 MW

16V50DF 15.2 MW

18V50DF
18V50DF 17100 kW 17.1 MW

0 5 10 15

© Wärtsilä 5
 Wärtsilä 50DF

 Cylinder configuration
 6, 8 , 9 L
 12, 16, 18 V

 Cylinder output 950 kW

 Optimized for running
on gas primarily
 Based on W46 engine

 W46 engine references: 956

(598 marine + 358 power plant engines)

© Wärtsilä 6
 Dual Fuel Operating Principle

Diesel mode

EX IN EX IN EX IN

Intake Compression Injection

of air of air of liquid fuel

© Wärtsilä 7
 Dual Fuel Operating Principle

Gas mode

IN IN IN
EX EX EX
**
**
* * * *
* * * * * *
* * ** * * *
* *

Intake Compression Ignition by

of air and gas of air and gas micro-pilot fuel

© Wärtsilä 8
Test Result 18V50DF: Transfer (Gas  MDO) on 100% load

Speed
Load

Receiver pressure
Gas pressure

Pilot fuel pressure

Diesel actuator

© Wärtsilä 9
Test Result 18V50DF: Transfer (MDO  Gas) on 80% load

Speed

Gas pressure

Load

Receiver pressure

Pilot fuel pressure

Diesel actuator

© Wärtsilä 10
 Twin injection valve

Twin needle injection valve

in the cylinder head Solenoid

 Combined main and micro-

pilot fuel injection valve
 Micro-pilot fuel timing and
duration electronically
controlled during operation
 Pilot injection activated also
in diesel mode Main diesel needle

Micro-pilot fuel needle

© Wärtsilä 11
 Gas and micro-pilot fuel systems

Gas common rail pipe

Gas admission valve

Micro-pilot fuel injection

valve (combined)

Micro-pilot
common rail
Nozzle pipes

Inlet channel

Connection pipe
Picture of V-type 50DF

© Wärtsilä 12
 Micro-pilot fuel system

 Pressurised micro-pilot fuel is delivered from the

pump unit into a double walled common rail pipe
 The micro-pilot fuel pressure is 1000 bar
 The common rail piping delivers pilot fuel to
each injection valve pilot side and also acts as a
pressure accumulator against pressure pulses
 The cylinder feed pipes distribute pilot fuel from
the common rail to the injection valves in each
cylinder head

Pilot pump

Common rail
© Wärtsilä 13
 Wärtsilä 32DF and 50DF secondary fuel systems

Fuel injection valve

(combined)

High pressure line

Injection pump

Tappet

Camshaft

© Wärtsilä 14
 Engine with individual control of the combustion

Cylinder control principle

WECS
 Individual adjustment of
gas feed and injection for MAIN GAS
ADMISSION VALVE
each cylinder
 Each cylinder equipped
COMBUSTION
SENSOR
with a combustion sensor
INPUT:
 The gas feed is adjusted - rpm DUAL FUEL
- kW INJECTION VALVE
individually to get the - air/fuel
correct air-fuel ratio in -etc..

each cylinder
 In case of knocking, only
that specific cylinder is
adjusted

© Wärtsilä 15
 Engine with individual control of the combustion

Each cylinder is controlled

to an optimal performance
22

Misfiring
20

18 Detonation
BMEP (bar)

16

14

12

10
Black dots shows
8 different cylinders
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2
Air-fuel ratio

© Wärtsilä 16
 Wärtsilä Engine Control System

Engine control system WECS 8000

The functionality of WECS 8000 comprises the following main categories:
• Handling of engine slowturning, start & stop sequences
• Changing of fuel modes
• Instrumentation & communication
• Speed measurement
• Engine safety
• Speed/load control
• Gas pressure- & gas admission control
• Pilot pressure- & pilot injection control
• Air/fuel ratio control
• Cylinder balancing & knock control
• Hardwired engine safety module (backup)

© Wärtsilä 17
 W50DF Maintainability

 NATURAL GAS IS VERY CLEAN FUEL!

 LESS ABRASIVE AND CORROSIVE COMBUSTION PRODUCTS

 CLEANER LUBRICATING OIL

 LESS CLEANING OF ENGINE PARTS DURING MAINTENANCE

 LONGER TIME PERIODS BETWEEN OVERHAULS

 MINOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE CAN BE PERFORMED DURING TERMINAL CALLS OR DURING

SAILING
 OVERHAULS CAN MOSTLY BE TIMED TO BE CARRIED OUT DURING DOCKING (DEPENDING ON 2.5
OR 5 YEARS DOCKING INTERVALS)

© Wärtsilä 18
 W50DF Vibrations

 Flexibly mounted constant speed engine transmits minimum

vibration to hull structure. The generator can be rigidly mounted.
 This concept is well proven in cruise ship installations.
(148 flexibly mounted W46 engines with rigidly mounted generators in 33
cruise ships!)

© Wärtsilä 19
 Machinery Configuration

LNG Carrier Propulsion Machinery Proposals

Wärtsilä 50DF engines

Cargo numbers and cylinder Power Propeller Shaft Propeller shaft
Capacity configuration power

km3 6 8 9 12 16 MW Single Twin MW

70 4 22.8 x 19

150 1 3 39.9 x 26

200 1 4 51.3 x o 33
250 1 5 62.7 x 42

o = option

© Wärtsilä 20
 Other Propulsion Alternatives

Dual Fuel Electric, Twin POD

 Improved maneuverability / dynamic positioning
 Improved propulsion efficiency Gas

Other
consumers

Converter

POD

Converter
Other
POD consumers
Dual Fuel gensets

MDO

© Wärtsilä 21
 Other Propulsion Alternatives

Dual Fuel Electric, Contra Rotating Propellers (CRP)

 Further improved propulsion efficiency

© Wärtsilä 22
 Fuel Alternatives for a DF Electric Installation

1. LNG as Primary Fuel

 Natural Boil-Off Gas
 Forced Boil-Off Gas as Additional Fuel
 MDO as Secondary Fuel

2. LNG and MDO

 Maximum utilization of Natural Boil-Off Gas without Forced BOG
 MDO as Additional Fuel

3. LNG and HFO

 Maximum utilization of Natural Boil-Off Gas without Forced BOG
 HFO as Additional Fuel(*


(* HFO can be used if the DF engine is adapted to run on HFO. Another alternative

is to have conventional HFO engines installed for additional power.

© Wärtsilä 23
 Gas supply system

© Wärtsilä 24
 Fuel Alternatives for a DF Electric Installation

LNG as Primary Fuel can be considered as a very strong

option
 ECONOMIC if the price of LNG is calculated according to the FOB price
 LNG price of 2.2 USD/mmBTU is equal to a HFO price of 102.6 USD/ton

 Gas is CLEAN, environmentally friendly

 Why utilize dirty Fuels to transport a clean Fuel?

 LNG is LIGHT: LNG 49.2 MJ/kg, HFO 40.4 MJ/kg, MDO 42.7 MJ/kg
 Maximized efficiency with a light ship

 The FUTURE is in Gas

 Rising prices for diesel, especially for low sulphur diesels?

 INSULATION of the cargo tanks can be optimized

 More cargo capacity

© Wärtsilä 25
 LNG as Primary Fuel for a 155’000 m3 LNG carrier


HOW MUCH FORCED BOIL-OFF GAS NEEDED?

EXAMPLE:

Cargo capacity
 155’000 m3 (98.5% filled)

Natural Boil-off gas rate
 0.13% in loaded conditions (in ballast conditions 0.065%)

Ship speed / propulsion shaft power
 19.5 kn / 24 MW (in ballast 19.5 kn / 23 MW)

Total electric power needed, propulsion power + ship service power
 27.2 MW (in ballast conditions 26.0 MW)


FORCED BOIL-OFF GAS NEEDED AS ADDITIONAL FUEL (see calculations)

 Loaded Conditions: 1.85 m3/h LNG

 Ballast Conditions: 5.30 m3/h LNG

© Wärtsilä 26
 Cargo Capacity


Cargo capacities for a modern 150’000 m3 LNG carrier,

compared to a steam turbine powered LNG carrier


Dual Fuel Electric propulsion:
 The benefit from a shorter engine room is 6 - 12 frames
 The increased cargo capacity is about +5%


The additional weight for the increased cargo capacity is about equal to
the weight of HFO needed for a steam turbine powered LNG carrier.

© Wärtsilä 27
 Steam turbine

© Wärtsilä 28
 Dual fuel electric

© Wärtsilä 29
 Review of advantages

Dual-fuel-electric LNG carriers are:

 Economic
 Environmentally friendly
 Safe
 Reliable
 Redundant
 Maintainable
 Crew-able

© Wärtsilä 30
 Economic

Dual-fuel-electric machinery:
 Uses less fuel
- has lower operating costs
Dual-fuel-electric machinery:
 Uses less fuel and therefore needs to carry less bunkers
(space and weight saving)
 Needs less engine room space (space saving)
 Uses natural and forced boil-off gas as fuel, which is
lighter than HFO (weight saving)
- has higher cargo carrying capacity / earnings capability

© Wärtsilä 31
 Environmentally friendly

Dual-fuel engines:
 Have a higher thermal
efficiency
 Use cleaner fuel
 Apply lean burn
combustion principle

And therefore have:

 Virtually no SOX
 Lowest CO2
 Lowest NOX

© Wärtsilä 32
 Safe, reliable and redundant

Other consumers Gas

Cargo pumps

Converter & Transformer G

FPP G
M
E-motors
M G

G
Converter & Transformer
Dual-fuel generator sets
Cargo pumps
Other consumers Liquid fuel

© Wärtsilä 33
 Maintainable

Case studies have been carried out to confirm that engine

maintenance requirements do not need to affect the ship’s
operations.

The case studies have shown that port calls and

scheduled dry-dockings provide enough time to carry out
all scheduled maintenance without affecting the ship’s
sailing schedule.

Selection of the engine configuration on the basis of the

ship’s operating profile is however advisable.

Wärtsilä offers tailored maintainability studies.

© Wärtsilä 34
 Crew-able

There is no need for specialized crew members.

Normal diesel engine crew will do.

© Wärtsilä 35
 Comparison of machinery alternatives

Comparisons of machinery alternatives for a standard

vessel of 147k cu m and for a large vessel of 220k cu m:

 Steam turbine
 Two-stroke + reliquefaction
 Dual-fuel-electric

© Wärtsilä 36
 Dual-fuel-electric LNG carrier

Commercial advantages compared to steam turbine LNG carrier:

 Lower fuel consumptions
 Lower emissions
 More cargo capacity

Commercial disadvantages compared to steam turbine LNG carrier:

 Slightly higher initial costs
 Slightly higher maintenance costs
 Lube oil costs

© Wärtsilä 37
 Assumptions for 150k cu m LNG carrier

Steam turbine Twin 2-Stroke Dual-fuel-electric

LNG carrier LNG carrier LNG carrier

Ship price* MUS$ 170 175 175

Interest rate* - 8% 8% 8%

Pay-back time* years 20 20 20

Cargo capacity m3 147’000 147’000 153’000

Trade length 1 days 4 4 4

Harbor time** days 1 1 1

* Our best estimate

** In each end

© Wärtsilä 38
 Assumptions for 220k cu m LNG carrier

Steam turbine Twin 2-Stroke Dual-fuel-electric

LNG carrier LNG carrier LNG carrier

Ship price* MUS$ 245 250 250

Interest rate* - 8% 8% 8%

Pay-back time* years 20 20 20

Cargo capacity m3 214’000 214’000 223’000

Trade length 1 days 11 11 11

Harbor time** days 1 1 1

* Our best estimate

** In each end

© Wärtsilä 39
 Assumptions

Fuel costs:
 160 US$/ton for HFO (LHV: 40.4 MJ/kg)
 240 US$/ton for MDO (LHV: 42.7 MJ/kg)
 2.10 US$/mmBTU for LNG, FOB (LHV: 49.2 MJ/kg)
 4.40 US$/mmBTU for LNG, CIF (LHV: 49.2 MJ/kg)

Lube oil costs:

 720 US$/ton for cylinder oil
 590 US$/ton for system oil

© Wärtsilä 40
 Assumptions

Steam Turbine 2-stroke Dual Fuel Electric

Fuel / Boil-off Gas : 100% Fuel / Boil-off Gas : 100% Fuel / Boil-off Gas : 100%
Boiler : 89% 2-stroke engines : 49% DF-Engines : 46%*
Steam Turbine : 34% Shafting : 98% Alternators : 96%
Gearbox : 98% Transformers & Converter: 98%
Shafting : 98% Electric motor : 98%
Gearbox : 98%
Shafting : 98%

Propulsion Propulsion Propulsion

Machinery Efficiency: 29% Machinery Efficiency: 48% Machinery Efficiency : 41%

Fuel / Boil-off Gas : 100%

Fuel / Boil-off Gas : 100% Fuel : 100%
DF-Engines : 46%
Boiler : 89% Aux. Engines : 43%
Alternators : 96%
Steam Turbine : 30% Alternator : 96%
Gearbox : 98%
Alternator : 96%
Electric Power
Electric Power Electric Power Generation Efficiency : 44%
Generation Efficiency: 25% Generation Efficiency: 41%
* 47.1% at maximum output

© Wärtsilä 41
 Assumptions

Required propulsion power:

 147k cu m
 24 MW in loaded condition (25 MW for 2-stroke)
 23.2 MW in ballast condition (24.1 MW for 2-stroke)
 220k cu m
 Loaded: 29.5 MW (31 MW for 2-stroke)
 Ballast: 28.5 MW (29.9 MW for 2-stroke)

Lube oil consumption:

 Steam turbine: Negligible
 2-stroke: Cylinder oil 1.1 kg / MW h, System oil 0.16 kg / MW h
 Dual-fuel-electric: 0.35 kg / MW h alternator output

Maintenance costs:
 Steam turbine: 2.4 US$ / MW h (main) and 3.0 US$ / MW h (aux)
 2-stroke: 1.2 US$ / MW h (main) and 3.0 US$ / MW h (aux)
 Dual-fuel-electric: 3.0 US$ / MW h

© Wärtsilä 42
 Delivered cargo

147k cu m:

Steam turbine Twin 2-stroke Dual-fuel-electric

LNG carrier LNG carrier LNG carrier
NBOG + HFO HFO NBOG + FBOG

Loaded at export terminal m3 146’800 146’800 152’800

Used as fuel m3 1’137 0 1’937

Offloaded at import terminal m3 145’663 146’800 150’863

Note: Only open sea conditions taken into account

Assumptions: BOG rate 0.13% in laden condition,
BOG flow in ballast condition 45% of BOG flow in laden condition

© Wärtsilä 43
 Delivered cargo

220k cu m:

Steam turbine Twin 2-stroke Dual-fuel-electric

LNG carrier LNG carrier LNG carrier
NBOG + HFO HFO NBOG + FBOG

Loaded at export terminal m3 213’700 213’700 222’700

Used as fuel m3 4’461 0 6’635

Offloaded at import terminal m3 209’239 213’700 216’065

Note: Only open sea conditions taken into account

Assumptions: BOG rate 0.13% in laden condition,
BOG flow in ballast condition 45% of BOG flow in laden condition

© Wärtsilä 44
 Energy Consumption Comparison

147k cu m:
Total energy consumption of round trip
(excluding harbour operations)

70000

60000

50000

HFO
40000 MDO
MGO
GJ FBOG
30000 BOG

20000

10000

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

© Wärtsilä 45
 Energy consumption

220k cu m:
Total energy consumption of round trip
(excluding harbour operations)

250000

200000

HFO
150000 MDO
MGO
GJ FBOG
BOG
100000

50000

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

© Wärtsilä 46
 Exhaust gas emissions
Total NOx emissions of round trip
(excluding harbour operations)

147k cu m:
100

90

80

70

60

ton 50

40
Total CO2 emissions of round trip
(excluding harbour operations)
30

20

10
4500
0
4000 Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

3500 Total SOx emissions of round trip

(excluding harbour operations)

3000

2500
ton 70
2000

60
1500

1000 50

500
40

ton
0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric 30

20

10

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

© Wärtsilä 47
 Exhaust gas emissions
Total NOx emissions of round trip
(excluding harbour operations)

220k cu m:
350

300

250

200

ton

150

Total CO2 emissions of round trip

(excluding harbour operations)
100

50

16000
0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric
14000

Total SOx emissions of round trip

12000 (excluding harbour operations)

10000

250
ton 8000

6000
200

4000

150
2000
ton

0
100
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

50

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

© Wärtsilä 48
 Costs

147k cu m:

Total operating cost of round trip

(excluding harbour operations)

-900000

-800000

-700000

-600000

-500000
USD
-400000

-300000

-200000

-100000

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

Other cost (manning, harbour, other machinery related maintenance cost, etc.)
Financing cost of ship
Maintenance cost
Consumables cost
Emissions cost
Fuel cost

© Wärtsilä 49
 Costs

220k cu m:

Total operating cost of round trip

(excluding harbour operations)

-2500000

-2000000

-1500000

USD

-1000000

-500000

0
Steam (Gas+HFO) Twin 2-Stroke DF-Electric

Other cost (manning, harbour, other machinery related maintenance cost, etc.)
Financing cost of ship
Maintenance cost
Consumables cost
Emissions cost
Fuel cost

© Wärtsilä 50
 Dual-fuel engine references
FOR INTERNAL USE

© Wärtsilä
 Dual-fuel engines in commercial operation

Dual-fuel engines in commercial operation:


2x 18V32DF Topcapi Turkey since ‘97

2x 18V32DF Cayrova Turkey since ‘97

1x 18V32DF Southampton UK since ‘98

1x 18V32DF Grindsted Denmark since ‘98

1x 18V32DF Salekhard Russia since ‘99

1x 18V32DF Gulle Turkey since ’00

2x 18V32DF Petrojarl I Norway since ‘00

1x 18V32DF Bharuch India since ’01

1x 18V32DF Sendje Ceiba Norway since ’01

1x 18V32DF Videcon India since ’01

4x 6L32DF Viking Energy Norway since ’02

4x 6L32DF Stril Pioner Norway since ’02

1x 18V32DF Sempra USA since ’02

6x 18V32DF Barajas Spain since ’03

© Wärtsilä 52
 Dual-fuel engines in commercial operation

Petrojarl I
2x 18V32DF
Since 2000

Sendje Ceiba
1x 18V32DF
Since 2001

Viking Energy and Stril Pioner

4x 6L32DF each
Since 2002

Stril Pioner

© Wärtsilä 53
 Viking Energy and Stril Pioner

Operating experience:
 Both vessels are in continuous
trouble-free operation
 Some challenges have been faced
along the way:
 Failing engine control system cabling
(cured: new design)
 Failing sensors (cured: higher quality
specified)
 Improved power management system
settings / improved low load operation
and load acceptance

Viking Energy

© Wärtsilä 54
 Endurance test engine 6L50DF

Endurance test engine

Bermeo, Spain
6L50DF
Since March 2004
Facts:
 Main purpose is to collect
running hours
 1650 running hours (> 90 %
on gas) accumulated (July
04)
 Average output 5.4 MW
(95% load)

© Wärtsilä 55
 Gaz de France Energy

Shipyard Chantiers de l’Atlantique

Hull / Name M32 / Gaz de France Energy
Ship owner Gaz de France

Cargo Capacity 74’000 m3

Delivery November 2004

Machinery 4x Wärtsilä 6L50DF

Primary fuel Natural boil-off gas, complemented
with forced boil-off gas
Secondary fuel MDO

Courtesy: Chantiers de l’Atlantique

© Wärtsilä 56
 Gaz de France Energy

Schedule:
 October 2003: Engine delivery
 April 2004: Start on-site technical assistance
 April - May 2004: Engine start-up MDO
 May - June 2004: MDO commissioning
 July 2004: Ship dry-docking
 August 2004: Sea trials MDO
 September 2004: Gas commissioning
 October 2004: Sea trials gas
 November 2004: Ship delivery

Courtesy: Chantiers de l’Atlantique

© Wärtsilä 57
 Atlantique #N32
Shipyard Chantiers de l’Atlantique
Hull N32
Ship owner Gaz de France

Cargo Capacity 154’000 m3

Delivery Autumn 2005

Machinery 3x Wärtsilä 12V50DF + 1x Wärtsilä 6L50DF

Primary fuel Natural boil-off gas, complemented
with forced boil-off gas
Secondary fuel MDO

Courtesy: Chantiers de l’Atlantique

© Wärtsilä 58
 Atlantique #N32

Schedule:
 May 2004: Start engine production
 September 2004: Engine delivery

Courtesy: Chantiers de l’Atlantique

© Wärtsilä 59
 Interesting sites

Bergen, Norway
Viking Energy and Stril Pioner

Saint Nazaire, France

Gaz de France Energy and Atlantique N32

Bermeo, Spain
Test engine

Trieste, Italy
Engine factory

© Wärtsilä 60
 Operations and maintenance support
FOR INTERNAL USE

© Wärtsilä
 Operations and maintenance support
Customer expectations

OPERATION &
MAINTENANCE
Management
MAINTENANCE
support
AGREEMENT
Support
Maintenance
support
Inspections
SUPPORT AGREEMENTS

SUPPLY
AGREEMENT

Wärtsilä obligations
© Wärtsilä 62
 Operations and maintenance support

Possibilities:
 Condition Based Monitoring
 Onboard Wärtsilä engineers
 Wärtsilä team for major overhauls
 Exchange parts to shorten downtime
 Etc.

© Wärtsilä 63
 Conclusion
FOR INTERNAL USE

© Wärtsilä
 Conclusions

Conclusions:
 Dual-fuel-electric LNG carriers are economic,
environmentally friendly, safe, reliable, redundant,
maintainable and crew-able
 Substantial amounts of running hours have been
collected on both onshore, offshore and ship
applications.
 Endurance tests are carried out to confirm the engine
performance
 The first dual-fuel-electric LNG carrier will take to the
sea soon
 Wärtsilä is committed to tailor its involvement to the
customers’ requirements

© Wärtsilä 65