North European LNG Infrastructure Project Appendices

348 Pages·2012·13.06 MB·English

Appendices

North European LNG Infrastructure Project
A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure
and test of recommendations

List of Appendices

Appendix 1 Green House Gas Emissions from the Maritime Sector
Appendix 2 Shipping Activities in the SECA area based on AIS-data Compilations
Appendix 3 Ship Cost Analysis
Appendix 4 LNG Infrastructure in Northern Europe
Appendix 5 LNG Terminal Cost Data and Calculations
Appendix 6 Future Land-based Gas Demand in the Study Area and National Gas Policies
Appendix 7 Port Descriptions
Appendix 8 Overall Bunker Technology
Appendix 9 Safety Aspects/Risk Assessment
Appendix 10 Port and Terminal Aspects on LNG Bunkering
Appendix 11 Examples of Operational Guidelines
Appendix 12 Hazard Identification Workshop
Appendix 13 Risk Control - Preventive and Mitigating Measures
Appendix 14 Permit Process and Public Consultation

1

Appendix 1
Green House Gas Emissions from the Maritime Sector
Table of Contents
1. Calculating Green House Gas Emissions ........................................... 3
2. Initiatives on Reducing Green House Gas Emissions ....................... 4
3. Studies made on Carbon Footprint in Maritime Freight Transport ... 5
4. The LCA Methology and Data Availability .......................................... 7
- 3 -

Appendix 1 Green House Gas Emissions from the
Maritime Sector

This appendix gives an estimation of the Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from the current shipping
activities in the sector based on the data on fuel consumption in the area given in Appendix 2 and data on
CO emission factors based on Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) data for shipping fuels. The maritime sector is the
2
fifth largest contributor to air pollution and carbon emissions, and with an increasing global trade the need to
address these emissions is of great importance1. Different initiatives are ongoing to reduce emissions through
fuel switch, engine changes or end-of-pipe technologies.

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is working to implement both technological and operational
measures, but also market based mechanisms to support increased energy efficiency and decreased GHG
emissions from the shipping sector. The IMO has taken decisions on measures to improve energy efficiency
trough the EEDI (Energy Efficiency Design Index) and the SEEMP (Ship Energy Efficiency Mangement
Plan) which will enter into force during 2013.

So far there is no binding reporting system for emissions within the maritime sector, and the sector has not
been involved in any scheme for green house gas emissions. Aviation is included in the European Emission
Trading Scheme (EU ETS) from 2012 and a discussion is taking place within the EU whether the maritime
sector should follow the same path. Within the IMO, there are on-going discussions, but differences between
the ordinary IMO approach, where the same rules apply to all countries/ships, and GHG emissions
reductions regulated within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),
where consideration is taken to the capacity of each individual country, makes the discussions difficult.
1. Calculating Green House Gas Emissions
To be able to measure and show outcome of the regulations put on the maritime sector in the Baltic sea, the
North Sea and the English Channel, a baseline scenario of the GHG emissions in the area in the near future,
before regulations come into force is needed.

In this appendix an estimation of the emissions from the shipping industry in the SECA has been made. Two
sources of data are used;
 Information on fuel consumption in the SECA calculated in Appendix 2;
 Information on emission factor of CO for HFO stated in the comparative LCA study of four
2
different marine fuels by Bengtsson et. al.2

In Appendix 2, calculations are based on AIS-data compilations3 for the North Sea, the English Channel and
the Baltic Sea. The total amount of bunker fuel consumed within the SECA (the specified sub-regions) is
summed up to 12 million tonnes. The calculated 12.0 million tonnes of fuel consumed are consumed while
the vessels are within the SECA, the fuel bunkered within the SECA but consumed elsewhere, is not
included. The majority of the vessels spend less than half of their time within the SECA. It is assumed that
100 % of the fuel used in the area is HFO with 1 % sulphur content.

1 European Commission, 2010, EUR 24602 EN, Regulating Air Emissions from Ships – The State of the Art on Methodologies,
Technologies and Policy Options.
2 Bengtsson et.al., 2011, A comparative life cycle assessment of marine fuels.
3 Compiled by IHS Fairplay for the SECA.
- 4 -

From Table 1, information is used on the lower heating value of HFO [MJ/kg]4 and the stated emission factor
[g CO e/MJ]5 for HFO.
2

With these data, an estimation is made of the total emission of CO in the SECA area in 2010 to be 38
2
million tonnes of CO .
2

12 million tonnes of HFO * 40.40 MJ/kg (lower heating value) * 78 g per MJ (emission factor CO ) =
2
37,8 million tonnes of CO ≈ 38 million tonnes of CO
2 2.

These calclulations are sensitive to different factors and the quality of the input data is crucial to obtain a
high quality estimation of the carbon footprint. Several important factors will affect the development of
GHG emissions in the area, most of them affecting the amount and type of fuel used in the area. Some of the
factors are stated below;

 The LNG supply chain characteristics;
 the number of vessels;
 time spent in the area;
 the fuel consumption for different vessel types;
o the vessel speed/velocity;
o the vessel engine efficiency;
o abatement technology choices and strategies;
 the methane slip of the sector.

Following up on the development of these factors makes it possible make updated measurements of the
emission reductions in the sector. Updated emission factor data, for example following up on the technical
developments within the field of reducing methane slip to zero, together with updated information on the
shipping activities in the area and the developments of ship engine energy efficiency and fuel change serve
as a basis for updated calclulations. The methodology can also be expanded to include important data on
cargo to asses measures for emissions on tonne kilometers.

The use of AIS6 data over time will facilitate to perform measurements of the development of the shipping in
the area and to follow the trend of the GHG emissions reductions. To be able to follow the development of
the GHG emissions reductions due to fuel change and change in traffic intensity as well as energy efficiency
in the SECA, updated information of the type presented in Appendix 2 could be used and applied. In the
following sections a review of initiatives on reducing GHG emissions in the sector is made as well as an
overview of the LCA methodology that forms a basis for the above estimate.
2. Initiatives on Reducing Green House Gas Emissions
Since no international binding agreements have been decided for the maritime sector to reduce the green
house gas emissions, a number of voluntary initiatives have been started. These are mainly driven by
consumers of fright services, to encourage ship owners to register their emissions. One such initiative is the

4 The lower heating value of fuels varies between different sources of litterature. The lower heating value used in Appendix 1 is taken
from the publication published by Bengtsson et al. Although, in the Baseline report of this study a slightly different heating value for
HFO was given; 42,686 MJ/kg. The heating value is dependent on the different compounds present in the fuel.
5 Value covers exploration, processing, transportation and refinery of HFO
6 Automatic Identification System
- 5 -

Clean Shipping Index Project7. This index is developed as an online tool for cargo owners so that they can
get a picture of the environmental performance of different shipping companies.

The shipowners answer questions about their ships and through an index they are compared to other
shipowners’ ships as well as the current state of the art. The index is calculated from a vessels’ operational
environment impact and scoring is obtained in five different areas; SO and PM emissions, NO emissions,
X X
CO emissions, chemicals, water and waste control. The scorings for the different areas are then added
2
to a total index for the ship concerned.

Another initiative, aiming at integrating environmentally and socially responsible business principles into
transportation management, is the Clean Cargo Working Group.8 The group consists of more than 25
multinational manufacturers (shippers), freight carriers and forwarders (carriers), accounting for more than
60 percent of the global container transport. Within the collaboration the members can access tools for
measuring and reducing the environmental impact of goods transportation and benchmarking their own
activities against industry performance. The Intermodal Emissions Calculator developed by the group
calculates the emissions from moving goods and is developed consistent with the WRI9 GHG Protocol
methodology.

The IMO has developed the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) as a standard for measuring the carbon
emissions for a broad range of cargo ships and is going to be used when building the ships. By setting a limit
for the EEDI of a ship, the amount of fuel that it consumed is controlled and thereby the carbon emissions
are limited. Also, the IMO has developed a Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP), that
incorporates best practices for the fuel efficient operation of ships, such as better speed management
throughout a ships voyage. Such efficiency measures will significantly reduce fuel consumption and,
consequently, CO emissions.
2
3. Studies made on Carbon Footprint in Maritime Freight
Transport
Several studies have been made on carbon footprint of maritime freight transport, usually with the aim to
compare logistics options. Leonardi and Browne10 compare the GHG emissions of several international
shipping lines for supply chains of chosen furniture and food products. The GHG efficiencies of the supply
chains are expressed in gram CO equivalents per kilogram of product [g CO e/kg]. Leonardi and Browne
2 2
state that there is a data gap in the statistics of maritime fuel use data. One conclusion is that for both product
groups in the different international supply chains, the relative importance of the maritime sector appears to
be rather high, depending on the assumptions for the final consumer leg.

In the method of Leonardi and Browne, an emission factor is used to convert heavy fuel oil (HFO) into
carbon dioxide equivalents. In this factor some indirect effects of emissions generated for bringing the fuel to
the filling station is included, which is about 13 % of the combustion emission factor.

7 http://www.cleanshippingproject.se
8 http://www.bsr.org
9 World Resources Institute, www.ghgprotocol.org
10 Leonardi, Jacques and Browne Michael, University of Westminster, Department of Transport Studies; ”Method for Assessing the
Carbon Footprint of Maritime Freight Transport: European Case Study and Results”, abstract to 14th Annual Logistics research
Network Conference 9th-11th September 2009, Cardiff.
- 6 -

Another study11, by Bengtsson et al., compares LNG to three other fossil marine fuels. The fuels are
compared regarding the life cycle emissions and assess the environmental performance of the fuels from
Well-To-Propeller using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The fuels are HFO (heavy fuel oil), MGO (marine
gas oil), Gas-To-Liquid (GTL) and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). In the study, two exhaust abatement
techniques are studied as well, open-loop scrubber and selective catalytic reduction (SCR).The study states
that LNG and other alternatives that comply with SECA 2015 and Tier III NOx requirement decrease the
acidification and eutrophication potential with 78-90 % in a life cycle perspective compared to HFO.
According to Bengtsson et. al, the global warming potential the use of LNG does not decrease the impact
more than 8-20 %, depending mainly on the magnitude of the methane slip from the gas engine.

Bengtsson et al. refers to other studies claiming that LNG reduces the direct combustion emissions of CO
2
with 25 % due to higher hydrogen-to-carbon ratio than diesel oils, but the effect on GHG emissions is
counteracted by a possible methane (CH ) slip.
4

The studied system included extraction of raw materials, production and transportation, bunkering, storage
and combustion of fuels for the transportation of cargo, i.e. from well-to-propeller. The compared unit was
the transportation of one tonne cargo one km with a Roll-on/Roll-off (RoRo) vessel.

The CH emissions were substantially higher for the two gas fuelled alternatives in the study, about 4 times
4
than the other investigated alternatives. This is primarily due to the CH slip from the gas engine, which is a
4
technical problem where improvements are developed trough for example engine design. One of the
recommendations in this study (Recommendation no. 16), is to minimize methane slip in all LNG handling
to as low as reasonably practicable.

Some of the conclusions of Bengtsson et al.’s study are that the tank-to-propeller phase of marine
transportation has the highest impact on the total life cycle performance, representing 50-99 % depending on
impact category and fuel alternative. Another result was that the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of LNG
when considering the whole life cycle emissions of CO , CH and N O is of the same order of magnitude as
2 4 2
for the fuels used today in the shipping industry. Emission factors used in the study as well as a summary of
the results is given in Chapter 4 below.

In a report supported by the Dutch Maritime Innovation Programme (MIP)12 a case study is carried out to
investigate the environmental aspects of using LNG as a fuel for three different types of ships. The GHG
emission comparison included three LNG chains and three diesel fuel chains. The report states that the green
house gas emissions primarily are dependent on the carbon content of the fuel and the efficiency of the
engine. However, for the three studied cases the engine efficiency for the LNG is only about 1 % lower than
for diesel, consequently the green house gas emissions are expressed in the study in g/MJ fuel energy.

The results of the MIP-report shows Well-to-Propeller greenhouse gas emissions for one of the LNG chains
10 % lower than the diesel fuel chains. Further improvement is possible, says the report, by lowering the
relatively high methane emissions of the engines. A conclusion in this report is also that further greenhouse
gas emission reductions are possible by biofuels. LNG can be replaced by bio-LNG or LBG (Liquefied Bio
Gas) without any impact on maintenance. Diesel can be replaced by biodiesel, Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil
(HVO), Pure Plant Oil (PPO) or possibly pyrolysis liquid, but these fuels may require engine adaptations and
increase maintenance.

11Bengtsson et al; “Life cycle assessment of marine fuels - A comparative study of four fossil fuels for marine propulsion”,
Göteborgs universitet, 2011
12 Verbeek, Ruud et al., ”Environmental and Economic aspects of using LNG as a fuel for shipping in The Netherlands”, TNO-RPT-
2011-00166, 2011
- 7 -

4. The LCA Methology and Data Availability
LCA is a tool for environmental assessment of products and services that addresses the potential impact in a
cradle-to-grave perspective. There are two types of LCA, “attributional” and “consequential”.
”Attributional” strives to be as complete as possible accounting for all environmental impacts of a product,
while “Consequential” LCAs strive to describe the environmental consequences of alternative courses of
action. The most commonly used is the Consequential and it only includes the parts of the life cycle that
differs between the alternatives.

The European Commission Joint Research centre on LCA Tools, Services and Data has published a life
cycle inventory database, the ELCD core database, where life cycle inventory data for European heavy fuel
oil and light fuel oil production are available. These data sets represent Cradle-To-Gate, which covers
exploration, processing, transportation and refinery of HFO and MGO. Distribution from refinery to harbor
is not included in these data sets. The allocation in the ELCD core database is based on energy content (i.e.
mass and lower heating value) and allocation is made after each sub-process in the refinery.

LNG life cycle data for extraction, processing and pipeline transportation of natural gas are available in the
CPM database. The data are representative for natural gas from the North Sea in 1991. In the study by
Bengtsson et al. the data are chosen despite their age, because they are assessed to be representative for the
region and extensive.

The distribution scenarios in Bengtsson et al.’s study are transportation from the North Sea or from Qatar as
representative for transportation of LNG from North Africa.

The data in Table 1, partly used in the calculations in Chapter 1 of this appendix, shows emission factors,
lower heating values and specific fuel consumptions for different marine fules, with or without an abatement
solution such as a scrubber.