LNG Propulsion 7

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS
AUTHORS: Richard Gilmore Stavros Hatzigrigoris Steve Mavrakis Andreas Spertos Antonis Vordonis
Presented to: SNAME GREEK SECTION in 17 February 2005
Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005
SNAME - Greek Section
A.
ABSTRACT
The LNG industry is heading into a new and sustained period of growth. This growth is driving a re-examination of the propulsion system for LNG vessels. This paper will review technical and economic aspects of the most promising propulsion alternatives of future LNG vessels. The initial cost, operating cost, reliability, maintenance and manning parameters that will affect the management of ships provided are presented and the pros and cons of each option are highlighted. Recent developments and trends in the LNG newbuilding market are reviewed.
B.
INTRODUCTION
The realisation of the reduced long-term availability of oil combined with the environmental concern for greener fuel has driven the rapid expansion of the gas industry. As a consequence, the LNG shipping industry, being the most efficient transportation vehicle between the remote reliquefication plants and end users, is in a phase of rapid growth and gaining momentum. A record 72 LNG tanker newbuildings were ordered in 2004, far surpassing the previous annual record of 24 in 2001 (see Appendix for LNG NB order book). The total order book for LNG ships stands at 107 confirmed orders and can go up to 140 if all options are exercized. Over the last 30 years the LNG industry has seen steady average growth of about 2.7% per annum. Today LNG represents about 6% of world primary energy consumption. Recent forecasts show this growth pattern changing dramatically with the industry set to double in size in the next 5 years. LNG has been a commercial cargo for over 40 years with a remarkable record of safety and reliability. One of the factors that enhanced this record was the choice of the propulsion system which was dominantly the steam turbine. Apart from its reliability, one of the major advantages of using steam propulsion is that the unavoidable boil-off gas, created by thermal conductivity through the tank walls and the movement of the liquid, can be directly burned in the boiler. Why then, should the LNG industry now be exploiting changing this proven propulsion system? As environmental, economic and technical expectations increase, the apparent drawbacks of the steam power plant make it a less attractive option. Among the drawbacks are the comparative low efficiency of the plant, its high fuel consumption, which in turn translates into high exhaust emissions. In addition, the comparatively large engine room space requirement, the limited propulsion redundancy, the high initial cost to install and the limited supply of experienced engineers, further encourage the transition to alternative propulsion plants. Advances in the design of dual fuel diesel engines, shipboard LNG reliquefaction plants and marine gas turbines, provide meaningfull alternatives to the traditional steam power plant for LNG vessels.
Page 2 of 36
C.
PROPULSION SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS
Before presenting and discussing the propulsion system alternatives, it is essential to review what are the requirements of an LNG vessel according to the current market demands. All consequences from choosing a specific propulsion plant type should be considered. 1) Operating Efficiency a) Plant efficiency The propulsion plant efficiency is one of the critical factors as for a given displacement, it determines the weight of fuel needed and hence the remaining cargo containment space but more importantly, it affects the leading element of operating cost of the ship, the fuel cost,i.e the cost required to transport a specific quantity of cargo per mile at sea . b) Best utilisation of the boil-off gas(BOG) The specified quantity of evaporated LNG from the containment systems is 0.15% per day as a maximum of the liquid tank volume on the loaded voyage of the vessel. This quantity of cargo is left to evaporate in order to control temperature and pressure in cargo tanks. LNG is a concentrated fuel (high Calorific value / unit weight) and hence using LNG in a given plant, can save up to 25% of fuel weight. (Typical Gas HHV: 13000 kcal/kg, Typical HFO HHV: 10280 kcal/kg) The easiest way to handle the ever-present boil off gas (BOG) is to use it as fuel. Until now this was done by simply burning it in a simple steam boiler. More recently, emerging technologies allow the BOG to be used as fuel directly in diesel engines. Alternatively, reliquefaction plants have been developed to return the BOG back to the cargo tanks. 2) Environmental Concern Environmental friendliness and Ecology is nowadays a major concern. New technology and engineering applications in the propulsion plants have achieved significant results minimizing CO2, SOx and NOx emissions. 3) Safety The LNG industry has an excellent safety record. This is the result of several factors, such as high standards of design and construction ,high levels of redundancy and high standards of training and operation. 4) Reliability and redundancy A key factor for ship reliability is the choice of propulsion. For more conventional vessels, a breakdown results in off hire at the daily charter rate with the expected financial costs. In contrast, the LNG trade, any outage during service could mean that the liquefaction plant exporting the cargo may have to shut down if there is no storage available until the next vessel arrives. So the out of service cost of an LNG ship has multiple consequences for the whole LNG project compared to out of service consequences for a conventional carrier. In the past,
Page 3 of 36
there were few LNG ships available on short notice to fill in for a ship that was out of service making this issue very important. 5) Maintenability The propulsion plant should be designed to require minimum maintenance. Maintenance requirements should be covered easily during port calls and scheduled dry-dockings without affecting ships sailing schedule and operations. 6) Flexibility Although at the moment the LNG trade is mostly a project-specific oriented market, with vessels built for long term time charters operating on standard routes, the spot market and the short term trade (currently limited to 5-10 % of the transported volume) is expected to increase in the near future. Single voyage based charters will require more flexible vessels in terms of vessel size ,fuel requirements and equipment, allowing trading between alternative ports and facilities (including offshore terminals).Many LNG terminals have limited or no bunkering facilities,therefore ,bunkering is often done by barges ,possibly at the loadingdischarge port,or by stopping the ship enroute. LNG vessels must also be prepared to halt cargo operations and depart the loading or discharge port at any time in case of an emergency. This requirement impacts propulsion system design and maintenance plans. 7) Crewability The rapid increase of the LNG fleet, resulted in a shortage of experienced crew for the expanded fleet and has already become a major industry concern. The problem is enhanced when considering vessels equipped with steam power plants.Since LNG ships are the only remaining commercial vessels still using steam power ,this has become a small specialised niche in the marine industry.Many suppliers of steam equipment have been driven out of business and the opportunities for obtaining steam training are few. This is another critical factor in deciding towards the optimum power plant. 8) Reduced Engine room dimensions As in all types of vessel, maximisation of cargo spaces is the ultimate objective of owners and charterers. The propulsion technologies available have significant differences in engine room dimension requirements, hence this parameter should not be overlooked.
Page 4 of 36
D.
PROPULSION ALTERNATIVES
A significant number of propulsion alternatives have been considered over the recent years as possible candidates for the replacement of the traditional steam plant on the LNG vessels, these involve different prime movers, different power generating sets, or combinations of them, different transmission systems, different fuel configurations together with different means for dealing with the unavoidable BOG. Here we will attempt to describe and compare the most attractive and promising alternatives based on the feed back currently being received from the industry. Table 1, presents the alternatives we will deal with in the remaining part of this paper. An attempt has been made to group the alternatives on the basis of the prime mover as this is considered the leading parameter, other groupings are also possible, eg by the type of fuel to be used (see following chart), to suit a particular study. Table 1. Propulsion alternatives according to Prime Mover
PRIME MOVER STEAM TURBINE CONFIGURATION FUEL USED -BOG HANDLING -BACK UP BOG HANDLING -BURNING ON BOILERS -STEAM DUMPING TRANSMISSION ELECTRIC POWER
TWO BOILERS WITH HP &LP STEAM TURBINE
HFO AND /OR GAS ALMOST IN ANY COMBINATION HFO
MECHANICAL DRIVE THROUGH REDUCTION GEARS
USUALLY TWO TURBOGENERATOR S AND ONE OR TWO DIESEL GENERATOR USUALLY FOUR DIESEL GENERATORS
SLOW SPEED DIESEL
ONE OR TWO SLOW SPEED DIESELS
- 2X100% RELIQUEFACTION PLANTS -NOT REQUIRED -BURNING ON THE ENGINE -OXIDIZER *2 -BURNING IN THE DUAL FUEL ENGINES -OXIDISER *2 -BURNING IN THE ENGINES -OXIDIZER *2 -BURNING IN THE ENGINES -OXIDIZER *2 -BURNING IN THE PROPULSION AND AUXILIARY TURBINE -OXIDIZER
DIRECT DRIVE
HFO AND/OR GAS
USUALLY FOUR DIESEL GENERATORS ELECTRIC DRIVE THROUGH SLOW SPEED PROPULSION MOTOR OR MEDIUM SPEED PROPULSION MOTOR AND REDUCTION GEAR OR ELECTRIC WITH AZIPOD *3 ELECTRIC POWER AVAILABLE FROM MAIN GENERATOR ENGINES ELECTRIC POWER AVAILABLE FROM MAIN GENERATOR ENGINES ELECTRIC POWER AVAILABLE FROM MAIN GENERATOR ENGINES ELECTRIC POWER AVAILABLE EITHER FROM MAIN GAS TURBINE OR AUXILIARY GAS TURBINE ONE DIESEL GENERATOR IS ALSO PROVIDED AS BACK UP
MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL
COMBINATION OF HFO BURNING DIESELS AND DUAL FUEL DIESELS DUAL FUEL DIESELS
-HFO -GAS OR MDO
GAS OR MDO
4* GAS OR HFO *1
GAS TURBINE
4*
SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE USUALLY ONE PROPULSION TURBINE AND ONE AUXILIARY TURBINE COGES (COMBINED GAS TURBINE AND STEAM)
GAS OR MGO
GAS OR MGO
-BURNING ON THE PROPULSION AND AUXILIARY TURBINE -OXIDIZER
ELECTRIC DRIVE THROUGH SLOW SPEED PROPULSION MOTOR OR MEDIUM SPEED PROPULSION MOTOR AND REDUCTION GEAR OR ELECTRIC WITH AZIPOD *3
Notes: 1. This option is not available in the market yet 2. For these options the oxidizer is shown as the back up means of handling BOG. Separately adding reliquefaction plant is discussed as an alternative design concept.
Page 5 of 36
3. For these options direct mechanical drive is a rarely discussed alternative.
4 .A possible alternative resulting form a combination of medium speed diesels and gas turbine is the CODAG (combined diesel and gas turbine). Table 2.presents the alternative propulsion plants available, based on the type of fuel each alternative utilizes. Table 2. Propulsion alternatives according to type of Fuel
TYPE OF FUEL
HFO
CONFIGURATION
SLOW SPEED DIESEL + RELIQUIFACTION MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL + RELIQUEFICATION
TRANSMISSION
DIRECT DRIVE
ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD
GAS + HFO
STEAM TURBINE
MECHANICAL THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR
SLOW SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL
DIRECT DRIVE
MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL
MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL + MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL HFO
GAS + MDO
MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL
GAS + MGO
GAS TURBINE SIMPLE CYCLE
MECHANICAL THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR
ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR
ELECTRIC DIRECT
AZIPOD GAS TURBINE COMBINED CYCLE MECHANICAL THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD
Page 6 of 36
1. Steam Turbine. The steam propulsion plant used in modern LNGs is very similar in outline to those used on earlier vessels. The plant usually comprises of two boilers supplying steam to high and low pressure turbines, which in turn drive a single screw via a gearbox. The steam also drives the electrical generators as well as powering many auxiliaries and provides the heat source to fuel tanks, air-conditioning etc. The vessels are equipped with one or two diesel generators, which are only for backup when manoeuvring, in port and for cold starting purposes.
Figure 1. Diagram of a typical Steam Plant configuration
a) Advantages i. Very easy and reliable method to utilise the BOG. The power requirements of a vessel in service, exceed the energy available from the BOG, enabling complete utilisation. ii. High reliability iii. Low maintenance iv. Low vibration levels v. Very low lubricating oil consumption
Page 7 of 36
b) Disadvantages i. ii. iii. Low efficiency of the turbine plant with the inevitable high fuel consumption. The need to continue developing experienced crew, familiar with the operation and maintenance of a steam plant. Long delivery time for turbines and reduction gears and very limited production versus demand. Hence in case of failure, major delays and off-hire may be encountered, unless depot spares of the major components are maintained which increases considerably the ships capital cost, this becomes more pronounced as the number of sister ships in the fleet is reducing. Excessive CO2 emissions due to high exhaust gas volumes. Larger engine room space requirements than for a motor ship The layout offers limited propulsion redundancy. At low speeds or at anchor, the power generated by continuing to burn the BOG is much lower than the energy available from the BOG. The excess steam is dumped into the main condenser resulting in the loss of economic value of the boil off. The typical configuration of the Engine room for a vessel fitted with a steam turbine is presented on figure 2
iv. v. vi. vii.
Figure 2. Engine room configuration
2. Slow Speed Diesel . The slow speed diesel is a proven prime mover with about 80% of the commercial vessels in service today propelled by slow speed diesels. For the LNG carriers however, the need to find an acceptable means to dispose of BOG, has prevented the slow speed diesel from being a feasible propulsion alternative until recently. Slow speed diesel propulsion is now a realised solution mainly because of the following two offered alternatives: a) Slow speed diesel with reliquefaction plant b) Slow speed diesel with dual gas and heavy fuel oil burning.
Page 8 of 36
The first solution has emerged from the fact that shipboard reliquefaction technology has matured considerably in recent years, tapping wide experience from land-based installations, LPG carrier installations and an experimental plant on one LNG carrier. The plant offers a solution for pumping the reliquefied BOG back to the cargo tanks and hence the opportunity to deliver more cargo to the buyers. The principle of the reliquefanction plant, is based on the closed Brayton cycle. The BOG is removed from the tanks, compressed, cooled and condensed into LNG in a cryogenic heat exchanger by means of a nitrogen compression-expansion cycle. Any non-condensibles, mainly nitrogen, are removed in a separator and released to the atmosphere. For a 149,000 m3 carrier, the plant requires about 3.5 MW of electrical power (This converts to about 20% of the energy available in the recycled BOG being expended during the reliquefaction process or about 20 tonnes of fuel per day is consumed to cover the electrical demand for this reliquefaction plant). Figures below show a typical layout of the reliquefaction plant and that of a slow speed diesel installation with reliquefaction plant.
Figure 3. Diagram of a typical Reliquefaction plant
Page 9 of 36
Figure 4. Typical slow speed diesel system with reliquefaction plant The second and possible slow speed diesel alternative for LNG carrier propulsion is the slow speed diesel with dual fuel (HFO-Gas) burning capability. This alternative has not yet been thoroughly tested. There is one land based installation on a power plant having a slow speed diesel in operation on natural gas only. While this tests the ability of the engine to operate only on gas, it does not test the ability to operate with a mix of two fuels, HFO and gas . As with the dual fuel medium speed diesel offered alternatives, which will be described later, the higher efficiency of the slow speed diesel, reduces the amount of energy required for propulsion and brings it much closer to the amount of energy available from the boil off gas Therefore the supplementary fuel oil requirement is drastically reduced, or even eliminated, compared to that of a steam turbine installation. Fuel burning options available with this type of engine are, the dual fuel mode with minimum pilot oil amount, the specified gas mode with the injection of fixed gas amount and the fuel oil only mode. Slow speed engine manufacturers claim that with the recent introduction of electronic control on slow speed diesels (as opposed to the camshaft controlled fuel injection/exhaust valve), the gas burning capability option is further technically enhanced. A potential drawback of this option is that the gas supply must be compressed to about 300 bar, to facilitate injection into the cylinder. This requires considerable energy and expensive and maintenance intensive compressors, it also raises safety concerns.
Page 10 of 36
Figure 5. GI Engine Configuration (source: MAN B&W) a) Advantages of the slow speed diesel with reliquefaction plant i. High overall fuel efficiency up to 50 %- (about 60% higher than for the steam plants) resulting in lower energy consumption and thus lower operating cost compared to steam plants. Smaller Engine room required hence more cargo space for a given vessel compared to steam propulsion. (For a 138,000m3 vessel, the increase in cargo carrying capacity is of the order of 6,000m3 when compared with a steam turbine vessel). The amount of LNG delivered is higher as the BOG is reliquified. The amount of CO2 released can be reduced by approximately 60,000 mt/ship/year compared to a steam ship for a 150,000 m3 LNG carrier. In the case of a design using twin diesel engines, with separate engine rooms, there is full propulsion redundancy and added safety margins against floods and fires in the engine room. The reliquefanction plant ensures that all cargo handling takes place on the deck, avoiding gas entering the engine room. This makes cargo and engine room operations simpler and safer. The reliquefanction plant and the separation between the cargo and the engine room, reduces the constraints on the propulsion plant design and the type of fuel. Availability of engineers experienced with this type of propulsion system.
ii.
iii. iv. v.
vi.
vii. viii.
b) Disadvantages i. ii. iii. iv. v. The readily available and clean BOG is not utilised for the propulsion of the vessel Higher NOx and SOx emissions compared to alternatives burning LNG instead of HFO Less redundancy than existing steam systems in the single engine layout. Diesel engines require more maintenance on a routine basis than steam turbines Higher lub oil consumption compared to steam turbine which adds to the operating cost.
Page 11 of 36
c) Investment cost: The capital cost of an LNG carrier with slow speed diesel and reliquefaction plant for a 130,000-150,000 m3 LNG is expected to increase by about 0-1% when compared with a steam turbine driven vessel, twin engine installation gives obviously the highest difference. Likewise the capital cost of a vessel with dual fuel slow speed installation is about 3% lower when compared to a steam turbine driven vessel. 3) Medium speed diesel (Diesel electric). All options with medium speed engines are almost exclusively considered in combination with electric propulsion. The engines operate as generator sets and deliver the propulsion power to the propeller through either medium speed electric propulsion motor(s) with reduction gear or directly through low speed electric propulsion motor(s). Single and twin screw configurations as well as azipod options are also available to suit the particular ship design depending on the level of propulsion redundancy, maneuvrability and draft characteristics required. Fig 6. below shows a typical medium speed diesel electric propulsion layout.
Figure 6. Typical configuration of a Medium speed dual fuel diesel electric Medium speed dual fuel engines have been installed in both offshore and onshore power plant applications for many years. In the case of onshore installations, natural gas is utilized and for offshore installations generally process gas is used as fuel for power generation. Dual fuel engines proposed for LNG vessels are developed upon these same principles. The engine is capable of burning either gas with marine diesel oil as pilot fuel for injection, or marine diesel oil. It is capable of changing over instantly between the two modes of operation whenever required with stepless power output.
Page 12 of 36
LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS Gas-mode
SNAME - Greek Section Diesel-mode
Figure 7. Modes of operation for a Medium speed dual fuel diesel electric engine During the gas operation mode, the engines operate on Otto cycle, gas is introduced into the cylinder during the air suction cycle at low pressure. Gas injection sub-system is normally located directly on the engine and its basic function is to provide timely and accurate delivery of the gas fuel into the cylinder, gas is delivered through an electronically actuated control valve leading to the engine air inlet ducting. Knocking sensors adjust combustion timing based on the gas quality. When the engine is switched to the MDO or HFO mode then it operates under the normal Diesel cycle. It should be mentioned that large bore medium speed engines operating on gas have not been tested in service yet. The information we receive from a leading medium speed engine manufacturer is that the dual fuel medium speed engine is going to become a more attractive option for LNG vessels by the introduction of a gas and HFO burning engine. This will eliminate the need to operate the engine on the relatively expensive diesel oil when gas is not available. Authors understand that this type of engine is currently undergoing shop tests and manufacturing of the first engine may start this coming summer. The most common configuration options available with medium speed diesel electric propulsion therefore are: DUAL FUEL ,(BOG/MDO) ENGINES ONLY A suitable number of dual fuel gas and MDO burning engines only (typically four).This option is suitable for trades where gas(natural and forced boil off) is considered as the primary fuel in all normal modes, except when no gas is available(first voyage or after drydock), in which case the engines are operated on MDO. DUAL FUEL ,(BOG/MDO) ENGINES AND HFO ENGINES A combination of dual fuel (gas and MDO) burning engines and HFO burning engines (typically two and two). This layout is suitable when gas cannot be predicted with confidence to be the primary fuel over the vessels service life. In this case when gas is not available or the price difference between gas and HFO trigers the choice of HFO, the installation can produce the propulsion and auxiliary power requirement by operating only the HFO burning engines. Obviously higher installed power is required
Page 13 of 36
if the normal power demand needs to be available when either only gas or only HFO is available. DUAL FUEL ,(BOG/HFO) ENGINES ONLY A suitable number (again usually four) of dual fuel (gas and HFO) burning engines. Although no such engine is available in the market so far, its introduction in the near future ,as promised by a leading manufacturer, will offer the most economically attractive layout among the three, since the plant will be able to produce the required power by utilising either gas only or fuel only or a combination of gas and fuel without installing excess power. In the three alternative configuartions described above, the need to have a back up means of dealing with the boil off gas is normally handled by the installation of an oxidiser .The oxidiser burns the amount of BOG which exceeds the propulsion requirements. Separately, the reliquefaction plant can be installed as a primary means of dealing with the BOG with the three alternatives described above. This option is discussed at the end of this section. It should be mentioned here that a possible but less promising alternative is to combine medium speed diesels with gas turbine on a CODAG (Combined Diesel and Gas Turbine) configuration. A schematic representation of the fuel system of a dual fuel medium speed engine can be observed on the following figure.
Dual Fuel Medium Speed Engine Fuel Supply
Figure 8. Gas fuel
Figure 9. Pilot fuel
Figure 10. Secondary fuel

Figure 11. Twin needle injection valve
Page 14 of 36
a) Advantages i. ii. iii. iv. v. Higher efficiency compared to steam propulsion (but lower compared to slow speed diesel options) High propulsion redundancy, especially on a twin motor twin skeg configuartion High flexibility on the available fuel and engine load, especially on the third option Reduced emissions Increased cargo carrying capacity (compared to the steam propulsion option for a given ship size), because of the shorter engine room length and possibly because of the reduced size of bunker tanks. The later is more pronounced on the first configuration alternative (The relative increase in cargo carrying capacity for a given ship size is comparable to that achieved by the slow speed diesel option, when both are compared to the steam turbine option). For a 138,000m3 vessel, the increase in cargo carrying capacity is of the order of 6,000m3 compared to a steam turbine vessel. Higher availability of experienced crew comparing to steam turbine. Auxiliary Electric power demand is covered by the propulsion engines eliminating the need for additional auxiliary gen sets. The provision of usually four or even more prime movers facilitates voyage maintenance with no or little available power reduction.
vi. vii. viii.
b) Disadvantages i. Added complication due to the handling of gas in the engine room, however low pressure gas is supplied into the engine room similar to the existing steam turbine design. Higher capital cost Higher maintenance as a result of more moving parts, higher speed and more cylinders in a particular installation. Limitations on satisfactory engine operation while burning gas based on the gas composition (max 22% Nitrogen and minimum 78% Methane) About 4% efficiency loss in the electric power generation process. At low speeds or at anchor, the power requirement is much lower than the energy available from the BOG. Excess BOG is then sent to the oxidiser which results in the loss of economic value of the boil off.
ii. iii. iv. v. vi.
c) Investment cost: The capital cost of an LNG carrier with medium speed diesel electric propulsion for a 130,000-150,000 m3 LNG is expected to increase by about 3-5% when compared with a steam turbine driven vessel. The installation of a reliquefaction plant will increase the capital cost by another 5%.
Page 15 of 36
Fig 12a. Single-scew, direct drive
Fig12b.. Single-scew, medium speed reduction gear
Fig 12c. Twin-scew, direct drive
Fig 12d. Pods
Figure 12. Medium Speed Diesel Configuration Alternatives (scource : Wartsila)
Page 16 of 36
Figure 13. Medium Speed Diesel Fuel Alternatives
Fig 13a. Dual Fuel Engines running on natural and forced BOG (or MDO if no BOG)
Fig 13b. Dual Fuel Engines: 2 engines running on natural BOG (or MDO) & 2 Diesel Engines running on HFO only
Fig 13c. Dual Fuel Engines Running on either BOG or HFO (Not available yet) (scource : Wartsila)
Page 17 of 36
4) Medium Speed Diesel with Reliquefaction Plant A possible alternative which is being discussed within the industry and is considered to boost considerably the flexibility of the preceeding alternatives with medium speed engine diesel electric propulsion, is the addition of a reliquefaction plant. Obviously the highest flexibility is obtained if the reliquefaction plant is installed in combination with the third diesel electric option-the dual gas/HFO burning engines-Such a configuartion will give complete freedom on the boil off gas handling (use as propulsion fuel or reliquefy) and consequently on the fuel used for propulsion. The configuration will allow optimum adoption to the relative prices of gas and HFO and to different vessel operating profiles and speeds. It seems therefore ideal for spot trade ships. The draw back on this alternative is obviously the added capital for the cost of the reliquefaction plant which is of the order of USD 10mil for 2x100% units. It should be mentioned here that the slow speed diesel dual fuel engine with a reliquefaction plant is an equally feasible solution. The reliquefaction plant viability depends also on the vessels speed as indicated on figure 14. The curve indicates the LNG consumption for the diesel-electric design at various speeds. The boil-off-rate is assumed to be more or less constant at 0.15% / day which is about 100 mt / day for a 142,000 m3 vessel. The shaded area above the curve indicates the excess boil-off. Hence, if for example a vessel without a reliquification plant is sailing at 18 knots, then 25 t of excessive boil-off would be lost every day. If the vessel was sailing at lower speed, the amount lost would be greater and vice versa. Hence the reliquification plant becomes more beneficial as the service speed of the vessel is reduced.
Figure14. LNG consumption vs. speed (Source C. Clucas, Dorchester Maritime )

Page 18 of 36
5. Gas turbine Even though the Gas Turbine (GT) propulsion system has many advantages in power to weight ratio, emission level, flexible machinery arrangement, efficiency and consequential cargo volume increase, it has not been adopted as a new propulsion system in an LNG carrier so far. As the GT propulsion system has some unique features and limitations compared with conventional marine propulsion systems, detailed technical and economic issues have to be solved in order to implement this power plant in an actual LNG carrier. The GTs proposed for LNG propulsion are usually marinized aeroengines of the latest generation with lower ratings compared to those used on aircraft. These changes promise to enhance reliability in the marine environment. The primary fuel considered for the alternatives associated with the GT is gas, with MGO being considered only as a back-up fuel in case of emergency. The alternatives therefore are suitable for projects where the use of gas (boil off and forced) has been established by overall economic considerations, similar to the medium speed dual fuel (gas and MDO burning) electric alternative . Further, the configuration options available with gas turbine are mainly based on electric propulsion, although mechanical drive through reduction gear is possible, it is not considered a likely candidate for LNGs because it removes some of the advantages achieved with the gas turbine, like flexibility of installation, elimination of auxiliary electric power generators etc. Electricity generated by the gas turbine-driven alternators is delivered to the distribution network on to high-voltage main busbars. Power for the propulsion motor - or motors - is taken directly from these busbars and converted to provide a variable speed drive. The alternatives are: Simple cycle, usually with one main turbine and one auxiliary turbine Combined cycle (COGES), usually with the same configuration as the simple cycle as far as number of gas turbines is concerned but with the addition of a heat recovery system which utilises the energy in the main turbine exhaust gasses to add steam turbine driven electric generation into the propulsion/auxiliary power system. This configuration is promised to offer a 10% increase in overall efficiency compared to simple cycle one but it increases the propulsion system capital by 25% and adds considerably to plant complexity.
The figures below show typical arrangement of the three propulsion configurations associated with gas turbine as prime mover.
Page 19 of 36
Figure 15. Simple Cycle
Figure 16. Combined cycle (COGES)
Page 20 of 36
Figure 17. Direct Drive
a) Advantages: i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi.

vii. viii.
Increased cargo carrying capacity (for a 138,000m3 vessel, the increase in cargo carrying capacity is of the order of 8,500m3 compared to a steam turbine vessel ) Low machinery weight and volume Reduced installation costs Low engine noise and vibration Low equipment routine maintenance Increased thermal efficiency compared to steam turbines Design flexibility Lower fuel consumption than steam plant (but not as good as diesel options)
b) Disadvantages: i. Expensive back up fuel (MGO) ii. Higher Capital cost iii. Lower redundancy compared to alternatives iv. Relatively untried technology for the commercial ships v. Combined cycle plant has the complexity of Gas Turbine plus the steam plant. vi. Specialised training of engineers is required
c) Investment cost: The capital cost of an LNG carrier with gas turbine simple cycle plant for a 130,000-150,000 m3 LNG is expected to increase by about 3% when compared with a steam turbine powered vessel, and that of a combined cycle (COGES) powered vessel by about 5%.
Page 21 of 36
6) Azimuth Thrusters A promising alternative for the propulsion and thrust power transmission, apart from common tailshaft propeller arrangement, is the Azimuth thrusters. The alternative is not an exclusive option for LNGs but for all ships with electric propulsion. Recently they have become a popular option for the latest generation of Cruise carriers. The feedback we get from such applications indicates that there are still teething problems to rectify. Azimuth Thrusters are electric podded drive systems mounted on a 360 degree rotating shaft under the ship. The absence of rudder improves the underwater dynamics and increases manoeuvrability. By allowing flexible machinery arrangements, azimuth thrusters make possible a smaller vessel with the same cargo space. The main component in the underwater unit is the electric motor, in this case of synchronous type with brushless excitation and with a stator shrink fit in the pod housing. In most cases, the motor is equipped with double windings in order to permit a continuous operation > 50% load, even in case of winding failure. There is also a shaft brake, locking device and equipment to slowly turn the shaft in order to assist when undertaking maintenance work.
Figure 18. Azipod Drive
Figure 19. CRP Azipod Drive
a) Owner/Operator benefits: i. Increased cargo capacity or reduced vessel size ii. Increased propulsion system efficiency (energy saving up to 10%) iii. Increased propulsion system redundancy and power availability iv. Reduced total installed power generation v. Reduced total fuel consumption & exhaust emissions vi. Reduced noise & vibration levels vii. Reduced vessel turning circle b) Shipyard & Construction benefits: i. Flexible machinery arrangement ii. Modularised design iii. Simpler vessel machinery installation iv. Simpler hull form and structure v. Reduced installation time and cost vi. Fewer components vii. Reduced shipyard/sub-supplier co-ordination work
Page 22 of 36
E. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES The steam turbine plant is highly reliable and widely adopted on LNG carriers. The ability to use both BOG and HFO ensures clean combustion. However, these plants suffer from inferior fuel efficiency and therefore higher fuel consumption. Furthermore, these propulsion systems are heavy and expensive to install, consume valuable cargo space and require experienced seagoing engineers. The diesel engine with a reliquefaction plant enables complete separation of the engine and the BOG handling system. The fuel efficiency is better, the amount of cargo delivered is increased but at the cost of eliminating the flexibility of consuming gas as propulsion fuel, higher maintenance and higher levels of NOX and SOX emissions. The slow speed dual fuel diesel eliminates some of the drawbacks associated with the slow speed/reliquefaction plant alternative and at the same time maintains the high thermal efficiency of the slow speed diesel. The medium speed dual fuel electric propulsion concept for LNG carriers offers a way to continue to use the boil-off for ship propulsion while achieving the higher thermal efficiency of a diesel engine. It is one of the cleanest power plants and offers multiple levels of redundancy and flexibility using multiple diesel engines producing electricity for propulsion, services and cargo transfer. Dual fuel diesel engines is one of the favored alternatives of the new generation LNG carriers. Special attention though should be paid on the safety requirements governing the construction and operation.
The gas turbine combined cycle plant offers better fuel efficiency and clean emissions as compared to the conventional steam turbine. However it requires a high quality petroleum fuel (MGO-as back up-) and is a complicated system combining the high technology Gas Turbine with the traditional steam plant and associated auxiliary systems. The table below indicates the effect each propulsion alternative has on the main elements which should be considered when attempting to evaluate propulsion alternatives different to the basic steam propulsion. Further, figure 20 represents the effect different propulsion alternatives have on engine room dimensions and cargo carrying capacity. Obviously the decision on a particular project will have to be based on a thorough technoeconomic analysis which would incorporate the whole transportation chain.
Page 23 of 36
Table 3. Comparison of alternatives

ENVIROMENTA L FRIENDLINESS EFFECT ON CAPITAL COST REDUNDANCY BOG UTILISATION CAPABILITIES RELIABILITY PLANT EFFICIENCY
CONFIGURATION
STEAM PLANT SSD /RELIQUEFACTION DUAL FUEL BURNING SSD MEDIUM SPEED DUAL FUEL GAS / MDO MEDIUM SPEED COMBINED DUAL AND HFO ENGINES MEDIUM SPEED DUAL FUEL GAS /HFO GAS TURBINE SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE COMBINED CYCLE
B (RE) (RE) (RE)
B CO2 SOX NOX
B (2X) (1X) (2X) (1X)
Indicates positive effect, Indicates negative effect, Indicates no appreciable effect
COMPARISON OF ENGINE ROOM LENGTH AND CARGO CARRYING CAPACITY WITH DIFFERENT PROPULSION ALTERNATIVES
Figure20.Engine room arrangements
Page 24 of 36
EFFECT ON CARGO CAPACITY
CREW ABILITY
F. CONCLUSION The LNG industry has entered a period of renewed growth which is driving technological change. The traditional method of powering LNG ships, the steam turbine, is being questioned in light of developments in alternative propulsion systems and reliquefaction systems for the boil-off gas. There appear to be significant benefits in changing to diesel or gas turbine power plants, in terms of fuel economy, cargo carrying capacity and reduced emissions. Also, moving away from steam to diesel has the additional benefit of easing the difficulty of bringing Engineers, experienced with the power plant, into the LNG industry. Each alternative system has its advantages and disadvantages. Individual Owners, Chaterers, or LNG Projects might weigh these differently in terms of importance when selecting their design. Forecasts of the relative price of LNG versus fuel oil (heavy fuel oil or marine diesel oil) will also greatly influence the selection. Work continues on each of these designs, further improving their capabilities and better integrating each into the hull and cargo containment designs, as well as the ship/shore interface. As a result, there is no best design that has been agreed upon by the engineers or the market. Whether one finally emerges, or there develops a number of excellent choices that become proven and available to the market; either way, the LNG industry will benefit from this exciting period of development.
Page 25 of 36
G.RECENT NEWBUILDING TRENDS ON ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION
The LNG carrier projects with propulsion other than the standard steam turbine which have recently been contracted are: 1. The LNGs under construction at Chantiers deLAtlantique on behalf of Gaz de France were the first non steam turbine propelled LNG carriers to be contracted in recent years. The characteristics of the first vessel of the series which was due to be delivered last November but delayed due to problems encountered with the cargo tank insulation are as follows: Table 4. Cargo capacity Main engines Installed Power Type of transmission 74,130 m3 WARTSILA ,4x6L50DF 4x5,700kW=22800kW Electric with two motors through reduction gear on a single shaft to a single propeller 17.5 knots
Service speed
The second and third vessels of the series have double cargo carrying capacity comparing to the first one and have the following characteristics:
Table 5. Cargo capacity Main engines Installed Power 153,500 m3 WARTSILA ,3x12V50DF +1x6L50DF 3x11,400+1x5,700kW =39,900kW Electric with two motors through reduction gear on a single shaft to a single propeller 19.0 knots
Type of transmission
Service speed
The layout of the plant for the above ships is similar to the one shown on figure 6
Page 26 of 36
2. Eight very large LNG carriers destined for transport of gas from Qatar to the UK. Four have been ordered at DSME of Korea, and two each from HHI and SHI. Also for the same project, each two LNG carriers of approximately the same capacity have been ordered at HHI and SHI respectively, the characteristics of these eight vessels are: Table 6. Cargo capacity Main engines Generator engines Installed Power Approximately210,000 m3 2x MAN B&W 6S70ME-C 4x MAN B&W Holeby 7L32/40 2x16500kW=33,000kW for propulsion 4x3600kW=14400kW for Electric power Type of transmission Reliquefaction plant Service speed Direct drive ,twin skeg 2x100% units 19.5 knots
The layout of the plant for the above ships is similar to the one shown on figure 4 3. Four (plus four options) LNG carriers ordered by BP at HHI with the following characteristics:
Table 7. Cargo capacity Main engines Installed Power
155,000m3 WARTSILA ,2x12V50DF +2x9L50DF 2x11,400+2x8,550kW =39,900kW Electric with two motors through reduction gear on a single shaft to a single propeller 20.0 knots
Service speed
The layout of the plant for the above ships is similar to the one shown on figure 6
Page 27 of 36
4. Four (plus two options) LNG carriers ordered at SHI for AP-Moller, and also two (plus one option) LNG carriers ordered by K-Line at the same yard, all with the following characteristics:
Cargo capacity Main engines Installed Power
153,000 m3 WARTSILA ,3x12V50DF +1x6L50DF 3x11,400+1x5,700kW =39,900kW Electric with two motors through reduction gear on a single shaft to a single propeller 20.0 knots
Service speed
Again the layout of the plant for the above ships is similar to the one shown on figure 6.
From the foregoing we get a total of 13 firm and 7 optionally contracted LNGs with medium speed diesel electric and 8 firm contracts with slow speed diesel and reliquefaction. In addition to the above, there are a number of LNG carrier projects under discussion which are considered to be equipped with propulsion systems other than steam turbine, these are: The Ras Gas II (train 6) project with either twelve 210,000m3 ships or ten 250,000m3 ships, with twin slow speed diesels and reliquefaction plant (same as item 2 above). Tangguh, Indonesia-Tendering for 7 LNG vessels, 135,000-160,000m3 capacity with either steam turbine or dual fuel diesel electric.
Page 28 of 36
H.APPENDICES Figure 21. Typical Thermal Efficiencies of Prime Movers (Source MAN B&W)
Page 29 of 36
Figure 21.Predicted Brake Power requirements vs. speed (Source Chris Clucas Paper)
Page 30 of 36
Figure 22. Predicted Brake Power requirements vs. size (Source MAN B&W)
Figure 23. Emissions for alternative configurations (Source Wartsila)
Page 31 of 36
Growing Global Natural Gas Consumption
World Primary Energy Consumption 2002

Oil 38%
Hydro electric 6% Nuclear Energy 6%
Natural Gas 24%
Coal 26%
Source: BP Global Statistical Review of World Energy June 200
W o rld Na tu ral G a s C o n s u m p tio n

180 160 140 120
tcf
100 80 60 40 20 0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2010 2020
His tory
P rojec tion
So urce: B P St at ist ical R eview o f W o rld Energ y June 2 0 0 3 , EIA , W o rld Energ y Pro ject io n Syst em (2 0 0 1)
Page 32 of 36
Growing Global LNG Demand

Natural Gas Trade Movement
2002
LNG 26%
Pipeline 74%
Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2003
Growth in LNG Demand

6,000
7% per year growth (1992-2002)

5,000 4,000 bcf 3,000 2,000 1,000 1970 Japan Italy 1980 1990 South Korea Belgium 1992 Taiwan Turkey 1994 1996 France Greece 1998 Spain Portugal 2000 USA UK 2002
Source: Cedigaz, BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2003
LNG is about 6% of worldwide natural gas consumption and about 94% of natural gas consumption in Japan.
Page 33 of 36
Development of LNG Infrastructure

1. LNG TERMINALS EXPORT RECEIVING 2. LNG FLEET EXISTIN G 18 46 160 PLANNED 28 72
100 ~200
% INCREASE 155 % 150% 100%
DEBOTTLE NECK LNG PLANTS - INCREASES CAPACITY AND NEED FOR SHIPPING POSSIBLE FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SPOT TRADING
Page 34 of 36
Factors To Increasing LNG Shipping Productivity Increase throughout and / or lower cost
1.Increase size of ship
Year Size / cubic meter 1960 30,000 1970 75,000 1980 125,000 1990 138,000 2000 145,000 2010 220,000 2020
Slow speed Diesel with re-liquefaction
2. Change propulsion from Steam to?
Dual fuel Diesel Electric Gas Turbine and Diesel or Steam
3. Lower Ship Cost
Page 35 of 36
References
Propulsion Alternatives for LNG Tankers David Furnival & Chris Clucas, Dorchester Maritime Ltd. Isle of Man, UK. Evaluation of Propulsion options for LNG Carriers Gastech 2002, Dr. Manfred Kuver, Chris Clucas, Nils Fuhrmann. Dual-Fuel-Electric LNG carrier Propulsion Barend Thijssen, Wartsila, Finland. Fueling the Future-Powering the Carriers (LNG) Dominic Welch, Rolls-Royce Marine Systems, UK. Dual Fuel Operation of MAN B&W Two Stroke, ME-GI Engines-Design Concepts Rene S.Laursen, MAN B&W Diesel A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark. Guide for design and installation of Dual Fuel Engines ABS, January 2003 LNG Carrier Propulsion by ME Engines and Reliquefaction MAN B&W. LNG Safety and Security Institute for Energy, Law & Enterprise, University of Houston, October 2003. LNG World Shipping newsletter, December 2004. Competitive pressure rises on steam propulsion for LNG Tankers The Naval Architect, March 2004. LNG Carrier Propulsion by ME-GI Engines and/or Reliquefaction MAN B&W Diesel A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark. Dual-fuel-electric LNG Carriers Barend Thijssen, Wartsila, Finland. Electric Propulsion for new generation LNG Carriers The FrontRunner, Sept 2004, Published by ABB Marine. Wartsila 50DF Engine HFO Development October 2004. Diesel Engines for LNG Carrier Propulsion Ole Grone & Peter Skjoldager MAN B&W Diesel A/S, Wemer Oehlers & Dirk Fabry-MAN B&W AG. August 2002. Two-Stroke Diesel Engines and Reliquefaction System for LNG Carriers Peter Skjoldager, Tore Lunde & Eirik Melaaen.
Websites http://www.rolls-royce.com/marine/product http://www.manbw.com/files/news/filesof3856/P9027-04-04.pdf http://research.dnv.com/marmil/gasprop/info.htm http://www.wartsila.com/?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=shippower_en
Page 36 of 36

LNG Propulsion 7

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

LNG Propulsion 7

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

Presented to: SNAME GREEK SECTION in 17 February 2005

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

PROPULSION SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

TWO BOILERS WITH HP &LP STEAM TURBINE

HFO AND /OR GAS ALMOST IN ANY COMBINATION HFO

MECHANICAL DRIVE THROUGH REDUCTION GEARS

SLOW SPEED DIESEL

ONE OR TWO SLOW SPEED DIESELS

HFO AND/OR GAS

MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL

-HFO -GAS OR MDO

-BURNING ON THE PROPULSION AND AUXILIARY TURBINE -OXIDIZER

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

3. For these options direct mechanical drive is a rarely discussed alternative.

ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD

MECHANICAL THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR

SLOW SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL

MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL

ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD

MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL + MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL HFO

ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD

MEDIUM SPEED DIESEL DUAL FUEL

ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR ELECTRIC DIRECT AZIPOD

GAS TURBINE SIMPLE CYCLE

MECHANICAL THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR

ELECTRIC THROUGH REDUCTION GEAR

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Figure 1. Diagram of a typical Steam Plant configuration

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

iv. v. vi. vii.

Figure 2. Engine room configuration

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Figure 3. Diagram of a typical Reliquefaction plant

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Maran Gas Maritime Inc. February 17, 2005

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS Gas-mode

SNAME - Greek Section Diesel-mode

LNG CARRIER ALTERNATIVE PROPULSION SYSTEMS

SNAME - Greek Section

Figure 8. Gas fuel