Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Con ference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
r
Energy consumption and exhaust emissions for
various types of marine transport
compared
with trucks and private cars
H. O. Holmegaard Kristensen. MSc
Danish Shipowners Association
SYNOPSIS
This paper contains the results of systematic computer calculations of exhaust emissions and energy consumption for different types of ship transport compared with transport by trucks and private cars. The ship types investigated in the computer model developed by the author include container ships, bulk carriers, Ro-Ro cargo vessels and Ro-Ro passenger vessels, i.e. normal car and passenger ferries, as well as fast femes (mono-hulls and catamarans).
The coining years will see the introduction of international maritime regulations for limitation of NOx emissions from ships and regulations for NOx, CO, HC and particulate emissions by trucks. This paper contains calculations that show the influence that these new regulations will have for maritime transport compared with truck transport and also for passenger transport by ferries compared with transport with private cars.
INTRODUCTION
Tri order to obtain deeper insight into energy consumption and emissions, the author has developed a computer model
(COMIBI-TRANS) for calculation of energy consumption for a given ship speed on the basis of cargo capacity for a
particular ship type. The model has now been implemented in an even larger computer model (TEMA 2000) which has been developed by The Danish Ministry of Transport in order to investigate the energy consi.nnption and the exhaust emissions for all types of transportation (ships. trucks, railways, buses, cars and air planes).
The author's calculation model includes the following ship types and sizes. Container ships: 100 - 6000 TEU (TEU = Iwenty foot Equivalent Unit) Bulk carriers: 2.000 - 150.000 tons cargo capacity
- Ro-Ro cargo ships: 700 - 3500 lane metres
Ro-Ro passenger ships (car ferries): 15 - 1000 PCU (PCU = private car unit) Fast mono-hull car ferries: 50 - 500 PCU
Fast catamaran car ferries: 50 - 400 PCU
A statistical a.nalvsis has been made of cargo capacity. main dimensions, and other parameters that influence propulsion power for each of the above mentioned ship types. The results of this analysis are used in a calculation model to estimate the main dimensions and service speed necessaiy to fulfil a specified cargo capacity for a specified ship type.
When main dimensions and speed are fixed, the necessary propulsion power is found with the aid of various empirical
calculation methods2 depending on ship pe. The accuracy of these calculation methods has been checked for selected
ships where full-scale measurements/observations are available. Comparisons of estimated and observed results also
include fast ferries. These comparisons show that the empirical calculation methods2 are reasonably reliable.
The main dimensions and service speed calculated by the program on statistical basis can be modified manually, to show their influence on propulsion power. The structure of the calculation model is shown in fig. 1, where the parameters of the calculation method can be seen.
Author's Biography
H. O. Holmegaard Kristensen is a Senior Naval Architect at Danish Shipowners Association and External Professor at Department of Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering at the Technical University of Denmark in Lyngby.
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle 4 6 September 2000
First calculate ship length, L, as a function of cargo capacity. K
L = f0(K)
L7
On basis of statistical data calculate the ship's main dimensions as standard functions of ship length. L
Propulsion power. Pf. is calculated on the basis of main dimensions, cargo capacity, K. and utilisation fraction. U
(U actual cargo/maximum cargo)
Finally, main dimensions can be modified and their influence on propulsion power and energy consumption can
be determined.
Fig. I Sketch showing main principles of calcu'ation model COMBI-TRANS for determination of energy consumption for different ship types. Printout from the model is shown in Appendix A.
As an alternative to the developed calculation method described above it is possible to make a statistical analysis of
relevant data (cargo capacity, propulsion power and corresponding service speed) for a number of ships. to find energy consumption per transpon unit (e.g. kg oil per transported tons per km). However, such a statistical method does not give seamless information about the influence of varying individual parameters, such as speed and cargo capacity. The results will have relatively large scatter and be of more qualitative nature compared with the method described in this paper.
In order to be able to compare ships with trucks. the calculation model includes a module for calculation of energy
consumption and emissions for truck transport on the basis of truckload capacity and different engine standards (fulfilling either present or future enviromnental requirements). Furthermore the calculation model includes a module for calculation of energy consumption and emissions for private cars (with and without catalytic emission control).
The calculation model can be used to combine the analysis methods for ships and trucks and cars to calculate energy
consumption and emissions for a complete transport chain consisting of any combination of the following three elements. Transport by truck or private car to departure harbour
Voyage by ship from departure to destination harbour Transport by truck or private car from destination harbour
Specification of individual transport distances for part I - 3 mentioned above together with the energy consumption needed for transference of cargo between truck and ship enables the calculation method to find the total energy consumption and corresponding emissions for the whole transport chain. The model can also be used to calculate the individual energy
consumption and exhaust emissions for transported cargo per kilometre for ships and trucks or private cars. It is this
calculation facility that forms the basis for the results presented in this paper.
2
Beam = B
= f1(L)Draft = T
= f.,(L)Depth = D = f3(L)
Light ship weight = M =
f4(L)Service speed = V = f5(L)
Auxiliary machinery power = Pa = f6(L)Pf= f7(L, B. T. D. M, V. K. U)
1
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Con [eren ce
- Newcastle 4 6 September
2000
ENERGY CONSUMPTION/SPECIFIC FUEL OIL CONSUMPTION FOR SHIP AND TRUCK ENGINES Specific energy consumption (grams oil per kW hour) for marine diesel engines has improved through the years.
particularly since the oil crisis in 1973. Fig. 2 shows an example for slow speed diesels, where it is seen that specific fuel consumption has been reduced by 20-25 % since 1973. Truck diesel engines have also been improved similar to marine engines but due to more strict exhaust NOx emission demands in the future for both ship and truck diesel engines the improvement rate will decrease or even stop.
1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010
Fie. 2 Historical development of specific oil fuel consumption for marine diesel engines
REGULATIONS FOR SHIP AND TRUCK EMISSIONS st
Janm' 2000 the UN maritime organisation, 1MO, introduced new limits for NOx emissions for new marine diesel
engines (Marpol Annex VI). According to these. NOx emissions must not exceed the limits shown in fig 3. Complianceis however so far voluntary, because the regulations have not been ratified by enough countries.
There are already regulations for diesel truck engines, the so-called EURO Il norms, which have been in operation since
1996. Still more stnct regulations are on the way. They are expected to be introduced progressively in 2001 (EURO III norm). 2006 (EURO 1V norm) and possibly also in 2009. In addition to limits for NOx emission, these regulationswill also include limits for HC, CO and particulate emissions as shown in fig. 4.
280
260 MIS SELANDIA (worlds first ocean-going diesel ship) 240 Specific oil fuel 220 Oil crisis 1973 consumption (/IcWh) 200 180 160 18 16 Specific 14 12 NOx emission (glkWh) 10 8 O 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400
Rated engine speed (RPM) Fig. 3 IMO's limits for NOx emissions for new marine diesel engines
4
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Gonference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September
Specific 4 I-emissions (g/kWh) 3
.
---A
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010Fig. 4 EU's present and planned limits for diesel truck engine exhaust emissions
TRUCK ENERGY CONSUMPTION
A truck's energy consumption is a function of the weight of the truck (cargo + unladen weight). motor type. and air
resistance and last but not least, driving conditions (e.g. driving in town or on a motorway at constant speed).
In this paper is used energy data for trucks which correspond to the previous mentioned traffic model TEMA 2000 from the Danish Ministry of Transport5 which is based on measurements carried out on different trucks.
The relation between weight of cargo transported and energy consumption per km for long distance transportation (more than 200 - 300 km) is shown in fig. 5 for two representative types of trucks driving at a speed of 70 - 80 kmfh.
It should be noted that the linear approximation shown in fig. 5and used for the calculations in this paper represents driing
conditions for long distance transport (more than 200 - 300 km). For a shorter distance the average speed will decrease and the energy consumption per km will increase, especially when the driving distance is less than 100 km where the values
shown in fig. 5will increase5 - 50pct.
16 14 Energy 12 demand (MJÌkm) 10 8
48t truck (approximately 18 m long) 0-- 25 t truck (approximately 12 m long)
O
6
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Cargo (tons)
Fig. 5 Energy consumption for truck transport ref. 5 at long distance transport (more than 200 - 300 km)
NOx ----u---- CO
---A-- HC
--e-- Particulates
0I
.
6
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
SUMMARY OF SHIP AND TRUCK EMISSIONS
As mentioned above, the analysis and comparisons described in this paper is based on current and future EU norms for trucks (fig. 4). The future limits for NOx emissions will probably be difficult to achieve, while the limits for HC and CO will be much easier to achieve, indeed, many truck motors already fulfil them.
It should be added that. both for truck and marine diesel engines, the amounts of the individual emission products var greatly with e.g. engine loading (steady-state/transient). It may be noted that for truck engines, the testing conditions are quite different from actual driving conditions, so the amounts of emission products for trucks (NOx. CO. HC and
particulates) should be treated very carefully. It should also be mentioned that marine diesel engines normally rim at constant speed and loading for a much greater proportion of the time than truck engines.
For the analysis of ship transport. the NOx emissions used are based on the 1MO limits that marine engine manufacturers will have to fulfil in the future. Regarding HC. CO and particulate emissions, the calculation model makesuse of sorne
representative mean values resulting from, amongst others. Lloyds Register of Shipping's exhaustive research programme concerning marine diesel emissions°, together with information from ship engine manufacturers MAN B&W and Wärtsilä
. Dunng normal service conditions (steady state). emissions vaiy within the following limits6.
NOx: 8 - 20 g/kWh
HC: 0.2 - 1.0 g/kWh
CO: 0.4 - 4.0 g!kWh Particulates: 0,1 - 2,0 glkWh
There are no specific limits for CO2 emissions. (which influence the greenhouse effect), because CO2 emissions are solely dependent on oil consumption and can therefore only be reduced by reducing energy consumption.
Values for individual exhaust emission products and oil fuel consumption are shown for ship and truck engines in Tables I and H respectively, which include all of the emission and energy factors used in the calculation model.
Table I Emission factors and specific fiel consumption for marine diesel engines for various ship types
Ship type
Container ships and
bulk carriers Ro-Ro cargo ships
Ro-Ro passagenger
ships
Car carrying high speed ferries
Car carrying high speed ferries
Engine type Slow speed Medium speed Medium speed High speed Gas turbine
Oil type Fuel oil Diesel/gas oil Diesel/gas oil Diesel/gas oil Diesel/gas oil
Specific oil consumption (kg/kWh) 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.24
NOx emission (gíkWh) 17.0 12.0 12.0 11.0 4.0
CO emission (g/kWh) 1.60 1.60 1.60 1,60 0.10
HC emission (g/kWh) 0,50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.35
Particulate emission (g/kWb) 1.38 0.44 0,24 0,23 0,10
Sulphur content in oil (pet.) 3.0 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.1
SO emission (g/kWh) 10.7 6.0 2,00 0,42 0.50 CO2 emission (g/MJ) 78.0 74.0 74,0 74.0 74,0 NOx emission (g/MJ) 2.5 1,5 1,5 1,3 0.4 CO emission (g/MJ) 0,23 0.20 0.20 0,19 0,01 HC emission (g/MJ) 0.073 0,061 0.06 1 0.058 0,034 Particulate emission (g/MJ) 0.200 0.054 0.029 0.026 0.0 10
SO2 emission (gi'MJ) 1,56 0.74 0.25 0,05 0.05
Cü2emission(g/kgoil) 3159 3167 3167 3167 3167
Particulate emission (g/kg oil) 8,1 2.3 1,2 1,1 0.4
Table LI Exhaust emission factors and specific fuel consumption for truck diesel en ines 6 24 20 18 Service speed 16 (knots) 14 12 10 8 SmP SERVICE SPEED
A significant factor that has importance for ship energy consumption, is service speed. Service speed increases with ship length for all ship types, as is also apparent in the statistical material for the 6 types of basis ships. The relation between ship length and speed (found on the basis of the statistical analysis), as used in the calculation model, is shown in figs. 6
and 7.
With regard to fast ferries, a more detailed analysis of the speeds of catamarans and mono-hulls indicates that catamarans are generally 2.5 - 3.0 knots faster than mono-hulls with the same car capacity. Systematic calculations for mono-hulls and catamarans (figs. 25 and 26 respectively) show that, for equal car capacity and speed. propulsion power for catamarans is 15 20 % lower than for mono-hulls. This corresponds closel\' to a speed difference of 2,5 -3,0 knots. which ex'plairis the
speed difference indicated statistically.
50 65 80 95 110 125 140 155 170 185 200
Lenuth between pp (m)
Fig. 6 Sei-vice speed for various ship types derived from statistical data
Norm EURO 2 (1996) EURO 3 (2001) EURO 4 (2006)
Specific oil consumption (kg/kWh) 0.20 0.20 020
NOx emission (g/kWh) 7,0 50 3.5
Particulat.e emission (g/kWh) 0,15 0.10 0,02
CO emission (g/kWh) 4,00 2.10 1.50
HC emission (g/kWh) 1,10 0.66 0.46
Sulphur content in oil (pet.) 0.05 0.05 0.05
SO. emission (g/kWh) 0.22 0.21 0.20 CO. emission (g/MJ) 74.0 74.0 74.0 NOx emission (g/MJ) 0.78 0.58 0.43 Particulate emission (g/MJ) 0.0 17 0.0 12 0.002 CO emission (g/MJ) 0.45 0.25 0,18 HC emission (gfMJ) 0.122 0,077 0,057 SO. emission (g/MJ) 0.025 0.025 0.025 CO, emission(g/kgoil) 3167 3167 3167
Calorific value (MJ/kg oil) 42.8 42.8 42.8
-
-
- Container ship - - -. Bulk carrier Ro-Rocargo ship Ro-Ro passenger ship-. . -. - -
-.
-- --
--
.Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
47 45 43 41 Speed (knots) 39 37 35 33 Container ships: Bulk carriers: Ro-Ro cargo ships Ro-Ro passenger ships: Car carrying fast ferries:o o
50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Waterline length (m)
Fig. 7 Speed for car cart-ving fasi ferries derived from statistica! data
SYSTEMATIC CALCULATIONS
Systematic calculations have been made for 6 ship types with the following cargo capacities: 100 - 6000 'lEU (TEU = 20 foot container).
2000 - 150.000 tons cargo. 1000 - 3000 lane metres 15 - 1000 private car units 50 - 400 private car units
120 130 140 150
In the analysis it is assumed that the ships and trucks are 100% loaded when they are compared. The two forms of transport are thus compared on an equal basis. For the comparisons between bulk carriers and Ro-Ro ships, total truckweight is assumed to be 40 tons, corresponding to maximum pennitted truck weight outside of Denmark. This corresponds to approx. 16 tons empty weight and a load of 24 tons. The container ship analysis assumes road transport with 2 containers of 10 tons each per truck, since the statistical analysis shows that a container ship's cargo corresponds to approx. 10 tons per TEU when the ship is 100 % loaded.
On the basis of key values for container ships up to Panma.x size (max. allowable beam of 32.2 m for passage of Panama canal) it has been assumed that 75 % of the deadweight is cargo. For beam greater than 32.2 ma cargo to deadweight ratio of 85 % has been used due to a relatively lower usage of both ballast water and fuel oil.
For bulk carriers, based on experience, it has been assumed that the cargo to deadweight ratio is 90 % for ships with less than 10000 tons cargo and 95% for larger ships. For Ro-Ro cargo ships a cargo to deadweight ratio of 75 % has been used while 60 % has been used for Ro-Ro passenger ships, on the basis of statistical analyses.
In this connection it can be mentioned that the calculation method isprogrammed such that the values of the cargo to
deadweight ratio for the different ship types can be user specified (See Appendix A). When less than 100 % of a ships deadweight capacity is utilised. it is also possible to specify the amount of extra water ballast to be used, partly to fulfil relevant stability criteria and partly to achieve adequate draft.
Container ships and bulk carriers are assumed to be powered by slow speed diesel engines, while both Ro-Ro cargo ships and Ro-Ro passenger ships are assumed to have medium speed diesels for main propulsion. Changing engine t'e from slow speed to medium speed diesel will increase energy consumption by 15 - 20 %. This is due to the lower specific fuel consumption of slow speed diesels, also taking into account the lower calorific value of fuel oil (for low-speed diesels) compared with diesel oil (for medium speed diesels).
o o o o
.
---_:I
-,
...
o- - - Mono hull hieh speed car fernes Catamaran high speed car ferries
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference -
Newcastle 4 6 September 2000
8 200 180 160 140 Length between pp (m) 120 100 go 60 RO-RO SHIPSThe relations between deadweight and ship length for the 4 conventional ship types used in the investigation are shown in fig. 8. Ro-Ro cargo and passenger ships have significantly less deadweight in relation to ship length than container ships and even less in relation to bulk carriers. In addition, of the cargo that a Ro-Ro ship carries, only approx. 60 % is useful cargo. as an 18 m truck has a maximum weight of 40 tons of which approx. 16 tons is the truck's own weight asmentioned
previously.
The result is that the useful cargo a Ro-Ro ship carries is small compared with a container ship and even smaller compared
with a bulk carrier. This is the reason for the relatively large energy
consumption per ton useful cargo (withcorrespondingly large exhaust emissions) for Ro-Ro ships shown in the following.
As many Ro-Ro cargo ships sail with only the trailers of articulated trucks onboard. calculations have also been made for this pe of transport, which naturally has better energy consumption per transported ton of truck load than when the truck cabs are also taken onboard.
The calculations show that "big-is-beautiful" does not really apply to Ro-Ro cargo slips, because the increase of
deadweight with ship size for Ro-Ro cargo ships is less pronounced than for container ships and bulk carriers (fig. 8). Another factor that influences the lack of"big-is-beautiful" is that many Ro-Ro cargo ships are designed such that they can carry more than the weight of a full load of trucks. This means that the ships often have a block coefficient higher than necessary (typically from 0.58 to 0.62), with corresponding increase of propulsion power. Fig. 9 shows a mean line for all of the Ro-Ro cargo ships that have been analysed and another line for deadweight trimmed to the actual truck capacity, i.e. ships that are not over dimensioned with regard to deadweight (with a typical block coefficient from 0.52 to 0.55). The influence on energy consumption (MJ per ton cargo per km) of trimming deadweight exactly to the specified truck capacity is shown in fig. 16. where it is seen that the energy saving is 15 - 20%.
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000
Deadweight (tons)
Fig. 8 Deadweight and length for different ship types
Container ship «----Bulk carrier Ro-Ro cargo ship Ro-Ro passenger ship / I
/
¡ II
f-'
---I / / I / I / ¡:
-
t'
/
/II
j
II y A . -,/
p/
/
t.-t¡
/
I
- -Ii
.1'
I,.
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 ('onference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
16000 12000 Deadweight (tons) 8000 4000 o G GRo-Ro cargo sps
GG
G G G G G GG.
_G
G -G -1r
G Statistical data Nonnal hull forni - - - Slim hull form
90 110 130 150 170 190
Length between pp (m) Fig. 9 Deadweight as function of ship length for Ro-Ro cargo ships
FAST FERRIES
Energy consumption and exhaust emission calculations have been made for fast car ferries including both high-speed diesels and gas turbines. Since the machinery weight represents a relatively large fraction of the displacement (approx. 20
%) the weight difference between diesels and gas turbines has been taken into account when calculating energy
consumption. The gas turbine's lower weight per installed kW, with corresponding reduction of displacement and hence propulsion power. offsets the gas turbine's higher specific fuel consumption to some extent.
CONCLUSIONS
The main results of the calculations that have been carried out are shown in figures 10 - 27. Energy consumption and exhaust gas emissions are given as functions of cargo capacity for different ship types. Unless otherwise specified. the results are for the service speeds given in figs. 6 and 7 and for 70 - 80 krnlh for both cars and trucks. In most cases it is assumed that ships burn oil with a sulphur content of 1.5 %. Calculations have been made for sulphur contents of 0.1 % for Ro-Ro passenger ships (figs. 21 and 24). The sulphur content of fuel for trucks has been assumed to be 0.05 % although many trucks already use diesel oil with a sulphur content of only 0.005 %.
Tite following conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the calculations:
1. For container ships and even more so for bulk camers. energy consumption per unit of cargo per transport kilometre
(hereafter denoted specific energy consumption) decreases with increasing ship size.
Specific energy consumption for container ships (fig. 10) and bulk carriers (fig. 13)is considerably less than for trucks.
with the most pronounced difference being for bulk carriers.
3. In contrast to container ships and bulk carriers, specificenergy consumption for Ro-Ro cargo ships increases with
increasing ship size, to a level that is 50 75 % greater than for trucks. best for trailer-only transport and worst for truck transport (fig. 16).
Due to the directly proportional relationship between energy consumption and CO2 emissions, the above conclusions (points i - 3) also apply to CO2.
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle
4 6 September 2000
NOx emissions per ton cargo per lc.m (hereafter denoted specific NOx emissions) for trucks that conform to the EU's current norms (EURO norm 2) are, according to fig. 14. in general 1 - 7 times greater than for bulk carriers. When trucks fulfil the 2006 norms (EURO norm 4) they will have NOx emissions comparable to 10.000 tons deadweight bulk carriers but still 3 times that of 80.000 tons deadweight bulk carriers.
Specific NOx emissions for trucks that conform to the EU's current norms (EURO norm 2) are, according to fig. 11. greater than for container ships larger than 300 l'12U cargo capacity.
Specific NOx emissions for Ro-Ro cargo ships are, according to fig. 17. in general 2 to 2½ times more than for EU II trucks, worst for the larger ships. As mentioned above in connection with power consumption. this is due to Ro-Ro ship' s relatively low useful cargo capacity.
For trucks transported by Ro-Ro passenger ships. specific energy consumption. NOx. HC. CO. particulates and sulphur emissions are all considerably more than for truck transport by road, because these ships generally have far fewer lane metres available for trucks and trailers than Ro-Ro cargoships.
For cars transported by Ro-Ro passenger ships (filly loaded). energy consumption per car per kilometre is 3 - 5 times
more than when driving on the road (fig. 22). NOx. HC, CO. particulates and sulphur emissions per car are also
correspondingly greater (fig. 23 - 24).
Fast ferries require 3 times more energy than Ro-Ro passenger ferries, resulting in correspondingly greater emissions
(fig. 27).
The specific SO2 emissions are for all ship types higher than for trucks and cars. Especially for Ro-Ro passenger ships the SO emission is considerably higher than for trucks and cars reflecting the sulphur contentof the fuels used.
REFERENCES
Iversen. E: Status for det europeiske auto/olieprogram. Danish paper presented at the trafic conference: Trafikdage p AUC 1999, p. 391 399 (Danish).
Guldhanimer and Harvald: Ship Resistance. Akadernisk Forlag 1974
Oossanen. P. van: Resistance Prediction of small high-speed displacement vessels: State of the art. mt. Shipbuilding Progress. Vol. 27. No. 313.
Insel. M & Molland, A. F: An investigation into the resistance components of high speed displacement catamarans. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Nay al Architects. Vol. 134, 1992.
TEMA 2000 - Et vrkioj til at beregne transporters energiforbrug og emisioner i Daninark. Traflkministeriet 2000
(Danish)
Lloyds Register: Marine Exhaust Emissions Research Programme, 1995
Data sheets for NOx emissions for slow speed and medium speed engines from MAN B&W presented 27. October 1999 at Skibsteknisk Seiskabs conference "Miljorigtig transport - men h'ordan ?" (Danish)
MEPC studies - pollution solutions. The Motor Ship. Januamy 1999. p. 32 -33.
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference
- Newcastle 4 6 September 2000
1,2 emission (g/1bU/km)08 0,4 0,0 O 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000Cargo capacity (TEU)
Fig. 10 Specific energy demand for container ships and trucks
4500 5000 5500 6000
Container ship fully loaded with TEU of 10 tons
Truck (48 t) loaded with 2 ThU of 10 tons
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 Cargo capacity (lEU)
Fig. 12 Specific sulphur emissions for container ships and trucks
r
-
r
r
r
Container ship fully loaded with TEU of 10 tons.
Trucks loaded with I TEU of 10 tons (25 t truck) or 2 TEU of IO tons (48 t truck)
Container ship fully loaded with TEU of 10 tons
Truck (48 t) loaded with 2 TEU of 10 tons
i.._.__.._..
Container ship EURO H Truck EURO III Truck - - - EURO IV Truck
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Cargo capacity (TEU)
Fig. 11 Specific NOx emissions for container ships and trucks
Container ship Truck -48 t EURO II -IV Truck -25 t EURO U -IV
Container ship (1,5 % sulphur content) Truck (0,05 % sulphur content)
9 8 7 6 Energy 5 demand (MJrFEU/kin) 4 3 2 o 6 NOx 4 emission (gITEU/km) 3 2 2,0 1,6
12
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
0.5 0,4 0.3 NOx emission (eítonlkm) 0.2 0,1 0.0 0,0 O 0.00 O
Ship fully loaded.
Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000
Payload (tons)
Fig. 13 Specific energy consumption for bulk carriers and trucks
140000 160000
20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 Payload (tons)
Fig. 14 Specific NOx emissions for hulk carriers and trucks
Bulk carrier (1,5 % sulphur content) Truck (0,05 % sulphur content)
Ship fully loaded
Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 Payload (tons)
Fig. 15 Specific sulphur missions for bulk carriers and trucks
carder EURO II Truck EURO Ill Truck -. - - - EURO IV Truck
Bulk
--
f
-
-
-
-N-"'
Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
Bulk carrier Truck-481 EUROII-IV
0,7 0.6 05 Enerv 0.4 demand (MJ/tonikm) 03 0.2 0.1 0,12 0,10 0,08 so2 emission 0,06 (g/ton!km) 0,04 0,02
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 conference
- Newcastle 4 6 Septe,nber 2000
0,7 0,6 0,5 emission 0,4 per ton truckload 0,3 (glton/km) 0,2 0,1 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000Length of vehle lanes (m)
Fig. 16 Specific energy consumption for Ro-Ro cargo ships and trucks versus lane capacity
Ro-Ro cargo ship EURO II Truck EURO Ill Truck - - - -« - EURO IV Truc
750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000
Leneth of vel±le lanes (m)
Fig. 17 Specific NOx emissions for Ro-Ro cargo ships and trucks versus lane capacity
Ship fully loaded with trailers of 24 tons cargo
Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
0,0
750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250
Length of vehicle lanes (m) Fig. 18 Specific sulphur emisnons for Ro-Ro cargo ships and trucks
2500 2750 3000
Ro-Ro cargo ship (14 m trailers) 18 m long truck
Ro-Ro cargo ship(18 ro trucks) SlixnRo-Ro cargo ship (14m trailers)
.
-Ship full loaded with traders or trucks
Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
--
-
r1
-Ship fully loaded with traders of 24 tons cargo Truck loaded with 24 tons cargo
Ro-Ro careo ship (LS % sulphur content) Truck (0,05 % sulphur content)
1,1 1.0 Energy Q,9 demand per ton 08 truck load ÇMJ/ton/km) 0,7 0,6 0,5 1,4 1,2 NOx 1,0 emission 0,8 per ton truck load 0,6 (g/ton4in) 0,4 0,2 0,0
14
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 conference - Newcastle 4 6
September 2000
o NOx 6 emission perton 4 truck load (g/ton/km) 2 so2 emission 1,2 per ton truck load 0.8 (g/ton/krn) 0,4 8 o 0.0 o
NRo-Ro
passenger ship fully loadedIr
passenger ship (14 m trailers) EURO II Truck
Ill Truck - . - EURO IV Truck
ship (18 m trucks)
Ro-Ro passenger Ro-Ro
EURO
Ro-Ro passenger ship fully loaded with trailers or trucks (24 tons load)
= = = . . - - - - = - - - . - - - . . - - i- - . - - - -- - - . - - . . - . - - - . -. . _.. -.
Ro-Ro pass. ship (0.5 % sulphur content) Truck (0,05 % sulphur content)
Ro-Ro pass. ship (1.0% sulphur content)
-. -. -.
Ro-Ro passenger
with trucks on1)
ship fully loaded
tons
load)J
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 19 Specific energy consumption for Ro-Ro passenger ships and trucks
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 20 Specific NOx emissions for Ro-Ro passenger ships and trucks versus car capacity
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Car capacity (PCL1)
Fig. 21 Specific sulphur emissions for Ro-Ro passenger ships and trucks
Ro-Ro passenger ship (14 m trailers) Truck- 1996(l8mlong truck)
Ro-Ro passenger ship (18m trucks)
o 100 5 4 Energy demand 3 per ton truck load 2 (MJ/ton/km) 2.0 1,6
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September 2000
12 10 8 Energy demand 6 (MJ/car/km) 4 o 16 14 12 NOx 10 emission 8 (/car/m') 6 0,5 0,4 0,3 emission (c./car/km) 02 0,1 0,0 2 o oRo-Ro passenger ship fully loaded with cars
r
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 22 Specific energy consumption for Ro-Ro passenger ships and cars
(Ro-Ropassenger ship fully loaded with cars
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 23 Specific NOx emissions for Ro-Ro passenger ships and cars versus car capacity
900 1000
passenger ship (0,1 % sulphur content) Car
Ro-Ro
Ro-Ro passenger ship filly loaded with cars
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 24 Specific sulphur emissions for Ro-Ro passenger ships and cars versus car capacity
Ro-Ro passenger ship Car without catalyser Car with catalyser
16
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Coiiference - Newcastle 4 - 6 September
45 40 35 30 Energy 25 demand (MJ/car/krn) 20 15 10 5 50 40 10 O 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 2S Specific energy consumption for fast mono-hull car ferries and cars
Statistical based values (mainly from diesel engine catamaran ferries) A Model calculations (diesel engines)
O Model calculations (gas turbines)
- -- - Car (13 km/litre petrol)
S Statistical based values (mainly from dse1 encine mono-hull ferries)
cakulations (dse1 engines) cakulations (gas turbines)
km/litre trol)
A Model
O--- Model
-
- Car(13s
JFast mono-hull ferries fully loaded with A carsi A
.
A A-
A AL
Fast catamaran ferries fully loaded with cars
£
A1
A.
s G s-
AIs.
S O 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400Car capacity (PCU)
Fig. 26 Specific energy consumption for fast calamaran car ferries and cars
Energy 30
demand (MJ/carllan)
Paper presented at ENS US 2000 Conference
- Newcastle 4 6 September 2000
4.0
2.5
2.0
a--
Same car capacity -<.-- Same transport cap acitv per unit of time50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Car cap acitv (PCLJ)
Fig. 27 Relationships between specific energy consumption of fast femes and Ro-Ro passenger ferries under different circumstances Energ comp anson between fast fernes and conventional fernes 3 0 3.5
Ro-Ro Cargo
Appendix A - Example output from the calculation model COMBI-TRANS
Side i
Energy consumptorì for combined transport (Ro-Ro cargo ship + truck)
Version 2000-06-23
.... : .... .. .Ship data (valid for 700 - 3500 lane metres)
-
Ship data proposed on the basES ofstatistical data
Alternative values (If none-(ype 0)
Maximum length of vehicle lanes
(lane metres)
2000
Length between perpendiculars
(m)
i 50,00
Average lane utilisation
(pcI.)
100
Length on water line
(m)
15750
Actual length of vehicle lanes
(lane metres)
2000
Breadth at water line
(m)
24,36
Proposed maximum cargo
(tons)
6000
Depth to weather deck
(m)
14,50
Actual cargo on board
(tons)
4444
Design draft
(ni)
6,50
Actual loads on trucks on ship
(tons)
2667
Maximum design cargo capacity
(tons)
6000
Proposed modified deadweight
(tons) 6833 Deadweight (tons) 8000 6833
Proposed modified draft
(m) 6,09 Lightship weight (tons) 7667 Truck data Displacement (tons) 15667 14500 Length of truck (m) 18 Block coefficient (-) 0,613 0,605 Truck load (Ions) 24,0
Midship section coefficient
(-)
0,970
0,000
Weight of truck with no load
(tons)
16,0
Service speed at 90 % main engine power
(knots)
18,9
Weight of truck with load
(tons)
40,0
Propulsion power! 0.9
(kW)
11102
Truck type (1, 2 or 3 according to truck engine data)
(-)
i
Power of auxiliary engines
(kW)
2300
Data tor transport distanceS and harbour
Energy consumption for voyage (calculated)
(MJ/ton/km)
0,562
Per ton ship cargo
Distance from start to departure harbour
(km)
500
Length of voyage
(km)
1000
Service addition for service resistance
(pct.)
10
Distance from arrival harbour to destination
(km)
500
cargo/deadweight *100
(pct.)
75
Total transport distance
(km)
2000
Percent of water ballast compensation
(pct.)
25
Total time for manoeuvring
(minutes)
30
Slow speed (1) or medium speed (2) engine(s)
Enter 1 or 2
2
CO2 emission
.En..rgy COSUrnption
Sea transport, total
(tons) 185,0 Voyage, total (Gi) 2499 Manoeuvring (tons) 1,0 Manoeuvring (GJ) 14
Road transport, total
(tons)
120,3
Road transport, total
(GJ)
1626
CC)2 emission For whole trip
(tons)
306,3
Total energy consumption for whole trip
(GJ)
4139
CO2 emission for ship per ton truck load
(kg/ton)
69,7
Energy consumption for ship per ton truck load
(GJ/ton)
0,94
bd. manoeuvring
co2 emission for ship per ton truck load per km
(kg/ton/kni)
0,070
Energy consumption for ship per ton truck load per km
(MJ/ton/km)
0,942
co2 emission for truck per ton load
(kg/ton)
45,12
Energy consumption per truck per ton load per km
(MJ/ton/km)
0,61
co2 emission for truck per ton load per km
(kg/ton/km)
0,045
Energy consumption per truck per km
(MJ/km)
14,6
Total co, emission per km
(kg/km)
153
Total energy consumption per km
(GJJkm)
2,070
Total co2 emission per ton truck load per km
(kg/ton/km)
0,057
Total energy consumption per tori truck load per km
(MJ/ton/km)
-Ro-Ro Cargo E n e rgy consumption arid exhaust emissio IlS (Related to tons truck load) Side 2
D Ship transport
D Truck transport
Oil consumption per hour for ship, normal service
(kg/hour)
2044
Oil consumption per day for ship, normal service
(tons/day)
49,1
NOx emission for whole trip NOx eniission per truck per ton load
(kg/ton)
0,499
NOX emission per truck per ton load
per km
(g/ton/km)
0,499
1,4
Total NOx emission per trucks
(kg)
1330
NOx emission for ship per ton truck load
(kg/ton)
1,391
NOx emission for ship per ton truck load
per km
(g/ton/km)
1,391
Total NOx emission for ship
(kg)
3708
1,2
NOx emission for whole trip
(kg)
5038
2 emission o
o e
ri
SO2 emission per truck per ton load
(kg/ton)
0,015
°2 emission per truck per ton load per km
Total SO2 emission per truck
(g/ton/km)
(kg)
0,015 40
1,
SO2 emission for ship per ton truck load
(kg/ton)
0,694
°2 emission for ship per ton truck load per km
(g/ton/km)
0,694
0,8
Total SO2 emission for ship
(kg)
1850
SO2 emission for whole trip
(kg)
1889
Pù1iculate enfl$SiO for
whaletri
Particulate emission per truck per ton load
(giton)
10,68
0,6
Particilate emission per truck per ton load per km
(g/ton/km)
0,0 107
Total particulate emission per trucks
(kg)
28
Particulate emission for ship perlon truck load
(kg/ton)
0,050
Particulate emission for ship per ton truck load
per km
(g/ton/km)
0,050
0,4
Total particulate emission for ship
(kg)
135
Particulate emission for whole trip
(kg)
163
CO emiSsion for whole trip CO emission per truck per ton load
(g/ton)
285
0,2
CO emission per truck per ton load per km
(g/ton/km)
0,285
Total CO emission per trucks
(kg)
760
CC) emission for ship per ton truck load
(kg/ton)
0,185
CO emission for ship per ton truck load
per km
(g/ton/km)
0,185
Total CO emission for ship
(kg)
494
CO emission for whole trip
(kg) 1254 2 3 4 6 7 Energy cons, CO2 x lo NOx emis. SO2 emis. CO emis. HC x 10 Particulate xlO (MJ/ton/km) (kg/ton/km) (g/ton/km) (g/ton/km) (g/ton/km) (g/ton/km) (g/ton/fcm)
C emission for whole trip
HG emission For truck per ton load
(giton)
HC emission for truck per ton load per km
(glton/km)
Total HC emission per trucks
(kg)
HC emission for ship per ton truck load
(kg/ton)
HG emission For ship per ton truck load per km
(g/ton/km)
Total HG emission For ship
kg) (kg)
Summary at energy consumption au cl exhaust emissions
HG emission for whole trip Values per ton truck load Energy (MJ/ton/km) lox GO2 (kg/ton/km) NOx (g/toníkm) SO2 (g/ton/km) GO (g/tonlkm) lOx HG (giton/km) Ifl
nartimilate íca/tnn/km
CO2 emission For ship per km NOx emission For ship per km Particle emission for ship per km CO emission For ship per km HC emission For ship per km SO2 emission For ship per km CO2 emission per truck per km NOx emission per truck per km Particle emission per truck per km CO emission per truck per km HG emission per truck per km SO2 emission per truck per km
Emissions for Ship per km riorma serv ce
0,94 0,70 1,39 0,69 0,19 0,58 0,50 78 0,078 209 0,058 0,058 155 363 0,61 0,45 0,50 0,01 0,28 0,78 0,11 (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (g/km) (o/km (kg/km) (kg/km) (kg/km) (kg/km) (kg/km) (kgikm) 1083 12,0 0,26 6,84 1,88 0,36 186 3,688 0,134 0,492 0,154 1,840 Ro-Ro Cargo
Specitic oli consumption (Kg/Kvv n) NOx emission (g/kWh) Particle emission (g/kWti) CO emission (g/kWh) HC emission (g/kWh) Sulphur content in oil (pct.) SO2 emission (g/kWh) NOx emission (g/MJ) Particle emission (g/MJ) CO emission (g/MJ) HG emission (g/MJ) SO2 emission (g/MJ) Calorific value (MJ/kg)
Side 3 0,20 7,0 0,15 4,00 1,10 0,05 0,21 0,82 0,018 0,47 0,129 0,025 Diesel/gas oil 42,8 0,20 5,0 0,10 2,10 0,66 0,05 0,21 0,58 0,012 0,25 0,077 0,025 Fuel oil 40,5
Specific oil consumption (Kg/KVVO)
0,19 0,17 NOx emission (g/kWh) 12,0 17,0 Particulate emission (g/kWh) 0,44 0,39 CO emission (g/kWh) 1,60 1,60 HG emission (g/kWh) 0,50 0,50
Sulphur content in oil (pct.)
1,50 1,50 SO2 emission (g/kWh) 5,99 5,36 NOx emission (g/MJ) 1,5 2,5 Particle emission (g/MJ) 0,05 0,06 CO emission (g/MJ) 0,20 0,23 HG emission (g/MJ) 0,06 0,07 SO2 emission (g/MJ) 0,74 0,78
Particle emission (g/kg Oil)
2,29 2,29
