Step changes in technology for the shipping industry being led by Lloyd’s Register
The shipping industry is facing the sustainability challenge: how can shipping find the right balance between the interests and needs[ds_preview] of business, society and environment?
The pace of change is ever increasing. The rapid introduction and complexity of new environmental regulations, rising fuel costs, changing societal expectations and business requirements for »clean« shipping, are all challenging prevailing orthodoxies.
The development of cargo ships for the last 30–40 years has been one of gradual evolution finding greater efficiencies in hull and propulsion but with no real step changes in technology. Almost overnight this is changing. The industry is brimming with ideas as to how we make shipping – the world’s most efficient form of transport, and without which world trade as we know it stops – ever more efficient. And it will be some time, many years, perhaps, before a new technical consensus is reached, if at all, as specialised trades, ships and local requirements start to undermine the idea of one ship type that can trade anywhere.
Exploring what this »paradigm shift« means for our stakeholders and for class is a key theme for Lloyd’s Register in 2010. This issue is being pursued through our engagement with shipowners, through our strategic research and our hands-on work with shipyards. Lloyd’s Register is working across a broad range of areas helping the industry meet the challenges it faces. Some of the solutions we support are ready and available today – but projects we are working on may reap dividends in the future. Nuclear power is one such area. Above all, we need to ensure that safety and environmental risks are adequately managed whatever technology we are talking about and eliminating options through a lack of understanding of technology and the risks involved will not help us to progress with the difficult decisions we face in both industry and society.
Analysis key to better engine performance
These new services supporting environmental performance and decision making is delivered by its Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (Fobas). Fobas Engine is an engine performance monitoring service, delivering extended fuel and lubricant telemetry regarding engine performance to ships’ crews and operators.
The service aims to give ships in its programme a clear indication of what is happening within a ship’s engine and, importantly, Fobas will then provide practical guidance as soon as deteriorating engine conditions are encountered enabling action to be taken before damage is caused.
This monitoring service represents a »low risk« for the ship owner as it is formed by the fusion of expertise from proven technologies and the data analysis engine provided by technology and service partner Flame Marine. This creates a significant extension of capability, adding value and offering true independence and support in engine management.
The benefits include reduced maintenance costs, diminished potential engine downtime and reductions in cylinder oil feed rate. As the shipping industry continues to seek improved engine performance, this new service enhances operators’ ability to operate efficiently – reducing both costs and emissions.
The service is delivered using eight points of performance analysis via a thorough assessment of the key condition variables that affect the efficient operation of engines. Its telemetry provides ships’ crews and shipmanagers with key engine performance information. The crew are empowered and enabled to make any necessary adjustments to achieve optimised engine operation. Reports generated are concise, clear and provide ship’s engineers with relevant, easily assessed information supporting their decision making.
Extended Dry Dockings provide flexibility to qualifying operators in more challenging times – without compromising safety
Recent interest has been shown in Lloyd’s Register’s pioneering work in piloting a 7.5 year Extended Dry Docking surveys. The classification society has been carrying out a first of its kind pilot scheme for Extended Dry Dockings (EDD) with a major containership operator for five years now. The procedures agreed with the operator in question and with the Danish Maritime Authority, as well as other flags, have been carefully thought through and are in no way a reduction of the controls provided by the special survey regime. The scheme is predicated on a number of factors to secure class and flag state approval.
Under the scheme certain dry dockings are replaced by in-water surveys (IWS) carried out by approved diving companies. The benefits to operators are increased flexibility in choosing a dry docking window and, with proper maintenance programmes in place, the potential for the hull to stay in water for up to 7.5 years.
Safety is always the paramount concern. To date, the combination of our procedures, the involvement of a first-class operator and experienced flag states, is providing appropriate oversight with respect to safety.
The operators of ships involved must take a demonstrable and sophisticated approach to the maintenance and management of ship operations. Requirements for survey while in-water include arrangements for testing and maintenance of seawater valves and that measurement of rudder and tail shaft clearances are undertaken – as would be required during a dry-docking. Coatings must be of a high quality suitable for extended docking cycles and in line with manufacturer’s guidelines. Ships should normally have been operated by the Company from new and operated by a company with a proven track record as well as having a good record of inspection (combined history of Flag and PSC). Impressed Current Cathodic protection is required together with regular monitoring and all Survey Planning Documentation is to be submitted to Class and Flag well in advance of survey.
Extended docking survey cycles will not be appropriate or possible for all types of ship nor all operators. The pilot scheme is currently restricted to larger container ships but smaller container and general cargo ships may qualify. Bulk carriers and tankers are excluded from consideration due to the Enhanced Survey requirements under which a docking survey is required at each Special Survey.
Exploring reintroducing nuclear power for merchant ships
Our Strategic Research Division is constantly researching new technologies. Recently we have been discussing the potential for nuclear propulsion in shipping, and while not likely to be a realistic option for most operators in the near future, there has been substantial interest in our work on what is a proven technology producing zero carbon emissions.
Environmental concern in recent years has been focussed on the influence of greenhouse gases on the world’s climate. Although the marine industry contributes a relatively small proportion of greenhouse gases in relation to the amount of goods and raw materials transported around the world, from a marine perspective the CO2 contribution from exhaust emissions has been a particular concern in recent years.
Indeed, a number of research and development initiatives have been introduced to mitigate this component of emissions from slow and medium speed diesel engines.
As part of these concerns the classification society has been considering the problem of greenhouse gases arising from ship propulsion from a number of perspectives in order to assist the marine industry in reducing its carbon footprint for the future. One such technology is that of nuclear propulsion which nullifies the CO2 contribution.
Some two years ago we commenced an internal research programme directed towards the implications arising from the nuclear propulsion of merchant ships. This work built on the extensive and ongoing experience of Lloyd’s Register in the land based nuclear industries and also previously in studies undertaken in the production of its Provisional Rules for the Nuclear Propulsion of Ships which were extant over a ten year period from 1966 through to 1976.
These Rules were developed in response to the interest shown in nuclear propulsion in the early 1960s as typified by the »Savannah«, and »Otto Hahn«. Both of these ships were technically successful, however, at that time conditions were not conducive to their commercial success but nevertheless traded worldwide for some years.
The then prevailing commercial situation has now arguably changed significantly with the steady increase in conventional fuel prices and the probable advent of carbon taxes. Indeed, notwithstanding naval experience, since the 1960s there has been a steady but slow development of merchant ship nuclear propulsion principally with ice breakers but also extending to a lash barge carrier and containership. Indeed, two nuclear ice breakers also undertake popular passenger cruising duties at certain times of the year.
LR’s research programme revisited the technical aspects of the nuclear ship propulsion problem together with the associated refuelling and waste disposal issues. This scope expanded to embrace public health, manning, training, operational, risk and regulatory requirements. Within this study the application of nuclear propulsion to cruise ships, tankers, bulk carriers and container ships has been principally addressed although, clearly a range of other ship types may also benefit from this type of propulsion system.
A major conclusion has, been that the building and operation of nuclear a propelled ship is technically possible: particularly with the range of small PWR reactors that are currently available or other types that will be available in a relatively short time: these developments include a range of high temperature reactors and embrace the pebble bed concept as well as furthering the development of the PWR concept. Indeed, in the context of marine propulsion most experience to date has been gained with the application of PWR technology to submarines and surface ships and in these roles they have demonstrated an enviable reliability and safety record when correctly applied and operated.
Modern reactor technology has, since the early Phase I designs, progressively introduced enhanced safety and control features which make their use increasingly attractive: particularly for merchant marine operation. Nevertheless, unmanned machinery spaces which are common of many types of ship today are unlikely to be acceptable in the foreseeable future for nuclear propelled vessels and, moreover, the training of crews will need to undergo considerable modification to that which is commonplace today. Indeed, a culture change within the seagoing and land based marine engineering community will be essential if the application of nuclear propulsion is to take advantage of the through life economic and environmental benefits.
If this is done the risks associated with well manned and operated ships will be minimal. An alternative, of course, is for manufacturers to supply, maintain and operate nuclear propulsion plants as a service package to ship owners within the ship command structure.
When considering use of nuclear propulsion the business model for ship purchase and operation will change significantly since the majority of the costs are up-front in this scenario. With conventional propulsion the cost of the ship is broadly defined by the ship structure, outfitting and machinery. Fuel costs are then distributed throughout the life of the ship at frequent intervals. In contrast, for a nuclear propelled ship the fuel cost is included in the initial cost of the reactor and the ship, for conventionally enriched uranium 235U of around 3 % to 4 %, will then be able to trade for some four to five years before needing to refuel again.
Such a refuelling period is not inconsistent with conventional survey periods and the refuelling process would take something of the order of 30 days under controlled conditions through defined routes in the ship for a conventional PWR plant. The spent fuel would then need to be dealt with in the normal way in line with the conventional nuclear fuel cycle.
From cradle to grave – new ideas
Tom Boardley, LR’s Marine Director, addresses the future of ship recycling, talking about research and the future of ship design:
One day »recycling-friendly« ship designs will become part of the shipping industry and will contribute to increased levels of safety and efficiency in ship recycling. Looking at the percentages of materials recycled in other industries the good news is that the shipping industry is well ahead, compared with the automotive and aviation sectors, re using some 95–98 % of a ship by weight.
But the bad news is that even if ship recycling has been efficient in terms of providing a ready supply of steel and other metals for re-use, there has been a cost in terms of lives lost and local environmental impact.
Cutting apart big steel structures is a complex and hazardous business. And even though a high proportion by weight of the ship’s structure is re-usable, there are significant amounts of plastics and other materials that should be handled carefully and appropriately. Although hazardous materials such as asbestos are already prohibited by previous convention, and the new Ship Recycling (Hong Kong) Convention will require that all new ships have on board an Inventory of Hazardous Materials to assist with their handling during decommissioning, there is no requirement to design a ship so that lifecycle safety and environmental costs are considered.
A minority of owners are now seeking greater control over the conditions under which their ships are demolished and the handling and disposal of non-recyclable materials. And there will be some now who will start to consider the full environmental impact, and cost, of building, operating and recycling ships. The Strategic Research Group is carrying out work on design for recycling. The group is looking at futuristic technologies and scenarios as they apply to shipping. Although the research is in its early stages, there is no doubt that new approaches to ship designs could help make ship recycling safer and cleaner. A major challenge is to balance the possibility of reducing one risk against that of increasing another. One of the most difficult families of materials to be dealt with during demolition is that of the plastic coatings on electrical wires. Much of the problem with the disposal of these materials is that their design is intended to protect against the risk of fire. How we still protect against fire risk while using materials that are easier to deal with at the end-of-life stage is one of many questions that need addressing.
Work at the design and construction stages is able to lead to ships that may be broken up and their constituent materials and parts re-used in greater safety and with less environmental impact. But one question, as ever, is who is going to pay for this – and at what stage in a ship’s lifecycle. Also, how do we ensure net safety and environmental benefits accrue so that the overall ship design lifecycle really is more sustainable?
The shipping industry is not immune from wider societal and political pressures as we have seen in the last year with dramatic growth in interest in environmental issues and new ship designs. In a world of growing demand and with the need to use energy intelligently and cost-effectively, we need to become better at re-using materials. We need to become better at understanding where the costs are in the process of designing, building, operating and recycling ships. By recognising the eventual certainty that every ship will need to be demolished and recycled at the building stage the process will become safer.
Nicholas Brown
