In the new era of ECA’s and alternative fuels, vessel owners/operators are faced with important decisions with significant cost and financial risks. The days of just using HFO without exhaust cleaning are over in the ECA’s and worldwide after 2020. Several alternative solutions for meeting the new emission regulations for a variety of ship types and sizes operating in a selection of trades are analyzed to determine their relative merits and costs. Three primary fuel alternatives were considered: a) Using MGO full time in the ECA now and worldwide after 2020 b) Using HFO with Scrubbersc) Using LNG The advantages and disadvantages of each fuel alternative are discussed and a cost and benefit analysis is developed for a variety of tanker and containership sizes, which can also be applied to other ship types such as bulk carriers, RoRo vessels, and multi-purpose vessels. No single fuel option stood out as the “best” solution for all ships in all services. It is hoped, however, that the analyses presented in this paper will demonstrate how owners can evaluate their service requirements, as well as the costs and benefits of the various options, in order to determine the best fuel alternative for their ships. The analysis work and time to prepare this paper were sponsored by Herbert Engineering Corp. It is intended for presentation at the November 18, 2014 meeting of the Chesapeake Section of SNAME.
Analysis of Fuel Alternatives for Commercial Ships in the ECA Era - There is no Silver Bullet
Van Rynbach, Eugene A., Briers, Karl E., and Nicholas DelGatto. "Analysis of Fuel Alternatives for Commercial Ships in the ECA Era - There is no Silver Bullet." Paper presented at the SNAME Maritime Convention, Houston, Texas, USA, October 2014. doi: https://doi.org/10.5957/SMC-2014-B5
Download citation file: