1. A PRESENTATION TO GREEK SHIPPING COMMUNITY
Best Fuel Purchase Practices, Energy Management and Asset Protection – An attempt to quantify benefits
MARPOL ANNEXE VI – AN UPDATE

2. BEST FUEL AND LUBE PURCHASE PRACTICES – ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND ASSET PROTECTION- AN ATTEMPT TO QUANTIFY THE BENEFITS
Bunker Industry Overview and Potential for savings
Quantification of savings through Bunker Quantity Surveys, ROB Surveys and Sludge Surveys
Holistic View of Bunker Fuel Performance including Bunker Purchase Efficiency - Saving Millions
Algorithms to Identify Problem Fuels saving marine machinery from major breakdown expenses
Spending less $ through best Fuel and Lube management – Energy Efficiency and Asset Protection
Total Lube Management – Quantifying $ Benefits
Scrubbers – A new simplified low cost regulations compliant design

3. INTRODUCTION TO BUNKER INDUSTRY - GLOBAL AND IN SINGAPORE
GLOBAL BUNKERING – 230 MILLION MT HFO AND 70 MILLION MDO VALUE - $240 BILLION ((HFO $700/MT, MDO $1200/MT, AVERAGE TAKEN AS $800/MT) SINGAPORE QUANTITY BUNKERED IN SINGAPORE > 40 MILLION MT THE EFFECT OF WATER WATER CONTENT IS 0.16% AGAINST 0.06% IN JAPAN 0.1% OF WATER = 40,000 MT = $32 MILLION !

4. INTRODUCTION TO BUNKER INDUSTRY - GLOBAL AND IN SINGAPORE
THE EFFECT OF DENSITY DIFFERENCE
EVEN FOR DENSITY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BDN (SAY 990) AND LAB DENSITY (980), IT IS 10 MT PER 1,000 MT. IN SINGAPORE, THIS COMES TO 400,000 MT = $320 MILLION
THE EFFECT OF QUANTITY SURVEY SHORTAGE
ASSUMING 40,000 BUNKERINGS AT 1,000 MT EACH
AND 10 MT LOST PER BUNKERING = 400,000 MT LOST DUE TO QUANTITY SUPPLY SHORTAGE = $320 MILLION !!
ADD UP THESE LOSES AND IN SINGAPORE ALONE THE LOSS IS NEARLY $672 MILLION
HOW TO REDUCE THESE LOSSES?

5. QUANTIFICATION OF SAVINGS FOR BQS, ROB AND SLUDGE SURVEYS#
SERVICE
NATURE OF PROBLEM
$700/MT
COST OF SERVICE 1
BQS - Quantity Shortage
30 MT
$21,000
$1,000 2
BQS - Density Differential
3000 X ( ) = 30 MT
included in #1 3
BQS - Water Differential
3000 X ( ) = 3 MT
$2,100 4
Remaining on Board (ROB)
30 days X 2 MT/day = 60 MT
$42,000 5
Sludge Survey (SS)
3000 X 0.5% = 15 MT
$10,500
Savable Loss in 30 day voyage
$96,600
Total Cost of Service
about $3,000
Assumptions: 1 Bunkering Stem = 3,000 MT of HFO used up in a 30 day voyage.

6. WHY BQS?
Disputes on bunker quantity are about 8 times that of disputes on quality.
Lot of scope for errors & manipulations
Well known that quantities and their measurements are manipulated by some suppliers through sounding tape, temperature, water addition, ship staff corruption, Cappuccino etc.
Quantity surveys do not eliminate, but reduce losses considerably

7. WHY DO BQS WITH VISWA?
Viswa Lab is the one of few labs to be accredited to ISO by Singapore Accreditation Council for the Bunker Quantity Survey Activity
Highly Experienced, Highly paid and mature surveyors familiar with
Cappuccino and Line blending
Calibration table and barge track record
Proper sampling and dealing with barge captains
7 Exclusive employees surveyors in Singapore/Malaysia area, 3 in mainland China/Hong Kong area and many more in US and Europe

8. WHY ROB SURVEY? WHY ROB SURVEY
- To capture unaccounted and hidden bunker fuels on ships
- Sounding all tanks and hidden spaces for the above
- Helps in keeping ship staff and supply barge stay above temptation
- Helps shore operations to calculate exact fuel consumption
- Helps shore operations to order the correct bunker fuel quantity
- Savings can be 2 MT/day or $42,000 in a 30 day voyage

9. WHY SLUDGE SURVEY? HISTORY
- Some sludge is always produced on a ship; this is stored in the sludge tank. It contains some fuel which has value
PRACTICE
The sludge generation can be increased through unethical practices such as
- Forced de sludging of heavy oil purifier
- Excessive draining of heavy oil settling and service tank
Forced purifier malfunctioning to extract more sludge
Excess sludge so produced stored in sludge tank and smaller quantity declared. The excess sludge commands premium and payments in some ports

10. WHY SLUDGE SURVEY? Viswa Solutions
Viswa surveyors will carry out comprehensive sludge survey, calculate the sludge discharge, study the oil record book and identify and quantify malpractices
Savings affected = 0.5% or 15 MT/3000 MT= $10,500 per 30 day voyage

11. BUNKER PURCHASE EFFICIENCY (BPE)
VL uses three clear parameters to study Bunker Purchase Efficiency (BPE)
Density differential,
Water content differential
EFN (Engine Friendliness Number)
The study reveals that avoiding bunkering in a certain port will improve BPE considerably. Similarly, avoiding purchasing from a certain supplier can show dramatic improvements in BPE.
See below Singapore example
* There is a difference in the supplier BDN density and the lab determined density. Fuel buyer can claim this difference.
** There is a difference supplier BDN water content and the lab determined water content. Fuel buyer can also claim.

12. BUNKER PURCHASE EFFICIENCY (BPE) COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE ON QUALITY SINGAPORE PORT - 4/2010 TO 4/2011
ABCD had lowest losses due to density differential (- 0.02%)
ABCD purchased fuel with lowest water content (0.13%)
Catfines in fuel purchased by ABCD was lowest at ppm
Vanadium in fuel purchased by ABCD was lowest at ppm
ABCD purchased fuel had best EFN at 61
Quantity loss per 1000 MT by ABCD due to density difference and water content was lowest at 1.43 MT/1000 MT (worst performer lost 3.78 MT/1000 MT). This means that ABCD saved over 2.35 MT/1000 MT or $1.65 per MT over the poorest bunker purchase buyer.

13. BUNKER PURCHASE – SHOWING BENEFITS OF FUEL QUALITY INCLUDING IGNITION AND COMBUSTION PROPERTIES TRUE WORTH INDEX – TABLE 1
CALCULATING TWI (EFN common as 50) - TABLE 1
BUNKER PORT
AVERAGE LIFT (MT)
AVERAGE DENSITY (Kg/m3)
QUANTITY CONSIDERED FOR CALCULATION (KG)
AVERAGE WATER (%)
AVERAGE WATER (Kg)
KG AVAILABLE FOR COMBUSTION
ROTTERDAM
1000
987.7
0.14 14
986
SINGAPORE
988.1
0.16 16
984
JEDDAH
968.6
0.1 10
990
TOKYO
983
0.06 6
994
HOUSTON
988.6
UAE
979.7
0.09 9
991

14. BUNKER PURCHASE – SHOWING BENEFITS OF FUEL QUALITY INCLUDING IGNITION AND COMBUSTION PROPERTIES TRUE WORTH INDEX – TABLE 2
CALCULATING TWI with EFN common as 50 (continued) A B C D E F G H
BUNKER PORT
KG AVAILABLE FOR COMBUSTION
AVG CALORIFIC VALUE (MJ/Kg)
MJ in 1000 kg (A X B)
TWI (NO EFN) (expressed as %)
MJ available for work (C X D)
HFO 380 cost
$/MJ (F/E)
MJ/$ (E/F)
ROTTERDAM
986
40.38 44
$644
0.0368
27.20
SINGAPORE
984
39.57 47
$680
0.0372
26.91
JEDDAH
990
40.93 61
$703
0.0284
35.16
TOKYO
994
41.23 60
$707
0.0288
34.78
HOUSTON
40.25
39606 42
$662
0.0398
25.13
UAE
991
40.3 50
$677
0.0339
29.50
BEST PORT
Jeddah
$/MJ or
35.16 MJ/$
TRUE PRICE DIFFERENTIAL FROM JEDDAH
22.80%
( )/0.0368
23.70%
1.40%
28.60%
16.20%
Though Rotterdam price appears to be cheaper at $644 per MT, if you take into account the quality of the fuel, Jeddah fuel is 22.8% less expensive even though the Jeddah fuel costs $703 per MT.

15. FUEL RELATED MACHINERY PROBLEMS – P&I FINDINGS
GARD - An International P&I company reported:
MAIN AND AUXILARY ENGINE REPORTED CLAIMS - 31% OF TOTAL HULL AND MACHINERY CLAIMS
INDUSTRY STATISTICS INDICATE 80% OF ALL ENGINE BREAKDOWNS ARE RELATED TO FUEL OIL OF LUBE OIL.
CIMAC USER GROUP IN VIENNA COMPLAINED THAT 40% OF THE VESSELS DEVELOPED MACHINERY PROBLEMS WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD.
ENGINE BREAKDOWNS, BLACKOUTS, DRIFTING SHIPS CONSTITUTE MAJOR DANGERS

16. FINDINGS OF A SURVEY CONDUCTED ON BUNKER FUELS
Asked if they had encountered "any serious off-specification fuel deliveries" last year, 52% said no, while 44% said yes.  4% did not reply. Off spec included items covered by para 5.1 of ISO 8217:2005
64% reported filter clogging, 48% experienced sludging, 40% said they had fuel pump sticking/seizures, and 19% had piston ring breakages.
77% said they had no regulatory problems in emission control areas (ECAs), while 22% said they did. 

17. MACHINERY PROBLEMS AND ISO 8217
WITH THE REGULATIONS DRIVEN NEED TO DROP SULPHUR CONTENT, MORE AND MORE REFINERY PROCESS CHANGES BEING EMPLOYED – MORE CONTAMINANTS ARE FINDING THEIR WAY INTO THE FUEL
COMPLIANCE WITH ISO 8217 NO GUARANTEE THAT CONTAMINANTS WILL NOT BE PRESENT
IN OVER 99% OF MACHINERY PROBLEMS, FUEL CONFORMED TO THE ISO 8217 SPECS!!

18. SOME QUESTIONS
A)Can we identify problem fuels using comprehensive testing and before they cause machinery damage?
Yes, thereby you can save machinery from poor performance and fuel related damage.
B) Can a problem fuel be treated on board to mitigate damage?
Yes. Performance of Purifier/Filters have to be monitored closely. Asset protection of high order can be achieved through proper monitoring of onboard treatment
C) Can the performance of the fuel be maximized using mechanical and chemical manipulations?
Yes. Through TFM and TLM, substantial savings can be achieved

19. HOLISTIC VIEW OF BUNKER FUEL

20. Using the Magic of Algorithms to identify problem fuels and saving millions

21. A formula or a set of rules to solve a problem Definition Of Algorithm
Algorithms
A formula or a set of rules to solve a problem
Definition Of Algorithm
In Layman's terms, play with numbers (data), find patterns and empirical rules.

22. Viswa Lab Algorithms # ALGORITHM ACRONYM 1 ENGINE FRIENDLINESS NUMBER
EFN 2
PURIFIER EFFICIENCY FRIENDLINESS NUMBER
PEFN 3
PROBLEM FUEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
PFIN 4
TRUE WORTH INDEX
TWI 5
NEW EQUIVALENT CETANE NUMBER
NECN 6
FILTER BLOCKING TENDENCY NUMBER
FBTN 7
CONTAMINANT PRESENCE INDICATOR
CPI 8
FAMES DETECTION INDICATOR
FDI

23. Beautification Algorithm
Beautification Algorithm uses mathematical formula to alter original form into more attractive version
Israeli Software takes into account 234 facial parameters. These parameters were arrived at based on likes and dislikes of 68 people who expressed their preference in beauty.

24. Algorithms In Bunker Fuel
Typically a fuel test yields 29 data points
With additional tests, this can be up to 40
Yes, we can use data, statistical analysis, pattern recognition studies to identify most of the problem fuels
The secret to identifying problem fuels is using appropriate Algorithms
Viswa Lab deeply into Algorithms and can claim success in >85%

25. PROBLEM – SEVERE M.E PISTON RING BREAKAGE
ALGORITHM PFIN (Problem Fuel Identification Number) PISTON RING BREAKAGE
PROBLEM – SEVERE M.E PISTON RING BREAKAGE
PROBLEM PORTS – SINGAPORE, GREECE, GIBRALTAR, SPAIN, PANAMA, HOUSTON
PROBLEM PERIOD – OVER 3 YEARS
NUMBER OF REPORTED CASES - OVER 100

26. BROKEN PISTON RINGS

27. (Problem Fuel Identification Number)
WHAT IS PFIN?
(Problem Fuel Identification Number)
Fuels with high MCR(11.5%), high asphaltene (> 10.5%) and high CCAI (>849) were found to cause main engine piston ring breakage. However, in a few cases even this combination did not cause piston rings to break
The need for finding other parameters which, in addition to the three above can effectively pin down the problem fuels was clear.
VL was able to identify Xylene Equivalent number and Reserve Stability Number as two other parameters which in combination with the three listed above, clearly flagged fuels likely to cause piston ring breakage with over 85% certainty using an algorithm developed for this purpose. Further study continuing.

28. PORTS PFIN TESTS REQUIRED PORTS PFIN TESTS NOT REQUIRED
PFIN GLOBAL COVERAGE
PORTS PFIN TESTS REQUIRED
PORTS PFIN TESTS NOT REQUIRED
Singapore
Hong Kong
Malta
Brazil
Gibraltar
Africa
Panama
Argentina
Houston
Australia
Spain
Russia
ARA
Japan
China
Korea
UAE
Saudi Arabia

29. Quantification of Fuel Quality-EFN
Engine Friendliness Number (EFN) - Already famous Benchmark of fuel quality.
Quantification helps evaluation of engine maintenance cost.
18 years, hundred’s of thousands of samples after
EFN < Fuel usually has problem
EFN > generally there is no problem

30. TRUE WORTH INDEX OF BUNKER FUEL –TWI (PUBLISHED AT BUNKERWORLD.COM)
The Selection of Bunker fuel – Importance of TWI
True worth of a fuel is the energy transformable to useful work with minimal machinery wear
What constitutes the True Worth of a Fuel?
Calorific Value (CV) – the energy content
Engine Friendliness Number (EFN)
Equivalent Cetane Number (ECN) or the ability of the fuel to combust on time to maximize fuel energy usage

31. Determination FBT Of Problem Fuel Oils
Procedure
Fuel oil is pumped with target viscosity of 35 cst at flow rate (20mL/min) through 10µm mesh filter paper using a piston type metering pump.
Back pressure of filter is recorded continuously.
Test is designed to record pressure until 100kPa or the volume of the oil pumped reaches 300 mL.
FBT is pressure differential/volume pumped

32. Determination Of FBTN Of Problem Fuel Oils
Test parameters of fuel oil
Sample ID
AAA
BBB
CCC
DDD
Vessel Name
Morning Express
ANTWERPEN
CARDONIA
AU ARIES
Density (kg/m3)
987.8
974.3
942.3
988.1
50°C (cst)
330.3
310.3
407.1
330
Temperature to attain 15 cst viscosity ( °C)
124.5
129.7
125.7
Al+Si (ppm)
143 58 43
TSP (%,mass)
0.02
0.06
0.03
Iron (ppm) 10 36 22
Water (%,vol)
0.10
0.70
0.20
FBT number (obtained by ASTM formula)
1.04
15.09
2.02
3.53

33. Energy Management – Not only saves energy… but also reduces emissions
(ENERGY = FUEL = $$)
but also reduces emissions

34. VISWA ENERGY INITIATIVES
Energy and Emission improvements – Driven by regulations
VISWA Contributes through :
TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
TOTAL FUEL MANAGEMENT
CHOOSING THE FUELS WITH BEST VALUE (TWI) – SAVINGS IN COST, EMISSIONS AND ENERGY
ENERGY MONITORING – SEEMP & EEOI
SCRUBBERS

35. VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Lubricants provide a barrier between rubbing surfaces and prevent metallic wear
Lubricants consume 5% to 15% of the energy transmitted in order to provide this lubrication. This energy loss is used for overcoming churning losses and friction losses which are load, viscosity and chemistry dependent.
Viscosity behavior under high temperature and high shear mainly determines oil energy efficiency.
Many base oils to meet many viscosity requirement.

36. VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY
In selecting the right lubricant for the right function, energy aspect has not received due weightage. Energy efficiency can be improved by selecting the right viscosity (lower the better but must avoid boundary conditions)
Energy efficiency can also be improved by right selection and quantity of the additives.
The savings in energy far outweighs the cost of the lubricant itself.

37. VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
LUBE SELECTION BASED ON ASSET PROTECTION
Asset protection simply means reduced wear and tear in the machinery. Wear and tear can be reduced by correct selection of additives and their quantity
Wear and tear can be reduced by monitoring the oil condition and taking preventive action
Wear and tear reduced by the correct filtration, particle count, temperature and every operational aspect of the oil
Asset protection should extend even to the surface finish condition of the rubbing parts.
The machinery life can be extended 3-4 times by investing in the above points

38. VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
LUBE CONDITION MONITORING INCLUDING AFTERMARKET ADDITIVES.
Detergents to keep spaces clean which will have the effect of clean combustion which could add to the fuel efficiency.
Detergents prevent scale formation which impedes heat transfer (0.1 mm layer of soot/sludge can affect heat transfer to the effect of 50 to 100 degC). Higher the temp of the piston, greater the wear on the liner and piston ring.
Identifying and purchasing After Market Additives - This is based on knowledge and functionality and how the additives work. This can provide valuable asset protection, higher energy efficiency, lower wear and particles generation and longer life for the lubricating oil.

39. VISWA LAB TOTAL LUBE MANAGEMENT
LUBE AND MACHINERY DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

40. WEAR DEBRIS ANALYSIS

41. Viswa Total Fuel Management
A concept in fuel management introduced by Viswa in 2001
How to get the best out of the fuel – Maximize Thermal Efficiency
Obtain the ignition and combustion characteristics.
Carry out complete analysis and forensic studies to identify chemical contaminants.
Based on analysis results and EFN and TWI values of the fuel, mechanical manipulation of machinery controls to obtain maximum thermal efficiency
Also chemical manipulation by using additives or lighter fractions such as distillate fuels

42. Percentage Fuel Savings per day after TFM Savings over 30 day voyage
TFM Benefit – As Computed For APL/NOL SHIPPING Calculations Over Several Voyages
Location
Hong Kong
San Pedro
Singapore
Quantity (MT)
3200
3307.2
3600
5600
Viscosity
324.8
295.8
491
302.6
444.7
Consumption before TFM (MT/day)
210.84
217.47
206.4
204.62
207.66
Percentage Fuel Savings per day after TFM
2.80%
1.98%
4.79%
1.82%
1.80%
Actual fuel savings per day after TFM
3.799
4.306
4.309
3.725
3.744
Cost of Fuel
$452.00
$500.00
$520.00
$600.00
Savings over 30 day voyage
$51,517.15
$58,383.94
$64,635.00
$58,106.88
$67,392.00
Cost of Test and Advisory service
$3,000 to $4,000

43. Tests Performed On Fuel For TFM
Routine Analysis
TAN/SAN
GC-MS
Asphaltene
Stability
Reserve stability number
Xylene equivalent number
Fuel Tech Ignition and Combustion
Purifier Efficiency - Before & After - Spectroscopic And Particle Count
Analyze Ship Machinery Condition With Logged Data
Monitor Results After Corrections Are Implemented

44. How Does It Work Output:
Parameters derived from Combustion Pressure Trace and Rate of Heat Release (ROHR)

45. Case: Problem Fuel Fuel Properties According to ISO 8217
Caused extensive problems for main engine
Reduced engine output
Heavy knocking at part load
Cylinder components needed replacement
FIA testing at Fueltech shows:
Bad ignition and combustion properties
Indication of dumb-bell fuel
Normal fuel
Problem fuel
Normal fuel
Problem fuel

46. FIA - Curve & Glossary

47. Figures on Manipulation

48. ENERGY MANAGEMENT MODULES
FUEL MANAGEMENT
SHIP ENERGY EFFICIENCY MANAGEMENT
CREATING AWARENESS AND MOTIVATION AND TRAINING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN
VOYAGE PLANNING
OPTIMIZED SHIP HANDLING
HULL MAINTENANCE

49. ONBOARD ENERGY MONITOR MEASURES THE FOLLOWING
EEOI - Energy Efficiency Operational Index
TonHFO/Ton nm - Mass of HFO per nautical mile
TonLFO/Ton nm - Mass of LFO per nautical mile
TonCO2/nm - CO2 per nautical mile
kWh/nm - Energy used per nautical mile
kWh/Shaft Kw - ME efficiency
TonCO2/shaft kWh - CO2 per shaft energy
kn/shaft kWh - Velocity per shaft energy
Ton CO2 / kWh - Generators emissions
GEffi. - % Generator and efficiency
Ton CO2 / kWh - Boiler emissions

50. SOME OTHER FUEL SAVING OPTIONS
TECHNOLOGY
POSSIBLE SAVING
Optimized Hull design and form
upto 10%
Weather and Voyage Routing 4%
Propeller Mewis Duct
4% to 6%
Fins on propeller boss nut 1%
Propeller - 3 blades
upto 3%
Trim Adjustment
3% to 5%
Wind Energy
upto 50%
LFC Paint
upto 9%
Emulsion Fuel
Choosing the right lubricants
5% to 15%
해운산업에서 잠재적인 감축가능성은
신선에 대하여는
개념 설계
선체 개선
기관 및 추진
연료유 및 신재생에너지 등으로 10에서 50%(감속 전제)까지
효율적인 운항관리를 통하여 10에서 50%(감속 전제)까지
총 25에서 75%(감속 전제)까지 온실가스배출을 감축할 수 있다고 국제적으로 인식하고 있습니다.

51. OTHER ENERGY SAVING OPTIONS
STARISTIND
GriegStarShipping
firstvessel
withMDinfullscale
September2009
Cost around USD 200,000.
Fitting time 2 days in Dry Dock
Retrofitting Possible. Currently 140 on order
Upto 6% energy savings 4

52. Scrubbers FUELS TIGHTER SULFUR REGULATIONS
EXPENSIVE MARINE DISTILLATE
FUELS
TIGHTER SULFUR REGULATIONS
SRUBBERS - VIABLE ALTERNATIVE

53. 53

54. MARPOL ANNEXE VI LIMITS ON SULPHUR
GLOBAL (Jan 1st)
EMMISSION CONTROL AREAS
ENTRY INTO FORCE DATE
>= TO /25*
>= 2020/25*
>= 1 Jul 2010
TO < 1 Jan 2015
>= 1 Jan 2015
LIMITS
3.5% +
0.5% +
1.0% +
0.10% +
* EFFECTIVE YEAR (2020 OR 2025) WILL BE DECIDED IN 2018
+ ALTERNATE TECHNOLOGIES ALSO ACCEPTABLE INCLUDING EXHAUST GAS CLEANING SYSTEM

55. LIMITS ON SULPHUR - European Union (eu) REQUIREMENTS and carb
0.1 % SULPHUR LIMIT(m/m) FOR MARINE FUEL INTRODUCED
EFFECTIVE DATE: JANUARY 1, 2010
APPLIES TO ALL TYPES OF MACHINERY
CALIFORNIA – 0.1% FROM 01 JANUARY 2014

56. Why Scrubbers? CASE 1
Consider a ship of 35,000 DWT consuming 25 MT per day. Based on detailed working, it is reasonable to assume that a ship will be in ECA area for at least 100 days in a year.
Take the example of a ship coming from Japan/China to US West Coast.
Voyage takes 30 days. In a year, at least 11 voyages. This will involve:
Port stay of 11 voyages X 2 x 3 days stay = 66 days.
Maneuvering time of 0.5 day X 22 times = 11 days
US West Coast ECA entry will be 1 X 22 = 22 days.
Total ECA time = approximately 100 days

57. Why Scrubbers? Consider the following benefits for Case 1
As ECA area increases, this 100 days can become much more thereby increasing the savings.
Post 2015, the differential cost between HFO and MDO can be much more than $300 per MT.
After 2020, there will be substantial benefit when the sulfur content is capped at 0.5%. Assuming the ship will be around for another 10 years, the savings will be:
265 (days) X 25 (consumption) X $220 +
34 (days) X 20 (consumption) X $220 +
66 (days) X 5 (port consumption) X $220 = $1,680,000 per year
So from 2012 to 2020, savings are $ 630,000 and
From 2020 to 2030, savings are $18,500,000
Up to 2030, the savings will come to $19 million

58. Why Scrubbers? Other benefits are:
Not having to have more tanks and pipelines for LS fuel,
The freedom to buy any sulphur fuel,
Not having to go to ports with added delay and bunkering small quantities of low sulphur fuel all of which are expensive and time consuming.

59. Introducing VISWA Scrubbers
Forefront of Technological Excellence. Fully automated trouble free operation
A product developed by three IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) Engineers with combined experience of over 100 years
30 years of experience, supplying pollution control equipment including scrubbers
Expertise in all aspects of Ships and Marine industry through the Viswa Group

60. Features and Options VISWA Scrubbers
Single scrubber can treat exhaust gas streams from ALL combustion sources
Includes main engine, auxiliary boilers and generators
Scrubber capacities up to 20 MW
Higher capacity scrubbers available
Options for exhaust gas treatment in ports

61. A LOGICAL alternative to WET SCRUBBERS - An exclusive from Viswa Scrubbers
A new simplified low cost regulations compliant design
New Design Dry scrubbers
Spray Dried Absorbers
Uses lime for SO2 capture
Safe to handle
No Centrifuges
No wash water to be discharged

62. Schematic Diagram of SDA
Inlet exhaust gas
From main engine, auxiliary engine and boilers
Air to
Atomizer
Spray Dryer
Lime
& Water
Fabric Filter
Stack
Waste solids
(CaSO3 &
CaSO4)

63. Advantages of SDA. Ca(OH)2 + SO2 > CaSO3 + H2O
Advantages of SDA Ca(OH)2 + SO2 > CaSO3 + H2O CaSO3 + ½ O2 > CaSO4
Removes SOx as well as particulates (upto 70%)
Sox removal 98% +, Some Nox removal
Low water consumption
Can use waste water or lake water
No wash water generation
No sludge treatment
Lower power consumption
Safe; no corrosive materials to handle
Inexpensive material selection

64. CONCLUSION
Substantial savings are possible through bunker quantity management
Asset protection and long term savings are possible through a Holistic Management of Bunker fuels
Energy Efficiency can be augmented through fuel savings and Total Fuel Management and Energy saving in Total Lube Management. Lube Management also enhances asset protection
Low cost new design scrubbers help in conforming to emission regulations with maximum savings and minimum complications
Additional Energy Savings ideas
Viswa Lab will continuously partner, participate and contribute in realizing these goals

65. MARPOL ANNEXE VI REGULATIRY UPDATES
* MEPC 62 EEDI – 01 JAN 2013 – NEW SHIPS SEEMP 01 JAN 2013 – ALL SHIPS EEOI ( Voluntary ) MARKET BASED MEASURES DISCUSSED *MEPC 63 LARGELY UNEVENTFUL Clarifications on EEDI Discussions on ECA compliant fuels Market Based Measures Discussed

66. MEPC 62
Chapter 4 Enters into Force on 01Jan 2013
All ships 400 GT and Above (Some exceptions )
Attained EEDI not to exceed Required EEDI
Building Contract on or after 01 Jan 2013
No Building Contract - Keel Laid or Similar stage of construction
Irrespective of above dates delivery on or after 01Jan 2015
All ships to be provided with SEEMP
30% reduction in three phases by 2025

67. Energy Efficiency Design Index
Cost: Emissions of CO2
Benefit: Cargo capacity & transport work
Complex formula to accommodate most ship types and sizes
The Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) provides a figure, expressed in grams of CO2 per tonne mile, that measures the attainable energy efficiency of a specific ship design. It enables the designer to optimize the various parameters at his disposal and provides an energy rating for the ship before it is built. The Index will, therefore, stimulate technical development of all the components influencing fuel efficiency. Through the application of this Index, ships in the near future will have to be designed and constructed intrinsically energy-efficient.
The formulation of the Index is rather complex, in that it tries to accommodate a wide range of ship types and sizes. The formula, which I cannot show in the slide because of size and complex structure, may still suffer some modifications before it is agreed by the MEPC in July. 67 67

68. Attained Index Cost: Emission of CO2
Benefit: Cargo capacity transported a certain distance
Relates to seagoing maximum condition – maximum capacity transported using maximum engine power

69. Attained Index CF: Conversion between fuel and CO2
SFC: Specific fuel consumption
P, Vref and Capacity: A consistent set of engine power required to sail at a certain speed when the ship is carrying its capacity in calm weather
fw: Speed reduction factor in wind and waves
fi: Correction factor for any regulatory limitation on capacity

71. Benchmark Against Baseline
Different Benchmarks for different types

72. Benchmark against a baseline
From public databases (LRFP*) a baseline for the ship types in the current MEPC discussion is derived for
Bulker
Tanker
Gas carrier
Container ships
General cargo ships
Ro-ro passenger ships, etc.
The “Required EEDI” of a new ship shall be below the Baseline
EEDIRequired < EEDIBaseline

73. EEDI base line vs. required EEDI
EEDI base line = a x DWT–c
To be determined according to “Guidelines”
Reduction of EEDI (MEPC61)
Required EEDI = base line x (1-(X/100))
X = reduction ratio of EEDI(%) Y
Y DWT : Ship Size requiring attained EEDI to be less than required EEDI 73

74. Baseline Establishment
EEDI New Baseline formula agreed at MEPC 60

75. Baseline Establishment
Ship type a b c
[Passenger ships
[ ] ]
Dry Cargo Carriers
DWT
Gas tankers
Tankers
Container Ships
[Ro-Ro Ships
General Cargo Ships
[Ro-ro Passenger Ships
Refrigerated Cargo Ships
If the design of a ship makes it possible to fall into more than one of the above ship type definitions
the required energy efficiency design index for the ship the most stringent energy efficiency design index.

76. Verification of EEDI

78. Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI)
An efficiency indicator for all ships (new and existing) obtained from fuel consumption, voyage (miles) and cargo data (tonnes)
Cargo Onboard x (Distance traveled)
Fuel Consumption in Operation =
Actual Fuel
Consumption
Index
The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) enables operators to measure the fuel efficiency of a ship in operation. Expressed in grams of CO2 per tonne mile, the indicator enables comparison between individual ships and thereby facilitates adoption of appropriate measures to reduce energy consumption. More importantly, the Indicator makes it possible for operators and crews to monitor the effectiveness of any new measures applied in accordance with the Ship Energy Management Plan.
The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator has been implemented on a trial basis since 2005 and the outcome and experience obtained from hundreds of trials will enable the MEPC in July to adopt a mature and robust tool to gage the operational efficiency of individual ships. 78 78

79. Objective of the EEOI Measuring energy-efficiency of existing ships
Evaluation of operational performance by owners or operators
Continued monitoring of individual ship
Evaluation of any changes made to the ship or its operation
Currently voluntary in nature
MEPC has developed Guidelines for voluntary use of the ship Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (MEPC.1/Circ.684) to establish a consistent approach for measuring ships energy-efficiency at each voyage or over a certain period of time, which will assist shipowners and ship operators in the evaluation of the operational performance of their fleet. As the amount of CO2 emitted from ships is directly related to the consumption of bunker fuel oil, the EEOI can also provide useful information on a ship’s performance with regard to fuel efficiency.
The EEOI enables continued monitoring of individual ships in operation and thereby the results of any changes made to the ship or its operation. The effect of retrofitting a new and more efficient propeller would be reflected in the EEOI value and the emissions reduction could be quantified. The effect on emissions by changes in operations, such as introduction of just in time planning or a sophisticated weather routing system, will also be shown in the EEOI value.

80. Market Based Instruments
Should MBIs be included?
Reasons for MBIs
Long life of ships
Growth of international shipping
CO2 reductions due to EEDI (new ships) = long term measure
Measures on existing ships = not sufficient to meet reductions of 20% or more in the short terms (up to 2020)
Which MBI?
- Bunker Levy (Denmark/Japan)
- Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) (Norway, Germany, U.K. & France)
- US alternative – based upon EEDI
- World Shipping Council (WSC) – modified US alternative
- IUCN Proposal of Levy on Imported Goods
- Bahama proposal of doing nothing other than Technical and Operational Measures.

81. Work Being Done At IMO
EEDI and SEEMP will come into force as a part of MARPOL Annex VI by under tacit acceptance.
Many leading maritime nations (European and Asian) are testing EEDI Formula and EEDI Base formula and carrying out impact assessment and reporting back to IMO for development of regulations that are equitable and implementable.

82. MEPC 63 SESSION 27 FEB TO 02 MARCH 2012
EEDI Formula Correction Factors AGREED
Bulk carriers and Tankers built to CSR
Ship Specific Structural Enhancements
Containerships – 70% Deadweigtht
Chemical carriers Cubic correction factor
ICE Class ships
ALL SHIPS - Weather correction factor option
Minimum Power and Mimnimum Speed – No AGREEMENT reached – defer to MEPC 64

83. Epilogue – Crisis ; Danger or Opportunity ?
선진국 및 대형 조선소들은
현재의 논의 과정을 위기로 생각하지 않고
기회로 생각하고 있습니다.
Danger
Climate Change
Opportunity
Green Growth 83

84. Coming together is a beginning, Staying together is progress & Working together is a success - Henry Ford Viswa Lab will be happy to be your partner in these endeavors and to achieve these goals together THANK YOU