The Green Ferry: Low Emissions, Low Wake & Operational Efficiency Matt Mullett Chief Executive Officer ALL AMERICAN MARINE
Low Emissions The “Right” thing to do
Low Emissions The “Right” thing to do
Low Emissions Legislative mandates –EPA Tier III – Marine Engines –EPA Tier IV – Marine Engines 2017 Challenge –Available technology –Economic viability
Low Emissions Biodiesel –Pros More Biodegradable Less toxic Renewable Resource –Cons Availability and Cost Engine OEM’s reluctant to accept blends greater than B20 or B30 –Meet ASTM Manufacturing Specifications –Cleans out the system, clogs filters Overall Impact from Corn to Combustion = more emissions
Low Emissions Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
Low Emissions SCR Systems –Pros Removing harmful emissions: NOx & SOx By-products – water and ammonia –Cons Marinization of industrial and highway technology Build boat around system Weight Burn more fuel Better off building lighter, smaller engines, burning less fuel emitting fewer emissions
Low Emissions After-Treatment Filters Catalyzed Particulate Filter for Diesel Engines –Pros 99% of Carbon monoxide 99% of Hydrocarbons 85% Particulate Material Provides additional sound attenuation –Cons No provisions for NOx and SOx treatment Back pressure
Low Wake Vessel wake – An issue here to stay
Low Wake Rich Passage Wake Wash Study
CFD Modeling & Testing VIRTUAL TANK TEST Teknicraft Design, Ltd. University of Iowa’s IIHR-Hydroscience & Engineering Research Center –Iowa’s Institute of Hydraulic Research (IIHR) CFDSHIP-IOWA INSEAN Naval Architects (Rome, Italy) –Potential Flow Code Refine design features for low wash and energy
Virtual Test Tank Wake Wash Elevations
Reliability of the Model
Refining the Revision
Vessel Optimization Study 3 Different hull shapes 3 Different hydrofoil profiles 9 New vessels
Vessel Optimization Study - 83’ LOA - Quad Jet Boat passengers - 37 knot cruise speed
Operational Efficiencies Economic necessity –Minimize hull resistance –Maximize fuel efficiency –Evaluate propulsion systems
Weight Watchers Put your boat on a diet Weight Inventory –Weigh on & off Check for Fouling
Operational Efficiencies Bottom Paint –Intersleek 900 Up to 9% fuel and emissions savings compared to biocide antifoulant coatings with self polishing copolymers Necessary Expense
Consumption Comparison 80’ Monohull (150 pax) –450 gallons/day 72’ Catamaran (150 pax) –400 gallons/day 83’ Teknicraft (150 pax) –330 gallons/day –same engine model
Effective at 17 knots Displaces 1/3 rd of the vessel’s weight Uses 1/3 rd less horsepower Burns 1/3 rd less fuel
WAVE PIERCER SYMMETRICAL BOW
ASSYMETRICAL TUNNEL
HYDROFOIL SYSTEM
VESSEL83' Teknicraft Catamaran90' Composite Monohull PASSENGERS150 ENGINE RPM1800 ENGINE POWER49.5%80% SPEED22 knots FUEL CONSUMPTION75.1 gallons/hour150 gallons/hour HOURS AT 22 KNOTS1600 hours/year FUEL COST$3/gallon ANNUAL FUEL CONSUMPTION120,160 gallons240,000 gallons ANNUAL FUEL COST$360,480$720,000 ANNUAL FUEL SAVINGS$359,520$0 MONTHLY FUEL SAVINGS$29,960$0Cheaper
Flat Fuel Consumption
Design Characteristics Lightweight aluminum construction –5383 Marine Grade Alloy
Operational Efficiencies Fuel Management Systems –Fuel Flow Meters Most efficient operating rpm levels
Operational Efficiencies Fuel Treatment Systems –Enhance Combustion –Economize fuel potential
Operational Efficiencies Diesel Electric
Operational Efficiencies Diesel Electric –Pros Consistent Load, predictable fuel consumption –Cons Size and Weight Availability of Motors Speed Loss of efficiency during power conversion
Operational Efficiencies Hybrid Transmissions –Gear box with an electric motor input –Eliminate the propulsion prime mover Issues –Suitable electric motors –Power generation for motors Genset Batteries
Operational Efficiencies Solar –Expensive –Real Estate –Weight –Speed: 7 knots
Operational Efficiencies Wind –Not suitable for most ferry applications –Efficiency
The Green Ferry: Low Emissions, Low Wake & Operational Efficiency Existing & emerging technologies – Beware of “Smoke & mirrors” Economic realities – Do your homework
Thank You