Alternative Fuels for Marine Applications Tennessee Renewable Energy Economic Council October, 2014

Sujit K. Ghosh Office of Environment Maritime Administration 202.366.1839 [email protected]

1

Alternative Fuels For Marine Applications Presentation Overview  Introduction  Maritime Alternative Energy Perspective  Towards a Sustainable and Greener Merchant Marine

 Renewable Fuel Oil Tests  Tested Two Types of Hydrotreated Renewable Diesel Fuels produced from:  

   

Algae Fermentation of Sugar

Performance tests Exhaust emission tests Machinery vibration tests Underwater Radiated Sound Measurements

 Projects in the Pipeline

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

2

Maritime Alternative Energy Perspective Several Alternative Energy Technology Changes  Sail (Wind)/Manual Power (Oar) to Coal – 200+ years ago  Coal to Petroleum Fuels – 100 years ago

Source: IEA World Energy Outlook 2012: CERA Courtesy: Sapphire Energy

– Environmental regulations were limited – Fuel costs were low and predictable – Marine fuels were “one size fits all”

Projected: Gap of 30+ million barrels per day between supply and demand by 2030 • All viable alternative sources of energy will be in strong demand What are the sources of alternative energy?

Courtesy: GL– Cost & benefits of ship fuel

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

3

Maritime Alternative Energy Perspective Alternative Energy  Non-renewable petroleum fuels –  LNG/CNG – Liquid/compressed Natural gas

 Renewable 

Biofuels –   



FAME – Fatty Acid Methyl Ester HRD – Hydrotreated Renewable Diesel Biomass – FT process

Other renewable energy –  

Hydrogen Solar, Wind, Thermal, wave, etc.

Main Considerations  Non-renewable petroleum fuels – LNG/CNG    

Low fuel cost High cost of developing fuel infrastructure Require new dual fuel/gas engines Cost of new ship construction/retrofit

 Methane slip  Renewable biofuels: HRD    

Strategic considerations Present cost of fuel Existing fuel oil infrastructure may be used Existing diesel engines may be utilized

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

4

Maritime Alternative Energy Perspective

HRD/F-T: “Drop-in-Fuel” The U.S. Navy’s Green Fleet Initiative  Advantages:  Similar chemical properties as petroleum fuel  Superior blending with petroleum fuel  Completely fungible with existing petroleum infrastructure and fleet

 Low emission of criteria pollutants from diesel engines End-to-End Solution for Algae Derived Fuel Developed by Sapphire Energy

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

5

SHIPBOARD TESTS OF HRD (DROP-IN) FUEL FUEL PRODUCED FROM ALGAE FEED STOCKS 1ST TEST – SEPTEMBER 2011

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

6

HRD Fuel Performance Tests Project Objective: – Conduct limited shipboard tests of the fuel as an end user

 Project goals:  Field blend the of the fuel with ULSD 50% by volume  Conduct operational, endurance, and exhaust emissions tests underway and pier side  Assess material condition of engine pre- and post-tests  Conduct fuel oil stability analysis  Collect and analyze data

MARAD agreement with Navy

 Agreement with the Navy  Navy will provide the neat HRD fuel  MARAD will provide: – – – –

The test platform Conducted underway and pier side tests Analyzed test results Published final report

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

T/S STATE OF MICHIGAN

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

7

HRD Fuel Oil analysis Neat Algae-based Fuel Oil Characteristics

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

8

HRD Fuel Oil Analysis- contd. USLD & Blended Algae-based Fuel oil Characteristics (Same ULSD batch used for blending) Test Lubricity, HFRR

Parameter Wear Scar

Method D6079

Units

D4176

Demulsification at 25°C

D1401

minutes

Density at 15°C

D4052

kg/m

-----

Clear & Bright

ULSD Fuel 320 Clear & Bright

10

3

50/50 Blend Fuel 310 Clear & Bright

4

3

829

804

10% Recovered

°C

Report

205

218

50% Recovered

°C

Report

251

270

°C

357

310

297

End Point

°C

385

333

320

Reside + Loss

Volume %

3.0

1.5

1.6

°C

-1

- 18

- 11

3

5.8

4.8

90 % Recovered

Cloud Point

D86

D5773

Color

D1500

Flash Point

D93

°C

Particulate Contamination

D5452

mg/L

Pour Point

D5949

°C

Viscosity at 40°C

D445 D974

mm /s mg KOH/g

D482 D524

Acid Number Ash Carbon Residue

Maximum 460

Appearance at 25°C

Distillation

Minimum

µm

10% Bottom

Copper Strip Corrosion at 100 °C

D130

Hydrogen Content

D7171

----60

59

61

10

0.2

1.2

-6

- 27

- 18

4.3 0.30

2.3 0.05

2.5 0.06

Mass %

0.005

0.001

0.000

Mass %

0.20

0.07

0.01

2

1.7

No. 3

----Mass %

1a 14.1

Cetane Index

D976

51

65

Storage

Total Insolubles

D5304

mg/100 mL

3.0

0.6

0.2

Sulfur Content

Trace Metals

, Total

40

1a 13.6

Ignition Quality Stability

-----

12.5

D 5453

m g/ kg

15

10.3

3.9

Ca

D7111

mg/kg

1.0

0.0

0.0

Pb

D7111

mg/kg

0.5

0.

0.0

Na + K

D7111

mg/kg

1.0

0.3

0.3

V

D7111

mg/kg

0.5

0.1

0.1

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

9

HRD Fuel Performance Tests – contd. Emissions Test Details    







UC-R portable emission test equipment installed Test performed to ISO 8178-2 ISO 8178-4 D2 Cycle selected for engine operational mode Modifications made to exhaust system and controls to permit testing ULSD tested first day underway and 50/50 blend test fuel tested second day Gaseous and PM emissions were measured in triplicate for each of the five modes Emissions and fuel performance comparison results were assessed

Underway Emission Test Installation ISO 8178-4 D2 Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4 Mode 5 Fuel Load 100 75 50 25 10 (%) 92 82 60 26 17 ULSD (kW) 554 490 359 159 101 (%) 92 80 61 28 15 Blend (B50) (kW) 551 482 368 167 91 Actual load points

ISO 8178-4 D2 Cycle

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

10

HRD Fuel Performance Test - Results Test Results: Average Weighted Emission Reduction with B50 blend fuel compared to ULSD     

NOX–emissions -10% CO-emissions -18% CO2-emissions -5% PM2.5-emissions -25% SOX reduced from 0.0055 g/bhp-hr to 0.0020 g/bhp-hr (based on the actual sulfur in the fuels)

Percent Reduction in Pollutants by 50/50 Blend

 A 5% reduction in CO2 reflects a similar amount of fuel savings for the B50 blend  Calorific Values: o

42.938 (USLD) 43.400 (B50) MJ/kg

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Specific Fuel Performance

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

11

HRD Fuel Performance Test - Conclusions Conclusions:  Use of the 50/50 blended renewable HRD fuel would yield cleaner emissions, especially lowering Particulate Matter, and Sulfur, Nitrogen and Carbon Oxides  Improves fuel efficiency  No operational differences in vessel and engine performance are evident  Engine component condition consistent with similar engine hours that use traditional fuels  50/50 blend fuel of ULSD and HRD-76 performs well enough to be an acceptable drop-in replacement fuel to replace ULSD in marine vessels with high-speed diesel engines.

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

12

SHIPBOARD TESTS OF AMYRIS RENEWABLE DIESEL FUEL PRODUCED FROM FERMENTATION OF SUGAR 2ND TEST – SEPTEMBER 2012

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

Amyris Renewable Diesel

First Tests on a Marine Vessel The fuel is:  Produced from fermentation of sugar (Sorghum)  Hydrogenated  Pure hydrocarbon “Drop-in” fuel

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

14

AMYRIS Renewable Diesel Performance Tests

Project Objectives & Goals: – Same as the 1st HRD test  In addition, collect data for:  Structural vibration and air borne noise  Under water sound transmission

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

15

AMYRIS Renewable Diesel Oil Analysis Properties of ULSD, Amyris Renewable Diesel, 65/35 and 50 /50 USLD/Amyris Blend

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

16

Amyris Renewable Diesel Emission Test Results

Total PM2.5 Mass Emissions TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

17

AMYRIS Renewable Diesel Performance Test Findings Findings  Statistical analysis of the data reveals that the emissions and fuel economy are essentially the same for the 100% ULSD and the 67/33 blend of ULSD/Amyris Renewable Diesel  No operational differences in engine performance are evident  Engine component condition consistent with similar engine hours that use traditional fuels

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

18

Comparison of the Two HRD Fuel Oil Test Results

2nd Test: %Reduction in Pollutants by the 67/33 Blend of ULSD and Amyris Biofuel

1st test: %Reduction in Pollutants by the 50/50 Blend of ULSD and Algae-based Biofuel •

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

19

Drop-in Fuel Performance Test Results – Both Fuels Other Test Results  Cleaner visible exhaust emission  Comparatively less vibration near the operating engine  Less odor from fuel fumes

Caterpillar Service Representative – “After performing pre‐ and post‐ test inspections, I did not see anything abnormal.  The effects of the  biofuel were the same as running on #2 ultra low diesel fuel.”

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

20

Drop-in Fuel Performance Test Results – contd. Underwater Radiated Sound Measurements

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

21

Underwater Radiated Sound Measurements  Test Objective:  Ascertain the differences in underwater radiated sound at different vessel speeds and fuel

 Goals: – Record and establish baseline environmental sound signatures – Record data at full and half cruising speeds each with one and multiple number of engines on line (same for each case) – Operate one engine alternatively with USLD and blended fuel – Analyze the data 

Tests conducted in The Great Lakes Test Set-up and Location

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

22

Underwater Radiated Sound Measurements – contd. Standard Run Geometry Using ISO Guidelines – Engine line-ups: •

Single and 2 engines

– Two ship speeds • •

Cruising Half cruising

– Two different types of fuel • •

ULSD Blend HRD

– Bow Thruster

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

23

Underwater Radiated Sound Measurements - Analysis Plot at 11 Kts Cruising Speed : ~2 dB difference at 4000 to 16000 Hz

•

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Plot at 6 Kts Cruising Speed : ~3 dB difference at 2000 to 12000 Hz

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

24

Projects in the Pipeline • 3rd Operational Test of HRD Fuel – Renewable fuel tests being conducted at Scripps Institution of Oceanography – Fuel tested: NExBTL produced by NESTE • Performance tests • Exhaust emission tests Refining of NExBTL Fuel

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

25

Projects in the Pipeline – contd. •

Marine Application of Fuel Cell Auxiliary Power Unit (APU): Towards Cleaner & Cheaper Maritime Power – 100 kW hydrogen PEM fuel cell prototype demonstration project for port and shipboard operation to provide power to refrigerated containers • • • •

System built into a standard ISO 20” container Scalable from kW to MW Built in redundancy Environmental conditioning

Fuel Cells

Portable, backup, and stationary generators

20’ 100kW H2 PEM Fuel Cell TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

26

Marine Application of Fuel Cells • Why Marine Fuel Cells – Ecological and Economical Considerations • • • • • •

Fuel cells have higher efficiency and perform better at part loads than diesel gensets. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Higher efficiency = Less fuel burned

Energy efficiency Emission reduction Compliance with emission regulations Renewable alternatives Reduced vibration/noise Energy security – Diversity in fuels enables energy independence and security

Diesel Generator

Fuel cell Emission Benefits

Source: officerofthewatch.com

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

27

Marine Application of Fuel Cells – contd.

Courtesy: Hydrogenics

TREEDC, Cookeville, TN October 2014

Sujit Ghosh, U.S. Maritime Administration

28

Thank You

29