Transcript Reduction of GHG emissions

Outcome from MEPC 61 on
Energy Efficiency Regulations
Tripartite Meeting
Tokyo, 15-16 October 2010
A. K. Seah
IACS EG/ENV Chairman
Contents
 Going into MEPC 61
 Outcome from MEPC 61

Decisions in plenary

Draft regulations

Guidelines
2
IMO Intersessional EE-WG
 Improved draft regulatory text for EEDI &
SEEMP

Undecided issues: ship size cut-off; EEDI
baseline and reduction rates; phases of
implementation; SEEMP approval…
 Guidelines – at various states of readiness

for calculating EEDI

for verification of EEDI

for calculating EEDI baselines
 Influence on safety

Speed reduction; structural enhancements
3
EE-WG: Draft regulatory text
 EEDI baseline  existing regression formula retained
(EEDI = a × capacityc)
 Ship size  ≥400GT, EEDI to be calculated; ships ≥ cut-off
limits in DWT, attained EEDI ≤ required EEDI

Various cut-off limits to be decided in MEPC 61
 Target years and phases  ≥2013, undecided as to phases

If 3 phases: 5 years each

If 4 phases, 1st phase (Phase 0) 2-5 years; rest 5 years
 Reduction from baseline  set with various reduction rates

E.g. for tankers 10, 25, 35%; if Phase 0, 0%
 SEEMP  loose agreement on whether Administration
approval is needed; be part of SMS
4
EE-WG: Guidelines
 Guidelines for calculation of EEDI

Ship type issues: ro-ro ships (65% DWT?); diesel
electric propulsion (?); dual-fuel engines - use
primary fuel (?)

Correction factors: fj for shuttle tankers with
redundant propulsion; fi for voluntary structural
enhancement (?); fw – need for guidelines
emphasized

Electric power table: guidelines introduced

EEDI formula: PPTO – need to avoid “overcompensation”; need to allow for CO2 abatement
system
5
EE-WG: Guidelines
 Guidelines for verification of EEDI

Draft text for guidelines for survey and certification of
attained EEDI for further consideration; boxed texts
 Calculation of EEDI baseline

Baselines are to be treated as “reference lines” for
developing required EEDI

Guidelines for calculating reference lines developed
 Guidelines for development of SEEMP

Need to develop supplementary guidelines in future
for activities associated with search and rescue
operations
6
Safety issues
 Safety should be not be compromised in seeking
environment protection
 Motivation for “under power” to minimize EEDI –
minimum power and speed should be established
 Voluntary structural safety enhancement should not be
penalized in EEDI – compensated by a fi in EEDI
formula (Greece)
 Compensate for heavier scantling of CSR-compliant
ships with fCSR in EEDI formula (China)
7
IACS Submission to MEPC 61:
Ambient conditions for electric power table
 At issue: footnote in 2.5.6.3 of draft guidelines
on method of calculation of attained EEDI on
electric power table referring to ambient
conditions
 IACS proposal

Ambient conditions in class rules are for rating
of equipment; not relevant to electric power
table

Where ambient conditions affect electric power
table, contractual conditions should apply
 MEPC 61/5/31 - IACS proposed revised
footnote
8
IACS Submission to MEPC 61:
Correction factor fi for structural enhancement
 At issue: fi the capacity correction factor proposed for
voluntary structural safety enhancement

IACS shares the view that voluntary structural safety
enhancement beyond regulatory requirements
should be compensated - but shares concerns for
“reference ship”

IACS proposed that compensation should not be
recommended until guidelines are developed
 At issue: fi the capacity correction factor proposed for
CSR-compliant ships

IACS holds the view that the matter of slightly
heavier scantlings for CSR-compliant ships should
be addressed by the setting of the required EEDI
 MEPC 61/5/30 - IACS proposed positions
9
IACS submission to MEPC 61:
Insert text for minimum installed power
 At issue: the lack of provision in the draft
Regulations for Energy Efficiency for Ships to
address the issue of minimum installed power
to enable safe navigation in severe weather
 MEPC 61/5/32 - IACS proposed text for a new
paragraph in Regulation 4
For each ship, to which this regulation applies, the installed
propulsion power shall not be less than the propulsion power
needed to maintain the manoeuvrability of the ship under
adverse conditions as defined in the guidelines to be
developed by the Organisation.
10
IACS Initiative
Investigating minimum installed power
 IACS forming project team with a view to submit
preliminary findings to MEPC 62
 Issues to be investigated

Review literature and capture experience from
seafarers

Define reference severe conditions

Define maneuverability standard

Perform seakeeping and maneuverability analyses
in reference severe conditions for given ships

Make preliminary proposals
 Hold industry workshop to discuss preliminary findings
11
MEPC 61
Decisions in plenary for MEPC 61/5
 Chosen presentations in plenary

Vanuatu paper on EEDI for ships of special circumstances
(ships serving remote islands)
• Not supported

USA paper on criteria for allowing correction factors in
EEDI formula
• For WG consideration

Singapore paper on CO2 abatement technologies
• For WG consideration; need further studies

IACS paper on minimum installed power
• WG to incorporate
 Other instruction to WG

Remove reference to Annex VI and the word “mandatory”
from the draft regulatory text
13
Draft Regulatory Text
 Application of regulations – to ships ≥ 400 GT

EEDI requirements for only 7 ship types: 1) bulk carriers, 2)
tankers, 3) gas tankers, 4) container ships, 5) general cargo
ships, 6) refrigerated cargo ships, and 7) combination
carriers.

Exclude: ships with steam, diesel-electric and hybrid
propulsions
 CO2 abatement technologies

* By linear interpolation
Singapore’s proposal not supported by WG as it deemed the
technology not ready
14
Draft Regulatory Text
 Definition of major conversion

Retained “substantial”
 Survey after major conversion

“partial survey” if conversion
is not “extensive”

Initial survey if conversion is
“extensive”
Major conversion
• Substantially alters
dimensions, DWT, power
• Change ship type
• Substantially prolong life
• Substantially alters energy
efficiency
 Duration of certificate (IEEC)

Valid for the life of the ship except where there is major
conversion or change of flag
 Improvement may be needed for survey for conversion, e.g.:

A survey should be conducted to verify if the parameters
affecting EEDI are changed

If so, EEDI should be recalculated, EEDI Technical File
revised, IEEC endorsed

Determination made if Vref is to be re-verified
15
Method of calculation of EEDI
 The Guidelines (MEPC 61/5/3 Annex 2) largely retained
 Remaining uncertainties:

Derated engine – use MCR from NOx Technical file - to be
dealt with by CG

Ambient condition in electric power table – to be dealt with
by CG

“fw” – retained as is, Japan to submit detail report
• Japan proposal to make fw optional with EEDIweather - not
supported
• Greece proposal to equate it to 0.85 - not supported

“fi” for CSR-compliant ship – not to have correction factor,
but to have reduced reduction rates – to be dealt with by
CG
16
Method of calculation of EEDI

“fi” for voluntary structural enhancement
• Example: is fi allowed for CSR “Grab” notation?
– Commercial consideration – not deserving?
• Example: is fi allowed for adding more corrosion addition than
that required by CSR?
– Commercial consideration, since reducing maintenance cost
– Enhanced safety, since reducing risk of structural failure; also
reducing lifecycle carbon footprint with reduced structural
maintenance
• Guidelines required:
– How to define the referenced ship?
– How to consider commercial v. safety?
– Lightship weight regression line? An existing ship? First of a
series of sister ships?
• IACS to consider co-sponsoring paper to MEPC 62
17
Survey and Certification of EEDI
 Guidelines (MEPC 61/5/3 Annex 3) largely retained –
discussions/reservations in boxes deleted
 However, many uncertainties
for implementation:

Main issue: verification of
reference speed Vref –
speed at 75% MCR &
summer draft
 Example issue: omission of
tank tests for ships of the
same or similar type

Should criteria be
established for waiver
of tank tests?
Ships of the same type
A ship of which the hull form,
excluding additional hull features
…and of which principal particulars
are identical to the base ship
Ships of a similar type
A ship of which the hull form,
excluding additional hull features
…and of which principal particulars
are largely identical to the base
ship
Omission of tank tests
A tank test…may be omitted based
on technical justifications such as
availability of results of tank tests
of ships of the same/similar type
18
Survey and Certification of EEDI
 Example issues:

Speed estimation at
design stage
• Established methods for
speed/power curve
predictions hard to verify
• Verifiers could ask for
highly proprietary info
• In future: develop more
robust method

Quality of tank tests
• ITTC quality system
• In future: consider
authorization of facilities
or witness of tests by
verifiers
4.2.6…The estimation of the ship speed at
the design stage much depends on each
shipbuilder's experiences, and it may not be
practicable for any person/organization
other than the shipbuilder to fully examine
the technical aspects of experience-based
parameters such as the roughness
coefficient and wake scaling coefficient.
Note to 4.2.6 A possible way forward for
more robust verification is to establish a
standard methodology of deriving the ship
speed from the outcomes of tank test…
4.2.7 – allows verifiers to request additional
information
Note to 4.2.5 For ensuring the quality of
tank tests, ITTC quality system should be
taken into account. It would be desirable in
the future that an organization conducting a
tank test be authorized or each tank test be
witnessed by the verifier in accordance with
the guidelines developed by the
Organization.
19
Survey and Certification of EEDI
 Other example issues:

Acceptance of numerical methods: for model propeller
open water test; for supplementing tank tests

Equivalent methods to ISO 15016 in calibrating speedpower curve at sea trial to account for wave, wind, etc.

Method of deriving Vref from speed-power curves from tank
tests and from sea trials

Need for a more ‘robust’ method of verification?
• Option A – status quo
• Option B – apply standard in lieu of proprietary, experiencebased parameters for ship speed estimates; derived specific
speed for EEDI purpose only
• Option C – apply verifiably parameters (verified during sea
trial) for ship speed estimates; derived specific speed for
EEDI purpose only
20
Survey and Certification of EEDI
 Need for joint industry effort for mutually
agreeable and technically sound method for
verification of Vref ?

Short-term solution
• Make Option A as robust as practicable –
development of unified verification procedure
• Quality of tank tests
• Protection of intellectual properties

Long-term solution
• …from lessons learned
21
Summary
 Regulations on energy efficiency for ships - a
step closer
 Several issues need looking into

Safety issues – installed power; structural

Survey for conversion

Calculation methods – correction factors

Survey and certification

SEEMP
22