Taharoa Destiny, image courtesy NYK Lines

On May 11, NYK accepted delivery of the Taharoa Destiny, a new 175,000 DWT class vessel dedicated to the transport of iron sand slurry from New Zealand.

Never heard of an iron sand slurry ship?  Nor had we.

Essentially, a pipeline from shore is used to load this vessel by pumping the iron sand slurry into the vessel cargo holds. After the loading operation is completed, the water in the hold is discharged before the ship sails from port.

This is the only vessel in the world designed to load iron sand slurry and thus requires advanced operating and loading/discharging technique and know-how.

Livestock carrier design, image: Groot Ship Design

KUALA LUMPUR – A unique contract was signed yesterday between Dutch naval architecture firm, Groot Ship Design, South Korea’s Sungdong shipyard, and Malaysian shipowner PBHH/BH, for the design and delivery of two types of livestock carriers.

Groot Ship Design created two concept designs for Sungdong, a design for the transport of 7000 cows (Livestock carrier 7000) and a design for the transport of 11000 cows (Livestock carrier 11000). These designs are to be further completed in the coming months. Groot Ship Design shall also provide a large part of the basic engineering for the Korean shipyard.

Of each type the Korean yard will build 5 vessels for PBHH/BH Livestock. Sungdong requested Groot Ship Design to deliver the design for each type because of the knowledge and experience in livestock carriers and the innovating bow design of the Groot Cross-Bow©.

For Groot Ship Design this is the biggest design order so far since the company started at the end of 2005.

The shipbuilding contracts were signed between BPHH/BH live stock and Sungdong.  Groot Ship Design and Bureau Veritas have been contracted separately by Sungdong to provide design/engineering and ship classification for these vessels respectively.

For PBHH this is an important step forward into the world market for live animal transportation with special attention for the welfare of the animals. PBHH is a major player in the production of halal food, the new fleet of livestock carriers will further strengthen its position in that market. For Groot Ship Design this is a new milestone with regards to further internationalisation (after Europe, China, and India, now Korea) and the size of the designs. The largest of the two designs, the livestock carrier 11000, is with respect to the main dimension, so far now, the largest ship designed by Groot Ship Design.

Of each design, 5 ships will be built (10 ships in total). Livestock is shipped from Sudan to Malaysia and as return cargo frozen chicken will be carried, each ship will therefore load 100 pcs of 40ft reefer containers.  Groot Ship Design is honoured to receive this great order which will offer work to 20-25 specialists and designers for the rest of the remaining year. Sundong is the no 5 shipyard of Korea with approx 8500 employees and one the most modern shipyards of its kind.

As part of a project to define the future design of container feeder ships for operation in the Baltic Sea, some of my colleagues have done a survey. They posed a set of questions to a range of ship operators in the Baltic Sea area, and some of the results are quite interesting from a LNG perspective. Other results may serve as weekend entertainment.

Some of the top ranking priorities are quite obvious. It would be strange if “operating costs” and “fuel efficiency” didn’t score rather high in a survey like this. Even in the shipping industry, which lives by its own set of economic indicators, this would be strange indeed.

If you are a reader from a different industry you may notice that not all items brought forward appear very futuristic, e.g. “optimal fuel consumption over wide speed range” may sound obvious, but actually most ships are optimised for easy construction, which gives a quite different output.

Not a popular finding among sailors I would guess, but “crew comfort” is among the lowest priorities. Perhaps this indicates that crew comfort is already at luxury level?

Next, the survey asks the ship operators what future solution they will be more willing to consider. Here it is very encouraging to see the high score for dual fuel engines. Actually, it is a bit surprising; I thought the operators were more sceptics. The study also indicates that they are much more comfortable with “dual fuel” than “pure LNG”. I guess the option to switch back to “normal” makes it easier to dive into the novel solutions. It will be interesting to see how this develops in later surveys when LNG has become more of a business as usual solution.

Container ships don’t want pods. We hear you, dear shipowners.

And we conclude with a small contribution to the frustrating task of forecasting future fuel sources:  The respondents are quite confident that “LNG will become an important or dominant fuel type for the Baltic trade”. It is good to see that we here at DNV are in tune with our customers.

More information and analysis from the survey will be published next week. I’ll be sure to keep you posted.

Enjoy the weekend!

Lars Petter Blikom is Segment Director for Natural Gas at DNV. Lars Petter follows both energy and maritime industries closely. Connect with Lars Petter on LinkedIn Follow Lars Petter on Twitter

E Class Sea Eagle catamaran

Sauter Carbon Offset Design (SCOD) says they have come up with an alternative design for the USCG’s new Sentinel Class Fast Response Cutters (FRC) that could potentially cut fuel consumption in half while at the same time increase cruising speed by up to 10% through solar power and a catamaran hull form.

The design was submitted through the USCG’s Unsolicited Proposal Program that allows companies or individuals to submit ideas for products or services that may be of interest to the Coast Guard.

SCOD says that the E-Class Search and Rescue Sea Eagle, as the design is called, uses half as much fuel to go 10% faster than the USCG Sentinel Class Fast Response Cutters’ currently in use and under construction.  In addition to the fuel savings and increased speed, the Sea Eagle will be equipped with a waterjet propulsion system, dynamic positioning, and “small wave making” technology to minimize harm to the marine ecology.

Instead of the Sentinels tier 2 diesel engines that generate 11,500hp, the Sea Eagle will generate a total of 5,000hp through a Solar Hybrid propulsion package that includes cleaner MTU Tier 4i diesels.  With less than half the fuel consumption of the Sentinel Class FRC’s, the catamaran Sea Eagle’s greater overall efficiency delivers a maximum speed of 32 knots, as opposed to 29 knots.

In “silent electric mode”, SCOD says the SEA Eagle can navigate inland water ways and dock with zero emissions. Plugged in, her solar cells can harness and return over 200 MWs of energy to the grid per year, enough power to offset 3,000 nautical miles of Carbon Neutral cruising at 18 knots. As a Certified Carbon Offset Project, SCOD says the SEA Eagle can reduce GHG emissions by as much as 12,000 tons per year.

Energy from the grid or captured from her 100KW solar array is stored in a Lloyds approved Corvus 2MW Lithium UPS and the 16 ton weight of the batteries also serves as the energy generating motion dampening system.  Combining this with the self leveling T-Foils in each hull greatly improves the ride, related safety aspects and the accuracy of the stabilized remotely operated 25 mm chain gun, and the four crew operated .50 caliber machine guns.

“Government Agencies like the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security while protecting us can also play a major roll in protecting our way of life for future generations,” says Richard Sauter, owner of SCOD. “They have the opportunity, if not a duty, to do this by insuring that only the best examples of fuel efficient Eco Conscious Vessels are to be found in our Coast Guard and Navy.

Considering the USCG has already called for the design and construction of up to 34 new “Sentinel Class” Fast Response Cutters (FRC) from Bollinger Shipyards in Lockport, LA, SCOD faces an uphill battle if they plan on getting the concept E Class Sea Eagle into production.

The first Sentinel Class was recently commissioned in Miami.

Image: HHI

As the fuel consumption efficiency of a ship is becoming a primary concern for shipowners, the length of the hull and the operating speed of the main engine decrease while the breadth increases. The height of the deckhouse is also increased to provide navigation visibility for large container carriers. Moreover, reinforced vibration regulations come into effect in accordance with shipowners ’ demand for comfortable cabins. Such changes make the existing anti-vibration solutions ineffective and thus a new low vibration design and vibration control scheme are necessary. Hyundai Maritime Research Institute (HMRI) has developed various technologies satisfying lower vibration limit (3 mm/s) including low-vibration deckhouse design, the exact evaluation of major excitation forces, and the development of vibration control devices.

Low-vibration Deckhouse Design
Elaborate parametric study was carried out to determine the optimal shape of the deckhouse in order to reduce vibrations. Different dimensions for the deckhouse were used according to various main engines. In addition, the wall lay-ups and supporting structures
were modified to control the rigidity of the deckhouse. Such design changes were applied to entire vessels such as VLCC, VLOC, VLOO, bulk carrier and containerships. It was found that the vibration level decreased drastically compared to that of the existing deckhouse design.

Evaluation of Major Excitation Force
Among various ship-borne excitation forces, thrust variation due to main engine explosion forces were analyzed and identified theoretically and experimentally. Three-dimensional FE analysis technology of the crank and propulsion shaft system was developed to
accurately predict excitation forces due to thrust variation. Then, the excitation forces were measured through semiconductive strain gauges during the sea trial. The measured results were as predicted. From the analytical model, design guide for a propulsion shaft
was also proposed to minimize thrust variation.

Vibration excitation forces are transmitted from the main engine and the propeller to the deckhouse through the hull structure. The transmission was identified analytically by using vibration intensity analysis technique which can accurately show the transmission paths of the vibration energy in the hull structure. As the transmission and dissipation paths of vibration energy were identified, effective low vibration design was obtained.

Development of Vibration Control Device
The vibration compensator to generate active control force was developed to reduce the vibration of the deckhouse and main engine. The developed compensator was designed to adjust control force minutely. The optimal vibration control scheme which realizes the total
automatic control without any operator was built and applied to commercial vessels in order to validate its effectiveness.

The top bracing with high damping capacity is being developed as a vibration control device for the deckhouse and main engine. The stiffness and damping of the commercial top bracings were identified experimentally for the performance evaluation of the current top bracings. Design parameter sensitivities were analyzed through the simulation of hydraulic components and various experiments
were carried out for the validation of the simulation. As a result, the damping performance of the top bracing was improved.

From the study conducted by HMRI, low-vibration design and countermeasures for newly developed ships were constructed systematically. Owing to this study, HHI has acquired core technologies to guarantee the vibration level of ship’s deckhouse below the lower vibration limit of 3 mm/s.

MT Mastera, image courtesy NESTE OIL, click for larger image

Concept and Background

- by Lloyd’s Register’s Robert Hindley and Robert Tustin:

Bow propellers have been installed on ships operating in ice since the 1880s with the following practical effects observed:

• Encourages the ice to break ahead of the ship’s bow
• Ability of propeller to further break-up ice into smaller pieces
• Washing of ice pieces away from the ship’s hull
• Improved maneuverability of the ship in the ice
• Assistance for freeing of the ship in trapped conditions

The practical effects of bow propellers in ice can also be achieved with podded propulsion units, or azimuthing thrusters which, when located at the stern, can be rotated to pull the ship ‘stern first’ with the additional benefits of directional thrust for maneuvering in ice and flushing of ridges.

Notice the transom clears iceline, a stern-facing pilothouse, the laterally located stacks, and the fine stern entry on MT Mastera. Image courtesy NESTE OIL, click for larger image

Ice interaction when operating stern first, courtesy Robert Hindley and Robert Tustin, Lloyd's Register

Ice interaction with propeller and hull operating stern first 

Beneficial effects of stern first operation from propeller and hull ice interactions are shown above and described below:

• Ice sheet bending and breaking – the water flow into the pulling propeller causes a pressure drop under the ice sheet ahead of the stern; which reduces buoyant up thrust on the ice sheet and promotes ice breaking by bending.
• Flushing of ice ridges – by azimuthing the pod adjacent to the keel of an ice ridge the variable flow of water promotes the erosion, or flushing, of the ice ridge keel.
• Lower frictional resistance in ice – with the propeller pulling, the water flow from the propeller washes along the length of the hull. The water flow reduces the friction between the hull and the ice by lubrication.

You may wonder, so does this present a curious rules of the road situation while at night?

Not to worry, “Stern First Ice Class Ships” will have mast head, side, and stern lights for both bow first and stern first operations.

Image courtesy NESTE OIL

Lloyd’s Register announced today that the first dedicated set of rules for stern-first ice-class ships has just been published, answering the demand for technical support as industry continues to explore the potential of polar transportation routes and the new energy reserves in the far north.

“These practical rules are answering a growing demand in the market and include the use of standard operational scenarios to provide designers with a basis for prescriptive rule applications that have been validated with designers and operators of these specialist ships,” said Robert Tustin, Lloyd’s Register’s Technical Manager for New Construction in Asia.

Lloyd’s Register has had a long involvement in the development of this class of ships. Mastera and Tempera – two 106,000 dwt “double-acting” tankers owned by Neste — were built to its class in 2002 and 2003 at Sumitomo’s yard in Japan. The ships were deployed to the Baltic, where they often operate stern first in heavy ice conditions, independent from icebreakers.

Other tankers, such as Sovcomflot’s Mikhael Ulyanov and Kiril Lavrov, were designed and built for operating stern first in ice in the Arctic. These ships, dual classed by Lloyd’s Register and the Russian Maritime Register of Shipping, were designed to eventually shuttle crude from the Prirazlomnoye platform in the Pechora Sea to a floating storage and offloading unit moored off Murmansk.

The development of Lloyd’s Register’s new rules were supported and validated by leading ice-class tanker designers, key regulators and operators.

The interpretation of regulatory and other rule requirements — and validation of strength levels for the hull and propulsion units — were confirmed by a review of the current fleet of double-acting ships, ensuring that practical experience supported the rules’ development.

They offer the following key interpretations:

§         The ship is considered as a bow-first and stern-first vessel for application of ice-class rule requirements for hull and machinery
§         It is also considered as a stern-first ship for the application of navigation-related rules and regulations
§         In other cases, the rule applies to bow-first ships only

The rules also include a framework for alternative-load scenarios when unusual operations are envisaged, as well as interpretations of international regulations and classification rules based upon industry precedents, said Tustin.

Interview conducted 20 March 2012  

Viking Lady, image: DNV

RA:  Thank you all for the opportunity to talk with you today.  CMA is a busy event and I’m sure all of you are being pulled in a hundred different directions.

We published an article recently about an LNG-powered platform supply vessel called the Viking Lady that was experimenting with Fuel Cells, and I know that DNV was heavily involved in this project, what can you tell me about it?

Tor Svensen – President, DNV Maritime, Oil & Gas

T. Svensen: It was an experiment to see if it is possible to use fuel cells in a commercial vessel.  The Viking Lady is already an LNG-powered PSV, so natural gas is available, as one of the fuels that can power fuel cells.

RA: How do they work exactly?

T. Svensen: It’s a direct conversion to electricity through a process using special metals.  Actually, fuel cells have an efficiency of about  75 to 80 percent compared to a reciprocating engine, which works at maybe 50 percent.

The nice thing is that fuel cells can run on different fuels.  If you run on hydrogen, you have zero emissions.  If you run on natural gas, you have maybe 50% reduction in CO2 emissions.  Both of those are huge advantages.

RA: One of the things they mentioned in the EEDI meeting this afternoon was using fuel cell technology on board ships to supplement power plants at sea.

T. Svensen: Yes, that’s exactly right.  If you’re in port, you’ll just run on the fuel cell and you’ll have all the power you need while in port.  In the case of the Viking Lady,  you’ll have part, or perhaps all, of the auxiliary load supplied by the fuel cell.  The fuel cell on Viking Lady was not more than 300KW, so it was not big fuel cell, although it was physically large.

Part of the tests on board the Viking Lady were to see if a fuel cell could fit into the operational profile of the ship.  Then, we wanted to test the interface into the electrical system and see how it would work given the ship’s motion and the marine environment.

RA: From a risk management standpoint, what are some of the issues that you saw with this system?

T. Svensen:  The fuel cell had no risk management issues beyond those of other propulsion or power systems.   With LNG, of course, there are issues with regard to double barriers for safety that are well established already.  Frankly, we were surprised how well everything worked.

Now, Fuel cells need to be developed much further for commercial application, but they look promising.  They are very good for a providing a stable power output at an optimum efficiency point,  perhaps 80-85 percent of maximum power.

RA:  Who is developing them?

T. Svensen:  MTU – Rolls Royce developed the fuel cell for the Viking Lady.

RA:  Are they the only ones working on this right now?

T. Svensen:  No, there are other manufacturers as well.  Unfortunately there are not enough manufacturers or development for fuel cells today.  I would like to see much more development because we need to bring them down in size so that we get more output for their volume, ie. power density needs to increase.

That is one of the biggest challenges.

RA:  The Viking Lady has a few other unique features designed into her, such as a deck-forward design.  Can you explain the rationale behind this feature and perhaps any others?

T. Svensen:  Yes, she looks a bit like a cargo ship.  They decided on that design in order to give better operability and handling.  I talked to the master of that ship and he said that on a traditional, deck aft PSV, you have a forward and aft position while working, however for the Viking Lady, everything is forward which enables the master to keep focused on what is happening on deck, and what is directly in front of the vessel at all times.  It’s a safety issue.

The other is the comfort factor.

Having the bridge and accommodation areas aft makes a huge difference when working in the North Sea.  Crews mention that they sleep better on this sort of vessel because they are not thrown around in their bunks as much.

RA:  Have you seen a lot of interest in this vessel design from other companies operating in the North Sea?

T. Svensen:  Most ship owners are fairly traditional and have not yet bought into this design.

An additional benefit is that with the pilothouse-aft design, the conduit run for the power systems is much shorter as the accommodations, the bridge systems, and the engine room are all arranged vertically.  It’s a simpler design, and thus less costly to build.

Also, with the aft superstructure, less buoyancy is required in the bow, and thus a finer entry can be designed to improve hull efficiency.

T. Svensen:  I think the main hurdle is to get used to handling cargo on the bow, where there are more ship motions than on the stern.

RA:  Besides affecting their bottom line, how do we get these companies on board with these new concepts?

T. Svensen:  I think the main idea is the use of LNG as a plentiful and environmentally friendly fuel.  The secondary idea is to explore the layout and actual design.  As I said, opinions are divided and design is always a tradeoff.  You choose some features that you like, and you compromise on other things.  I continue to think that owners and designers will always explore new options for safety and efficient operations

Elisabeth Torstad – COO, Division Americas

RA:  Elisabeth, tell me a bit about DNV Americas, what’s the strategy for DNV over the next year?

E. Torstad:  We have been in the Americas for over 100 years and have a strong organization.  DNV Americas covers several different areas, not just maritime.  Today, we are growing in pipeline safety, oil and gas, especially offshore, renewable energy and electrical power transmission as well as maritime.  We are very strong in healthcare side and the certification of management systems to quality, environmental and other international standards.  Then, our laboratories for fuel testing, pipeline safety and forensic investigations, as well as a research and innovation unit, round out the broad scope of our activities in the Americas.  Within maritime, which is a very strong area for us in the Americas, though, we are seen as a very capable and highly competent organization.   So we have several strong legs to stand on.

We focus on technology and quality in the Americas, which also differentiates us throughout the world.  We have a strong edge within offshore and we bring a lot of competence here from other places in the world.  Houston is also a hub for development of our other global business units.

Image: DNV

RA:  How are you able to bring in that talent?  Why do people want to work for DNV?

E. Torstad:  Because we focus on competence and technology and we do things such as engage in projects like the Viking Lady, the Quantum, Triality and other concept ships on the shipping side, and we similar innovative design projects on the oil and gas sectors.  Also, we value innovation and creativity – the desire to challenge the norm and we invest in both the technical and managerial competence of our people.

To us, though, competence alone is only valuable if we share it with industry and government – and we do in the delivery of our services and by taking positions on key issues.  For example, we had a position paper for an effective offshore regulatory regime for the U.S. in July 2010, less than 3 months after the Macondo blowout.

RA:  How do you communicate these points to the industry?

E. Torstad:  We communicate in several different ways.  gCaptain is certainly one avenue for us to communicate and we appreciate your interest in all of our  innovative projects, such as the Viking Lady, the X-Stream pipeline and concept ships, LNG fuel for propulsion and offshore solar farms.  Secondly, we have an open and active internal and external communication policy and we are available to the trade and general media to offer our own analysis or share our insights.

Third, we have a number of publications, such as Forum, our corporate magazine, and industry specific publications, such as the Updates for Offshore, Tankers, Container Ships, Cruise Ships, LNG, Wind Energy, etc., which are distributed to our customers, government agencies, and are also available on our website.

Fourth, we take time to listen to our customers and, when it is appropriate, we can point out how some of our innovation products or services may help them.

We do hold press conferences, but many trade and general media journalists now subscribe to the press releases we post on our web site.   Also, we are active in various industry conferences and provide speakers when we feel we have something to add or a unique view.

We also have a very strong tradition for developing new ways of working and new standards or recommended practices together with industry where we invite companies and governmental institutions in to work together with us.  So we both work in the background on our own, as well as in strong partnerships with industry and government

RA:  Tell me a bit about the work that DNV is doing within the arctic?

E. Torstad:  We have been working within the arctic since the early days when Norwegian, Finnish, and Russian bases were established.  This includes everything from ship design, dealing with ice, ice loads, ice management, ice breaking, working in cold/harsh conditions, as well as working with the noise and vibrations emissions into the arctic.  For shipping, we have been very active in the technical aspects as well as the working environment.

As you know, the arctic is not a homogeneous area of ice and harsh weather, but a very diverse range of different environments.

We are currently taking on a large project for the Norwegian and Russian governments called the Barents 2020.  Originally, this project involved figuring out the best way of regulating the arctic for the common needs of both Norway and Russia.  We started out by mapping the Norwegian and Russian regulatory regimes for the arctic and identified the commonalities and gaps.  Those gaps were then individually assessed and standards developed to maintain the same level of safety and reliability that we have in the North Sea for offshore oil and gas operations.

The work is still ongoing in terms of working with the industry to develop those standards and cover those gaps.

As this project has progressed, both Norway and Russia recognized that this work has international applications and it has now been expanded to an international project.  The next part of that work is actually bringing in US and Canadian authorities, who have shown a lot of interest in our work.

RA:  How are the US and Canadian authorities coming along when it comes to managing the offshore arctic E&P landscape?  During the Deepwater Horizon disaster, there appeared to be a bit of a knowledge gap between the MMS and the US Coast Guard, where do you see things now?

E. Torstad:  I think that’s closing in now.  Having Admiral Watson as the new Director for BSEE was a very good appointment and  there have been several other steps taken which have supported more coordinated regulatory efforts across government agencies.

What we see, while working with government agencies, is that they are dealing with increasingly complex regulatory regimes and more demanding public expectations.

You can judge the overall regulatory system by the actual implementation level, however, there are a lot of good thought processes and work processes looking at improving both the regulatory programs and implementation.  I also think I can say that there have been some major steps while working with some of the offshore safety committees.   Some of the permanent committees that have been put into place have been doing a lot of great work.

RA:  Is DNV involved with the Marine Well Containment Company?

E. Torstad:  Yes, we provide services to them and we have been verifying and certifying the equipment and systems.

RA:  How did DNV develop it’s expertise in the subsea world?  Was this developed organically or via acquisition?

E. Torstad:  Our subsea competence has been developed together with the oil companies over time since the first subsea development project.  We’ve done a lot of joint industry projects and launched a lot of research and innovation projects, but I don’t think we’ve made any specific subsea acquisitions.  It’s all been organic.

T. Svensen:  When the offshore industry in the North Sea moved into deep water, or it needed to go beyond the normal areas from a fixed platform, they really had to find new solutions.  It started basically in the late 80s, when the oil companies,  the research communities, and DNV, were heavily involved in some big projects prototyping new technology such as flexible risers, anchoring systems, etc., which lead to floating production and subsea installations.  It’s gradually moved through various stages.  Today, you see a trend that it’s  moving more and more from the sea surface to the seabed.

K. Vareide:  More and more processing facilities, and of course, Statoil’s strong and aggressive presence in the North Sea, led to the deployment of new subsea technologies.  The world’s biggest subsea companies and manufacturers are Norwegian-based.   So, as this cluster of companies and skill sets developed in Norway, so did DNV.

E. Torstad:  I’d like to also mention that DNV has large laboratories which have helped us stay at the forefront of technology.  We’ve been able to work with setting the functionality requirements of subsea technology and then testing it In addition, DNV KEMA has the world’s largest high voltage testing laboratory and our office in Columbus, Ohio, has extensive corrosion testing and analysis capabilities.

Kenneth Vareide, Director of Operations, DNV Maritime, Oil & Gas North America

RA: Floating LNG… Is DNV working with Shell on Prelude?

E. Torstad:  Absolutely.

RA:  It’s a pretty amazing project.

T. Svensen:  The Shell FLNG is first one, however there will be more to come in the future.  It provides lots of flexibility and  advantages, but of course, it’s a huge undertaking, a tremendous development.

E. Torstad:  It’s fascinating… You were asking earlier about oil spills, and I’d like to comment on that because it’s more than just containment, which is an important part in our view.  One of the keys is our use of models to analyze oil spills and predict the effects,  We have a leading position in how to do this, including the use of satellite imagery.  For example, one of the things we can do is to actually look at possible consequences of say a blowout situation, such as what might the spill ratio may be, where will the spill flow, how large will the flow be and what species may be affected.  The whole consequence modeling of an oil spill is one of our strong suits.

You can’t just say you need to avoid oil spills, you need to know what to do if you have one.

RA:  And I would assume that DNV works with the geoscientists to figure out ratios of condensate or gas to oil within these spills as part of your modeling process?

E. Torstad:  Yes, of course.  One of the important inputs is assessing the properties of a specific well to obtain the data to model how much the blowout ratio could be and then we can do the modeling. .

RA:  The Northern Sea Route… Last year it was a fairly popular route to take for gas carriers serving the Yamal Peninsula.  What is DNV doing to support companies like Sovcomflot and others who operate along that route?

Kenneth Vareide, Director of Operations, DNV Maritime, Oil & Gas North America

K. Vareide: I think last year the number of ships transiting that area was maybe 35.  It is picking up though, and right now it’s in the pilot phase to become a regular route.

I think the industry is taking the right steps to learn more about operating in that area.  One of the shipowners who has been operating up there recently said that you really need to have an efficient logistics chain to take that route.  You will save quite a few days along that passage, but you need specifically built ships capable of sailing efficiently from Europe to Shanghai.

RA:  Do you need ships to go all the way to Shanghai, or do you build transshipment areas at each end of the route?

K. Vareide:  Exactly.  If you’re going to make this very effective, that’s probably what you’ll need to do.

E. Torstad:  Yes, there are different logistics solutions for a variety of investment scenarios,

T. Svensen:  You also have to consider shipment between Asia and Europe in the zero-ice season.  Those ships may  not need to be ice-strengthened when standard commercial ships can run on this route.  Then, you have the other part of shipping where you have to go in to where the raw materials are coming from, whether it be from Yamal, or wherever, and those ships will need to be ice classed, specialty ships.  Those ships, however, will  not be as efficient while sailing in other regions.  You don’t design an oil tanker to break ice and then go across the Atlantic to deliver the cargo.    That’s totally inefficient.

Icebreaking, or ice-strengthened vessels will just go to Murmansk for example, offload their cargo, then a normal Suezmax will pick it up.  This is very different from this Northern Sea Route, which is simply an alternative to going through the Suez Canal, or around Africa.

RA:  Considering the diverse business areas, and industries, that DNV works within, I was wondering if there was any sort of collaboration going on between your company and the Carbon War Room.

T. Svensen:  I don’t think that they are very serious in the things that they do, to be quite straightforward.  They are using published data and publishing efficiency figures, but they don’t take consider the technical aspects for someone who may use their data.  That is my main criticism.  They don’t go into the necessary depth and, as a consequence, they create unnecessary tension.

We are very engaged though, and have been doing a lot of very serious studies of abatement potential for shipping.  In fact, we have worked with Lloyd’s Register to generate a serious study and report to the IMO about the effects of introducing the new EEDI regulations.  The IMO does have a  scientific approach, unlike some of the NGO’s, which do not take technical aspects or how things operate on ships, into account.

On the issue of addressing CO2 abatement and bringing down energy consumption on ships, DNV’s approach has been to drive energy efficiency much harder in order to reduce the CO2 footprint.  That results in real reductions in emissions.  Then, in our view, the next step is to talk about creating new schemes for the industry to reduce its overall footprint further, whether it be carbon trading, or another approach..

Our studies show that the potential for CO2 reduction in the shipping industry varies from close to 30 percent using today’s technology, to upwards of 50 percent if we bring in some of the emerging technologies that I think will be available within the next 10 to 20 years.

Click for larger version

E. Torstad:  I think I’d like to point to another difference as well.  We differ significantly from an NGO in the fact we are in business, and we are doing business with customers to address a multitude of different risks that they are facing.  We agree in the direction, we have a policy and a strategy and we want to drive emissions down and achieve  a more sustainable industry.

We think that’s the right direction to go, but we are also working with all the other aspects of doing business in this industry. A key point is that our knowledge, capabilities and overall involvement are much greater than what an NGO can do because they are not involved in the totality.

Signet Weatherly, image courtesy Robert Allan Ltd.

Signet Weatherly is the latest RAmparts 3200 Class ASD from the design board of Robert Allan Ltd.

Recently delivered to her proud owner, Signet Maritime Corporation, the tug will be based in Corpus Christi, Texas and is named after the winner of the 1962 America’s Cup.  The new vessel will enhance Signet’s Gulf operations, providing ship-assist capabilities along with long range towing.

The RAmparts 3200 design is configured for low-manning operation, with a high standard of machinery automation. The vessel is equipped with both a bow winch for ship assist work and a stern winch and tow pins for towing and other operations over the stern, as well as for offshore duties. Extended fuel capacity gives her extended range for towing rigs in and around the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean.

Signet Weatherly was built in accordance with American Bureau of Shipping notation:

•  A1 Tug, Towing Vessel,  AMS Unrestricted Voyages

Particulars of this tug are as follows:

Tank Capacities are:

On trials, Signet Weatherly met or exceeded all performance expectations, with the following results:

The vessel has been outfitted to the highest standards for a crew of up to 10 people. The large main deckhouse contains a spacious galley and mess, and 2 cabins with shared en suite WC for the Chief Engineer and Master. The lower deck contains 3 crew cabins, WC and 2 showers, a galley store and a deck stores room. The wheelhouse is designed for maximum all-round visibility with forward and aft control stations providing maximum visibility to both fore and aft deck working areas.

The deck machinery is comprised of a 50HP Markey DEPC-48 Render / Recover Hawser Winch on the foredeck with a brake holding power of 300,000 lbs. Line pull is rated at 15,000lbs at 100 ft/min and 3,500lbs at 200 ft/min. Maximum stall pull is 40,000lbs. Capacity is 500 ft of 9″ circ. line.

Located on the aft deck is a 100HP Markey TESD-32 side-by-side double drum towing winch with a brake holding capacity of 400,000lbs. and carrying 2300 ft of 2″ dia wire. Maximum line pull at stall is 135,000lbs., with rated capacities of 92,000lbs at 30 ft/min and 11,000lbs at 90 ft/min.

There is a Smith Berger 12T-214 tow pin / roller / hold-down block integrated into the bulwarks aft.

Propulsion comprises a pair of MTU 16V 4000M60 diesel engines, each rated 1760kW at 1800 rpm, driving a pair of Niigata ZP31 Z-drives with 102.4 inch diameter fixed pitch propellers.

The electrical plant comprises 2 Northern Lights M1066 diesel gen-sets, each with power output of 130 kW.

Ship-handling fenders at the bow comprise of one tier of 32 inch hollow rubber fenders with a lower run of 14 inch “W” block fenders. A 14 x 14 inch hollow “D” fender provides protection at the main and foc’sle deck sheer lines, and 14 inch “W” block type fendering is used at the stern.

Click here to view the embedded video.

On the X-Bow design, via Ulstein…

The hydrodynamic efficiency of the X-BOW, which leads to reduced emissions and more cost-effective operations, is not its only benefit. With its superior sea-keeping abilities, it also provides a safe and comfortable workplace for the crew both during transit and seismic surveys. This is particularly the case in heavy sea. The X-BOW eliminates slamming and hence increases the well-being of those on board.

“The X-BOW’s gliding movements and the absence of slamming allows us to relax and sleep uninterruptedly – a definite benefit for the people on board”, says a chief officer in Polarcus, who has plenty of experience with the tiring effect slamming has on the body from his time on board vessels with a conventional bow.

On arctic operations…

Polarcus Amani is an arctic-ready vessel designed and built for operations in arctic waters. She carries the ICE-1A* and Winterized Basic notations from DNV, and can operate in first-year ice of up to 1 metre thickness without the assistance of icebreakers. The entire vessel is ice-reinforced with thicker ribs and skin plates. She has de-icing and ice-preventing systems at critical tanks and pipelines, and propellers, gears and thrusters are dimensioned for withstanding operations in ice. Escape corridors and rescue equipment are also protected against icing during arctic operations. Although 3D seismic acquisition will only take place in ice-free, or possibly bergy water conditions, the arctic qualities of the vessel enables it to move through ice on her way to and from the survey area, or remain in icy areas waiting for the ice to clear, increasing the operational window of the vessel.