MARITIME

Scrubber retrofit
Meeting the Global Sulphur Cap 2020 limits
DNV GL webinar

10 October 2018

1 DNV GL © 10 October 2018 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

Welcome to today’s webinar
The team today:

Stine Mundal Dag Sandal Daniel Springer

Project Manager Approval Principal Consultant Head of Digital Communications
DNV GL Maritime DNV GL Maritime DNV GL Maritime
[email protected]

Presenter and specialist class Presenter and specialist Your webinar host and facilitator
approval scrubbers scrubber advisory

2 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

3 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
A paradigm shift in marine fuels is on our door step with the introduction of global
sulphur cap of 0.50% Sulphur in 2020

Today’s topic

4 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

There has been a significant uptake in scrubber orders in 2018

Number of confirmed scrubber system installation

▪ There are about 1850 ships with installed or
confirmed scrubber systems installations

▪ The “first scrubber wave” started in 2014 in

preparation of SECA in North America

▪ The “second scrubber wave” is now on its

way with over 1000 confirmed projects it the
past 6 months

▪ A majority of the orders are for retrofits

Early predication by the IMO indicated that 4000 ships would be fitted with scrubber systems by 2020

5 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

There are >20 different scrubber suppliers as per DNV GL’s statistics

Market share per supplier Segment distribution

▪ The 3 largest scrubber suppliers has over 50% market

share
▪ Cruise and RoPax were initially the largest segments
▪ The supplier base is a mix of “known” maritime
▪ Now bulk, tankers and containers are the largest
equipment manufacturers and shore based process
segments
industry suppliers

6 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

7 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
Strategic decisions must be made and technical challenges solved to ensure a
competitive edge in the market beyond 2020

▪ Time in ECA / EU ports (S0,1% compliance)? ▪ Price differential between

▪ Local regulations impacting system operation? compliant fuel and HFO?
▪ Availability of HFO?

▪ Increased charter rates for ▪ Cost of increased power consumption?

ships with scrubbers? ▪ Maintenance, repairs and downtime costs?
▪ Alkali bunkering / sludge landing costs?

Scrubbers can significantly mitigate the cost impact from the 2020 sulphur cap and the decision if to invest should be
made yesterday

8 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Business case example

▪ Scenario based on a ship with 20MW installed power,

assumption:
365$ fuel spread – HFO price: 450USD/ton
– Compliant fuel: 652USD/ton
▪ Resulting payback time is 1,3 years for open loop and 1,7 for
202$ fuel spread hybrid
▪ Fuel price spread is key
40$ fuel spread
– at 40USD/ton there is no business case for scrubbers on
ships with 20MW power
– at 100USD the pay back time is less than two years for an
open loop system

Assuming a price spread between HFO and compliant fuel greater than 100USD/ton there is a positive business case
and short pay back time for most ship sizes

9 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

The importance of fuel cost

+13,3 MUSD

+5,1 MUSD

+1,6 MUSD

▪ Scrubber systems will increase the ship’s fuel consumption of approx. 2%

▪ Downtime of the scrubber systems will introduce a cost for running of compliant fuel
▪ Installation of scrubber systems will increase the maintenance cost (more for closed loop)
▪ For closed loop systems there will be an additional cost for alkali bunkering and sludge disposal

Although scrubber systems are a significant investment, the CAPEX is small compared to fuel costs while other cost
centres are negligible

10 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

11 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
A quick intro: Sulphur in the exhaust gas is neutralized by an absorbent

▪ The sulphur in the exhaust gas is neutralized in the

scrubber tower by the absorbent

Different absorbents can be used:

▪ Sea water
▪ Caustic soda
▪ Magnesium hydroxide
Scrubber
tower ▪ Limestone*

▪ The most common solution is to use sea water as the

absorbent in an «open loop» system

▪ While most suppliers also offer «closed loop» and «hybrid»

DE systems using caustic soda or magnesium hydroxide

12 DNV GL © 10 October 2018 * Dry scrubbers using limestone is not addressed in this presentation
Scrubber systems are large

Large multi-inlet tower Typical multi-inlet tower VLCC with scrubber and SCR
/ EGR

13 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Overview of system types: open loop vs hybrid / closed loop

▪ Sea water flows through ▪ Process water flows through

the tower and is the tower and re-circulates in a
discharged overboard. closed loop.
▪ Treated wash water is held
onboard then discharged where
permitted.

+ Few components ( lower

cost) + Increased flexibility
+ Utilises seawater directly from + Can operate in all areas
sea, no hazardous chemicals regardless of seawater
are required. alkalinity or temperature.
- Not allowed in some ports and areas - Increased complexity ( higher costs)
- Unsuitable in brackish and fresh waters - Requires a constant supply of an alkaline medium.
- US VGP ph compliance require a “dilution” pump NaOH is hazardous and require special handling.

Most retrofits are open loop installations while hybrid / closed loop systems allow for increased operational flexibility

14 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Overview of system types: in-line vs multi-inlet tower

▪ Handles the exhaust flow ▪ Handles the exhaust flow from

from one DE several engines
▪ Typically installed in the ▪ Typically installed in or next to
location of the silencer the funnel
▪ Can be operated in open or ▪ Can be operated in open or
closed loop (as fitted) closed loop (as fitted)

+ Small footprint if the tower can

replace the silencer + Can handle multiple exhaust
+ Lower centre of gravity reducing streams with one tower
impact on stability + Possibly easier installation
+ Lower energy consumption + Typically more cost efficient
+ Are designed to sustain dry running solution for all engines
- Possibly more complicated tower installation - Possibly more complicated pipe routing
- Requires additional towers to cover more engines - Require by-pass solutions

Most retrofits are of multi-inlet tower design while the optimal solution will depend on ship specific considerations

15 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

The scrubber system must be in compliance with air emission and wash water discharge
requirements [MEPC.259(68)]
𝑆𝑂2 (𝑝𝑝𝑚)
Emissions to air: FO sulphur 0.5% = 𝑣 = 21,7
𝐶𝑂2 (% )
𝑣
𝑆𝑂2 (𝑝𝑝𝑚)
FO sulphur 0.1% = 𝑣 = 4,3
𝐶𝑂2 (% )
𝑣

Emissions to sea:

pH US VGP: ph outlet > 6

4m pH outlet > 6.5 at 4m

Alternative ph criteria pH inlet delta pH outlet = < 2

PAH* PAH inlet delta PAH outlet = < 50 μg/L PAHphe

Turbidity Turbidity inlet delta Turbidity outlet = < 25 FNU / NTU

16 DNV GL © 10 October 2018 * Criteria varies with washwater flow rate through the EGC
Open loop scrubber systems are the preferred choice
System types

▪ Most scrubber suppliers are offering both open loop and

closed loop / hybrid systems

▪ Open loops system with a “closed loop ready” option is

currently the most popular system design

▪ The most common scrubber tower design are multi-inlet

17 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

In addition to international regulations there are local requirements that must be
considered

▪ Coastal states or port authorities restriction on wash water discharge

– US EPA Vessel General Permit
– wash water requirement pH =>6.0 at overboard discharge*
– No wash water discharge
– Connecticut, USA
– Belgium
– Germany (some areas and ports)
– Under consideration: Sweden, Norwegian Heritage Fjords, some other
▪ Restrictions on HFO in California, Antarctica and around Svalbard
▪ Scrubber ban in California unless research exemption is granted
▪ Visible plume/”smoke” due to increased water vapour for wet scrubbers may
cause reactions from local authorities

To meet the requirements of no wash water discharge a more complicated and costly “closed loop” or hybrid scrubber
system must be installed

18 DNV GL © 10 October 2018 *with the exception that during manoeuvring and transit, the maximum
difference between inlet and outlet of 2.0 pH units is allowed.
19 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
Scrubbers are technical feasible solution while good system design and material
selection is critical to minimize downtime

▪ Scrubber efficiency and compliance

▪ Corrosion challenges

▪ System reliability

▪ Monitoring equipment calibration and maintenance

▪ Closed / hybrid systems

20 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Scrubber efficiency and compliance

FO sulphur 0.5% = 21,7 Scrubber efficiency

FO sulphur 0.1% = 4,3
▪ Most scrubbers in operation are able to meet the air emission
requirement with some margin
▪ Spray nozzle design and location, droplet size, retention time
combined with water flow are the main parameters to consider

Engine backpressure
▪ Scrubbers increase the back pressure with about 1000 –
1500 Pa which may affect the performance of the ME
▪ It must be verified that the exhaust back pressure limits
are not exceeded (NOx rating)
▪ Exhaust gas fans are generally not recommended

Wash water discharge compliance

▪ Methodology for documenting pH compliance using CFD is
established
▪ Key factor is size and number of discharge outlets, diffusers
should be avoided
pH >
6.5 at 4m ▪ New suppliers still require some direction on design solutions

21 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Corrosion challenges

Corrosion of exhaust pipe

▪ The exhaust line after the scrubber tower must be corrosion
resistant
▪ For in-line design the existing exhaust piping should be replaced

Corrosion of wash water piping, bellows and valves

▪ Wash water has low pH and is highly corrosive!
▪ GRE/GRP piping is frequently applied due to their
corrosive resistant properties
▪ Design should aim to minimize penetration of existing
structures (bulkheads, deck) to avoid steel penetrations

Corrosion of discharge pipe and side shell

▪ Class rules require replacement of overboard
valves every 5 years
▪ Discharge pipe must be UT tested every year
(recommended every 6m)
▪ Appropriate coating must be applied to side shell

22 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

System reliability

Sea water supply

▪ The scrubber system can be supplied by existing sea
chests if there are sufficient capacity
▪ Most systems are only connected to one sea chests
which introduce a single-point of failure
▪ It is recommended to install redundant sea water pumps

By-pass valves and sealing air fans (multi-inlet)

▪ Failure of by-pass valves or sealing air fans can result in-non
compliant air emissions
▪ The interlock functionality of by-pass valves are critical to
ensure that the valves are in correct position when starting DE’s
▪ It is recommended to install redundant sealing air fans
Automation system
▪ A robust automation system is key to ensure reliable operation of
scrubber systems
▪ The automation systems incorporate a range of shut-down alarms,
and poor automation systems can impact the availability

23 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Monitoring equipment calibration and maintenance

Analyzer reliability
▪ Reliable monitoring equipment is key since they are the
basis to show compliance of the system
▪ The analyzers requires proper maintenance to function
correctly
▪ Crew training is important to minimize downtime of
analyzers
Calibration and maintenance
▪ Calibration methods and interval vary between
manufactures, general intervals can be summarized as:

Factory calibration /
Sensors Onboard calibration
maintenance
CEMS ~ 1 month ~ 1 year

Turbidity ~ 3 month ~ 2 year

PAH ~ 6 month ~ 2 year

pH ~ 2 - 3 month

24 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Closed / hybrid systems

Process reliability
▪ Hybrid / closed loop systems are significantly more complex
▪ Robust automation system and good installation quality of
sensors are required to minimize downtime from “false alarms”
Wash water treatment
▪ Various types of wash water treatment systems are available;
centrifugal, chemical and membrane types
▪ Performance vary significantly and thorough technology
assessment is recommended
Sludge storage and discharge
▪ Sludge from treatment units are hazardous waste and must be
treated accordingly
▪ Major ports have facilities / companies for accepting sludge
Alkali bunkering and handling
▪ Common alkalis are caustic soda (NaOH) and magnesium hydroxide
▪ NaOH has very strict requirements, and it will be reclassified in the
IBC code to toxic from 2020

25 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

How is your ship prepared for installation?

26 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Installing one scrubber in 1,5 year is easy, installing e.g. 32 in 1,5 year is difficult

Stakeholder mapping: 11
Technology
Sister series Ships Design house Class Yard
suppliers
32 ships, 4 sister series
Series A 8 Scrubber 1 Design House 1 Class 1 Yard 1 and 2
Series B 8 Scrubber 2 Design House 2 Class 2 Yard 2 and 3
Series C 8 Scrubber 1 Design House 1 Class 1 Yard 1 and 3
Series D 8 Scrubber 2 Design House 2 Class 3 Yard 1 and 4
Sum 32 2 2 3 4

Project processes: 392

Technical specifications 4
Basic design 4
Plan approval 32 32
Detailed design 32
A relatively small scrubber Construction drawings 32
retrofit project may require close Planning and purchasing 32 32

follow up of 11 stakeholders and Logistic 32 32

management of 392 individual Installation 32

Commissioning 32 32 32
project processes
Sum 100 36 64 192

27 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Key processes in a scrubber retrofit program
Key processes: Key processes:
• Establish business case • Align installation plan with dry-docking schedule • Risk management
• Complete technical feasibility study • Change order management • Update SMS and PMS
Contract(s) Program
• Evaluate & select supplier(s) • Process tracking, monitoring and reporting • Establish inspection, test plan
signed & sign off protocols finished

1 – 3 months 1 – 3 years
Business case Program management

Basic design Detailed design

complete complete

Ready for dry-

1 – 3 months 2 - 4 months dock retrofit
Basic design Detailed design
Installation Operationally
Key processes: Key processes: 1 – 3 months complete ready
• Define clear scope • Ensure design quality sufficient
to support procurement &
Planning &
• Identify operational impacts procurement
planning 2 – 6 weeks ~ 2 week
• Identify differences between Key processes:
sister ships
• Develop installation Installation Commissioning
(sequencing) strategy • Develop installation plan Key processes: Key processes:
• Verify backpressure, stability,
• Follow up class approval • Monitor purchasing and • Forecast & progress • Complete MARPOL &
pH compliance
process and drawing status logistic plan reports available to PM performance test
• Manage owner supply • On-site quality control • Make ship operationally ready

28 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

29 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
DNV GL classification – Supporting the low sulphur future
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7

General Materials and Hull System and Ship types Additional class Fleet in
regulations welding components notations Service

▪ DNV GL classification process

– Contact your local DNV GL contact – as for normal conversion
– Responsible DNV GL Approval Center will handle approval and kick off
– Remember to start in due time before your docking
– DNV GL local dedicated surveyor will follow up installation
– Please inform us as soon as you know your retrofit location

▪ Emission Reduction (ER) notation for Scrubber - Published July 2018

30 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Class involvement in scrubber installations

▪ Statutory verification of documents for EGCS acc.

to MARPOL Annex VI, Reg.4 & 14 as detailed in
MEPC.259(68) scheme B,
▪ Marpol Verification Surveys onboard after
installation and commissioning.
▪ Following up work towards the Flag State:
– IMO notification (GISIS database) requests.
– USCG notification (by the Flag State) requests for ships
operating in US waters.
– IAPP endorsement for the completed EGCS installation.

▪ MED certification of EGCS for ships flying EU flags

acc. to Directive 2014/90/EU on marine equipment
and Regulation (EU) 2017/306, item MED/2.10.

31 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

DNV GL Maritime Advisory – Supporting the low sulphur future

Business case
Concept Contract Basic design Installation Commissioning Operation
development FEB
Inspection
Detailed design Sign-off

Feasibility Technology HAZID for Project risk Automation

study and qualification Emission Fuel change
installation management testing (HIL)
business case Testing calculator

32 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

33 DNV GL © 10 October 2018
Demystifying the scrubber myths

Are they reliable? None of my competitors are installing..?!?

▪ First of all – They are working ▪ First installations were mainly due to SECA implementation
▪ Experience is made and design has improved in 2015 – Cruise and Ro-Ro/ferries
▪ Drastic shift in segments that now install

▪ Scrubbers are technical feasible solution while good system ▪ There will be capacity constraints throughout the value
design and material selection is critical to minimize chain
downtime ▪ Scrubbers can significantly mitigate the cost impact from
the 2020 Sulphur Cap and the decision if to invest should
be made yesterday

The long term solution for compliance?

Who knows – maybe not…

There are many uncertainties for the future.
However, it might very well be a cost saving and safe solution as
the fuel market transitions into a “new fuel normal” situation.

34 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

Find more information in our DNV GL brochures

www.dnvgl.com/maritime/publicat www.dnvgl.com/maritime/publicat www.dnvgl.com/services/exhaust- www.dnvgl.com/maritime/publicat

ions/sulphur-limits.html ions/global-sulphur-cap- gas-emission-measurements- ions/alternative-fuel-assessment-
2020.html 65835 download.html

35 DNV GL © 10 October 2018

DNV GL offering the
broader view on sulphur
compliance

Stine Mundal
Project Manager Approval
For more information, get in touch
with your local DNV GL office
Dag Sandal
Principal Consultant

www.dnvgl.com

www.dnvgl.com/maritime/contact The trademarks DNV GL®, DNV®, the Horizon Graphic and Det Norske Veritas®
SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER are the properties of companies in the Det Norske Veritas group. All rights reserved.

36 DNV GL © 10 October 2018