Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

JSAE 20119212
SAE 2011-01-1998

LNG-Fuelled Engines and Fuel Systems for Medium-

Speed Engines in Maritime Applications

Vilmar Æsøy
Norwegian University of Science and Technology -NTNU

Per Magne Einang, Dag Stenersen, Erik Hennie, Ingebrigt Valberg

MARINTEK

Copyright © 2011 Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan, Inc. and Copyright © 2011 SAE International

ABSTRACT engines are among the most efficient energy

converters available. Nonetheless, international
The maritime transportation sector is facing new shipping is a significant contributor to global and
international restrictions on exhaust emissions. NOx regional air pollution. Emissions from shipping have
and SOx emissions from traditional marine fuels are a been estimated in a number of studies with different
major challenge, which make natural gas a promising results [2],[3],[4]. The most recent IMO study
new clean alternative. Since the late 1980s, new estimates that 1050 million tones of CO2 are emitted
concepts for medium-speed natural gas-fuelled annually by shipping. Although this is only 3-4% of
engines have been developed, primarily for stationary global CO2 emissions, there is no disagreement
power generation. This technology is currently regarding the fact that emissions from ships are
entering the mobile sector, where Spark Ignition increasing rapidly, as a result of growth in world trade,
engines, Dual-Fuel engines and High Pressure Gas given that 80-90% of all trade is carried by sea.
engines offer advantages such as high efficiency, low
emissions and fuel flexibility. The availability of The relative contribution of shipping to local and
liquefied natural gas (LNG) is increasing, not least via global emissions is increasing, since emissions from
small-scale distribution systems. In Norway, 23 land-based sources are being reduced by investments
coastal traffic vessels operate on LNG supplied by a in exhaust gas cleaning technology. Figure 1
distribution system that also supplies city bus fleets. compares the development of SOx emissions from
This paper discusses the development of natural gas shipping and land-based sources.
engines and fuel system technology, and describes
experiences from LNG-fuelled ships in operation in
Norway.

INTRODUCTION

A sharpening focus on the environment and scenarios

for primary energy supply are emphasizing the need
for alternative fuels in the transportation sector. The
International Energy Agency (IEA) prognosis [1]
indicates that liquid fuel production based on known
resources will decrease by 50% in the next 20-30
years, while demand is expected to increase by 50%.
In this scenario, new alternative energy sources will Figure 1. SOx emissions from shipping and land-based
have to fill the widening gap between supply and sources (EU)
demand for traditional liquid fuels. This scenario will
also drive the market towards significant fuel price The major concerns regarding air pollution from
increase, which then will open for more expensive shipping are NOx, SOx and particulate emissions,
alternatives. which cause significant local and regional health and
environmental problems. In 2006, emission control
International shipping is by far the most energy areas (ECA) were established in the North Sea and
efficient mode of transportation, and marine diesel Baltic Sea. In these areas only low- sulfur fuels are
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

permitted, unless exhaust gas cleaning systems, such the steam boilers. Later, and due to the low efficiency
as scrubbers and/or catalysts, are installed. In 2011, of steam propulsion systems, more efficient
the USA and Canada will implement the North gas-burning internal combustion engines began to be
American Emission Control Area (ECA) for NOx and developed in the 1980s [5].
SOx restrictions, which cover all the coastal waters of The first natural gas-fuelled ships utilized compressed
these two countries. From 2016 on, IMO will also natural gas (CNG). Around 10 ships currently operate
implement strict NOx limits on all new ships (Figure 2), on CNG. These include three tourist boats in Russia,
which will require extremely low-emission engines two canal boats in Netherlands, one bulk carrier in
and/or systems for exhaust gas cleaning. Australia, two ferries in Canada and one river boat in
the USA [6].

In 2000 the first LNG-fuelled ship MF Glutra entered

service on the coast of Norway [7]. In this first project,
compressed natural gas (CNG) was evaluated as an
alternative for the fuel system. However, weight, cost
and safety factors strongly favored LNG. Pressurized
gas tanks are a major safety concern, and only
storage in safe zones above the main deck is normally
approved. Storage tank weight and dimensions give
LNG a clear advantage in terms of storage and
transportation efficiency. The conclusion is that CNG
may be an alternative on board vessels with low fuel
capacity requirements, while LNG is normally the
preferred choice for larger systems. The AVL study [8]
also concluded that LNG is the preferred fuel for
Figure 2. NOx emission restrictions proposed by IMO, long-haul trucks, since it has a significantly higher
MARPOL Annex VI energy density, which means smaller and lighter
fuel-tanks.
Considering liquid fuel supply and proposed
Since 2000, 23 LNG ships have come into service on
emissions legislation, the authors believe that future
the coast of Norway (Table 1). Most of these are
marine fuels will develop through several phases. First,
car/passenger ferries (Figure 3) operating on short
ships are already being converted from heavy fuel oils
fjord routes, typically 15-45 minutes crossing time.
(HFO), to cleaner low-sulfur distillates. The next
The other LNG vessels are also short-sea shipping
phase will involve conversion to low-carbon fuels such
vessels, operating on regular round-trip routes. The
as LNG and “synthetic” fuels, produced from natural
ferries are 100% LNG-fuelled, while most of the other
gas and various biomass sources. In the following
vessels have dual-fuel (DF) systems.
new technology must be developed including
renewable energy sources and novel energy sources.

To meet current and future emissions and energy

challenges, 40 LNG-fuelled ships will be in operation
on the coast of Norway by 2012. This full-scale LNG
program will necessitate the development of
infrastructure for LNG distribution, on-board fuel
systems and gas engine technology.

This paper addresses state-of-the-art and research

challenges related to gas engine technology and fuel
systems.

LNG AS MARINE FUEL - EXPERIENCE

The first LNG-fuelled ships were LNG carriers, which Figure 3. LNG fuelled car ferry “Bergensfjord” operating on
have been in operation since 1964. Boil-off gas (BOG) the coast of Norway (source: STX/Fjord1)
from these vessels’ LNG cargo tanks was utilized as
an additional propulsion fuel, instead of releasing the The main challenges in designing these ships concern
gas to the atmosphere or installing complex their LNG fuel system. Well-proven cryogenic
re-condensation plants. These ships were all steam technology from industrial installations has been
turbine-driven, and extra gas burners were installed in modified to ensure safe operation. Safety has been
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

the major design issue, focusing on physical standard as for diesel. The second category comprises
arrangements, explosion-proofing, extended specially designed engines for natural gas.
ventilation, double walled gas pipe work and
Marine gas engines can be sorted into three groups:
operational procedures.
x Otto-cycle – Lean-Burn engines (LBSI)
Table 1. LNG fuelled ships in operation and under construction x Dual-Fuel engines (DF) - operating as Otto-cycle
on gas and Diesel-cycle on diesel oil or HFO
Year Typeofship Shipname Owner Engine
2000 Car/Pass.ferry Glutra Fjord1 MHI x Diesel-cycle – High-pressure gas injection (GD)
2003 OffshorePSV VikingEnergy Eidesvik WärtsiläDF
2003 OffshorePSV StrilPioner SimonMøkster WärtsiläDF Only the LBSI involves the pure gas-fuelled engine
2004 LNGtanker PionerKnutsen KnutsenOAS MHI concept, while DF and GD engines require a 1-5%
2006 Car/Pass.ferry Bergensfjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce injection of diesel fuel for ignition assistance.
2007 Car/Pass.ferry Stavangerfjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce
2007 Car/Pass.ferry Raunefjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce
2007 Car/Pass.ferry Mastrafjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce
2007 Car/Pass.ferry Fanafjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce Marine Natural gas engine Manufacturers
2008 Offshore  VikingQueen Eidesvik WärtsiläDF
2009 Car/Pass.ferry Moldefjord Fjord1 MHI The main manufacturers of marine gas engines are
2009 Car/Pass.ferry Tideprinsen TideSjø MHI Rolls-Royce, Wärtsilä, Mitsubishi (MHI) and MAN
2009 Car/Pass.ferry Tidekongen TideSjø MHI
2009 Car/Pass.ferry Tidedronningen TideSjø MHI (Table 1). Rolls-Royce and Wärtsilä also supply
2009 Patrolvessel Barentshav REM MHI complete propulsion system packages, as well as
2009 LNGtanker CoralMethane AnthonyVeder RollsRoyce complete ship designs. Wärtsilä and MAN are the main
2009 OffshorePSV VikingLady Eidesvik WärtsiläDF
2010 Car/Pass.ferry Fannefjord Fjord1 MHI
suppliers of dual-fuel engines, and Rolls-Royce [10]
2010 Car/Pass.ferry Romsdalsfjord Fjord1 MHI and Mitsubishi manufacture pure gas engines (LBSI).
2010 Car/Pass.ferry Korsfjord Fjord1 MHI
2010 Patrolvessel Sortland REM MHI Wärtsilä and MAN supply dual-fuel engines (DF) in
2010 Car/Pass.ferry Tresfjord Fjord1 RollsRoyce Otto-cycle designs with a standard diesel injection
2010 Car/Pass.ferry Selbjørnsfjord FosenNamsos MHI system and micro pilot system. Wärtsilä and MAN also
 make high-pressure gas-injection engines (GD)
2011 OffshorePSV SkandiGamma DOF WärtsiläDF [12],[13].
2011 ROROship TBD Seacargo RollsRoyce
2011 ROROship TBD Seacargo RollsRoyce
2011 Offshore  TBD Solstad WärtsiläDF
2011 Car/Pass.ferry TBD Fjord1 RollsRoyce Lean Burn Spark Ignited engine cycle (LBSI)
2012 OffshorePSV TBD Eidesvik WärtsiläDF
2012 OffshorePSV TBD Eidesvik WärtsiläDF
2012 Car/Pass.ferry TBD TorghattenN. RollsRoyce
2012 Car/Pass.ferry TBD TorghattenN. RollsRoyce
2012 Car/Pass.ferry TBD TorghattenN. RollsRoyce
2012 Car/Pass.ferry TBD TorghattenN. RollsRoyce
2012 OffshorePSV TBD Olympic  WärtsiläDF
2012 OffshoreService TBD IslandOffshore WärtsiläDF
2012 OffshoreService TBD IslandOffshore WärtsiläDF
2012 BulkFishFodder TBD NSKShipping RollsRoyce
2013 ROPAX TBD FjordLine MANDF Dual Fuel gas engine cycle – pilot diesel ignition (DF)
2013 ROPAX TBD FjordLine MANDF
2013 ROPAX TBD VikingLine WärtsiläDF
2013 LNGtanker TBD AnthonyVeder 

NATURAL GAS FUELLED MARINE ENGINES

Twenty-five years of research and development on
natural gas-fuelled marine engines have turned LNG
into an excellent fuel alternative. The high methane Multi-fuel Gas Diesel engine cycle – High pressure gas
injection (GD)
content of LNG offers excellent ignition and
combustion qualities for medium- and slow-speed
engines. “Slow” combustion rate and high auto-ignition
temperatures offer the benefits of high compression
ratios; higher thermal efficiency, and cleaner
emissions.
Gas-fuelled engines can be divided into two
categories. The first includes simple retrofitted diesel
engines, on which a “gas conversion kit” is installed Figure 4. Natural gas engine cycles [12]
and the main parts of the engine are kept more or less
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

Otto-cycle natural gas engines

Otto-cycle engines (LBSI or DF) are the most common
option when diesel engines are modified to operate on
natural gas. A gas mixing system is usually installed on
the air intake manifold, and the engine operates on a
mixture of natural gas and diesel fuel. However,
optimized engines have modified combustion
chamber, adapted turbo-charging and a spark plug or
micro-pilot system for ignition. These LBSI engines
have demonstrated very high efficiency under optimal
operational conditions, with shaft efficiencies of up to
48% [10]. An important advantage of Otto-cycle gas
engines is their low-pressure fuel-supply system. Figure 6. Lean Burn pre-chamber ignition system [10]
Supply pressure is usually available directly from the
Flame propagation is also slower in lean mixtures, and
LNG tank, and a supplementary pressurizing system is
turbulence or swirl generated by the pre-chamber jets
not required.
or pilot diesel jets may be employed to increase
High-performance gas engines are designed to combustion speed (Figure 6).
operate on a homogeneous lean mixture of gas and
air. The lean mixture eliminates auto-ignition (knock),
reduces NOx formation and maximizes efficiency Diesel-cycle natural gas engines (GD)
(Figure 5). On the other hand, if the mixture is too lean,
Gas Diesel (GD) engines (Figure 7) operate in a
misfire and incomplete combustion may occur, result
standard diesel cycle, in which gas is injected directly
in high exhaust temperatures and allowing unburned
into the cylinder at the end of compression. Ignition is
gas to enter the exhaust system (“methane slip”).
provided by a small amount of diesel-fuel that is
injected ahead of gas injection (Figure 8). The GD
cycle offers multi-fuel flexibility, enabling the same
engine to operate on natural gas (LNG), marine diesel
oil (MDO) or heavy fuel oil (HFO) by selecting the
appropriate operating mode.

Figure 5. Lean Burn combustion - optimal operation

The “lean window” is very narrow (A/F ratio between

2.1 and 2.3), which at high load requires very accurate
fuel control. As we can see from Figure 5, Otto-cycle
engines are normally limited to maximum 20 bar break
mean effective pressure (BMEP). If variable gas
quality and load variations are added to the equation,
the practical limit for marine applications is reduced to
16-18 bars. Optimum operational conditions require
advanced control systems. Automatic de-rating is
based on monitoring combustion in each individual
cylinder [10],[15].
In lean air/gas mixtures (A/F~2.2), high ignition energy
is required to ensure stable combustion. Therefore, a
gas-enriched pre-chamber or pilot diesel-fuel injection
is employed to obtain a stable and effective source of
ignition (Figure 6).
Figure 7. High-pressure gas injection – GD engine
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

In Otto-cycle gas engines, however, part load

efficiency is significantly lower (Figure 11). This is
mainly caused by the low-load throttling such engines
require. Part-load efficiency is significantly higher in
variable speed engines than generator engines run at
constant speed (Figure 11).

Figure 8. The high-pressure gas injection – GD cycle

The main advantage of the GD engine concept is that it

has no process limitations such as combustion knock
or misfire related to premixed [Link] engines
can therefore operate at maximum power (BMEP) up
to the mechanical and thermal limitations of the diesel
engine. No de-rating is required, and no extra Figure 10. Otto-cycle gas engine efficiency compared to
Diesel cycle
measures are required to handle variable gas
composition or transient loads.
The disadvantage of the GD engine concept is its high
gas-pressure injection requirements. 250-350 bars
gas-feed pressure requires special piping and safety
systems, while an additional high-pressure gas
compressor or LNG pump must be installed to provide
injection pressure. For gas compression, significant
compressor power is required. However, for the LNG
liquid pump, only a fraction of that compression power
is needed.
Natural gas engine performance
Engine efficiencies for LNG-fuelled marine engines are
good. Some highly optimized LBSI and DF engines, Figure 11. LBSI engine performance [10]
demonstrate even higher efficiencies than the
corresponding diesel engine. Shaft efficiency as high
as 48% have been measured under optimum load
conditions [10]. Figure 9 compares natural gas Natural gas engine emissions
combustion in an optimized engine process with the LNG is a pure fuel burning with low emissions. Due to
original diesel combustion process. the H/C ratio of 4:1 compared to standard liquid
petroleum fuels, which have a H/C ratio closer to 2:1,
methane combustion products will contain more H2O
and less CO2. Results of laboratory tests at
MARINTEK and field measurements on board ships in
operation show reductions in CO2 of 20% to almost
30%, depending on engine efficiency (Figure 12).

There is also a significant reduction in NOx emissions,

mainly due to the lean combustion. Premixed
combustion in LBSI and DF engines may offer a
75-90% reduction of NOx. For the GD cycle, the lower
local air/fuel ratio in the diffusion flame offers a slightly
lower NOx reduction than premixed combustion.

SOx and particulate matter (PM) are reduced to zero

Figure 9. Typical lean-burn combustion cycle compared to in the pure gas combustion in the LBSI engine. In GD
diesel combustion
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

and DF engines, there will always be residual From the gas quality examples in Table 3 we can see
amounts of these pollutants due to the 1-5% pilot that such variations in LNG quality may be a problem
diesel for ignition. Table 2 summarizes the emission for Otto-cycle engines. Variable propulsion load adds
reduction factors. to this problem, and an increased safety margin must
be applied.

Figure 13. Operating window reduction by Methane Number

Figure 12. LBSI engine emissions compared to MDO [10] The quality of LNG as a marine fuel in an open
bunkers market may differ every time the ship is
bunkered, and some robustness is therefore required.
Table 2. Best available technology emission reduction in % Advanced engine control systems must be adopted,
compared to MDO
such as knock sensing and load control, a variable
Reduction turbocharger system and/or variable valve timing
factors LBSI DF* GD (Miller cycle). Another option is to specify the fuel
compared quality in terms of minimum Methane Number.
to diesel
CO2 25-30% 20-30% 20-26% Table 3. Typical LNG from major export terminals [12]
NOx 80-90% 75-90% 40-50%
TYPICALLNGCOMPOSITIONFROMMAJOREXPORTTERMINALS[Vol%]
SOx >99% 95-99% 95-97%
Methane

Nitrogen
Propane

Heating
Heavier
Butane
Ethane

Value 
Particulates >99% 95-99% 90-95%

Lower
Methane
HCs
*)Highest reduction factors for DF obtained with micro pilot ignition  Number
  [CH4] [C2H6] [C3H8] [C4H10] C5+ N 2 [MJ/kg] ()
Arzew (ALG) 87.4 8.6 2.4 0.05 0.02 0.35 49.11 72.7
In this study we have focused on CO2 emissions as the Bintulu (MAS) 91.23 4.3 2.95 1.4 0 0.12 49.35 70.4
main green house gas (GHG). However, if we also Bonny (NGR) 90.4 5.2 2.8 1.5 0.02 0.07 49.35 69.5
Das (UAE) 84.83 13.39 1.34 0.28 0 0.17 49.26 71.2
include methane slip from incomplete combustion the Badak (INA) 91.09 5.51 2.48 0.88 0 0.03 49.48 72.9
total reduction of GHG will be slightly lower for the Kenai (USA) 99.8 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.1 50.02 98.2
LBSI and DF engines. The GD engine operates with Lumut (BRU) 89.4 6.3 2.8 1.3 0.05 0.05 49.36 69.5
Point (TRI) 96.2 3.26 0.42 0.07 0.01 0.01 49.91 87.4
almost zero methane slip. Ras (QAT) 90.1 6.47 2.27 0.6 0.03 0.25 49.32 73.8
Skikda (ALG) 91.5 5.64 1.5 0.5 0.01 0.85 48.97 77.3
Withnell (AUS) 89.02 7.33 2.56 1.03 0 0.06 49.36 70.6
Snøhvit (NOR) 91.9 5.3 1.9 0.2 0 0.6 49.2 78.3
Variable LNG fuel quality Average 90.9 6.04 1.97 0.70 0.01 0.2 49.39 75.58

Variable gas quality is a major challenge to the LBSI

and DF cycles. To avoid engine knock the gas must Comparing natural gas fuelled engines
have a high Methane Number (MN). Methane number Each gas engine concept has different properties, and
is defined in terms of pure methane MN=100 and pure the application involved will favor one concept over
hydrogen MN=0. In terms of motor octane number the other. Compared to diesel engines operating on
MON, MN=100 is equivalent to MON=135. MDO and HFO, gas engine emissions are extremely
low, and complex and expensive exhaust-gas
The content of higher alkanes (Ethane, Propane,
cleaning systems can be avoided. The cleaner
Butane, etc.) reduces MN and moves the “knocking
exhaust gas also means that simpler ways of
zone” into the operating window (Figure 13). When this
recovering waste heat from gas engines can be used.
situation occurs, engine de-rating is required [15].
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

Among the main issues that have still to be resolved is The first LNG-fuelled ships (ferries) installed
gas fuel quality, where different engine concepts offer diesel-electric propulsion arrangements. One
different degrees of robustness to handle variations. important reason for this choice was the availability of
Table 4 illustrates some typical properties that are natural gas engines developed for land-based power
used to compare the different gas engine concepts. generation and optimized for constant-speed
operation. The principle of this arrangement is shown
Table 4. Natural Gas fuelled engine concepts in Figure 14. For extra redundancy, four engines and
Property LBSI DF GD two separate LNG fuel systems were installed.
Thermal Very high at Very high at High at all
efficiency max load max load loads
Low at part Low at part
load load
Emissions Very low Very low Low
Multi-fuel
flexibility LNG LNG/MDO LNG/MDO/
HFO
Sensitive to
gas quality Yes Yes No
Gas Low-pressure Low-pressure High gas
pressure system system pressure
No extra No extra required
compressor or compressors (300-350 bar)
pumping or pumping LNG pump or
Figure 14. Car ferry - Pure LNG operation – DE transmission
necessary necessary booster
compressor
required
Complexity Major complex Variable Replace fuel The DE propulsion arrangement was usually chosen
– retrofitting modification of depending on injection due to the special double-ended propeller
existing diesel engine degree of system
engines optimization arrangement in ferries. This arrangement also offers
Gas vs. MDO greater flexibility, redundancy and safety.
Commercial 3-4 2 2
availability manufacturers manufacturers Manufacturers The next example is also a diesel- electric system for
(marine) Proven Proven Prototype
technology technology technology a platform supply vessel (PSV) (Figure 15). These
vessels operate in a special load profile, in which
30-50% of their time at sea is in position-keeping
mode, serving the offshore oil rig. In this mode, the
engine load ranges between 15 and 35% of maximum
LNG PROPULSION MACHINERY SYSTEMS
power. Diesel Electric propulsion offers higher
propeller efficiencies at part load and therefore better
Generally speaking, the same main machinery
overall efficiency. Dual-fuel engines are chosen for the
arrangement can be employed with LNG fuelled
sake of their fuel flexibility, since these vessels
engines as with diesel engines. The main differences
operate in a spot market, where LNG bunkers
concern the fuel system and safety. For propulsion
availability is still very limited.
machinery systems, three different concepts are
primarily involved.

Diesel-Mechanical (DM) propulsion. In these most

common systems, the propellers are driven directly by
the engines through mechanical transmission systems
(shafts and gears). These tend to be the most robust
and efficient systems.

Diesel-Electric (DE) propulsion. In these systems the

engines with generators make up an on-board power
station. All consumers are supplied with electrical
power, including propeller systems. The main Figure 15. Platform supply vessel – Dual fuel – DE propulsion
advantages of these systems are their operational
flexibility and redundancy. The negative factors are
higher transmission power losses and greater Today, variable-speed gas engines are available for
complexity. direct propulsion drive. For most ships, diesel
mechanical transmission offers significantly higher
Hybrid propulsion systems. These systems combine total efficiency and lower emissions than generator
the high efficiency of mechanical transmission with the engines. Ro-Ro cargo ships (Figure 16) are optimized
operational flexibility of the diesel-electric system. for transit operations at service speed, where the
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

direct propulsion arrangement offers the best fuel insulated tank itself and the necessary valves and
efficiency. In this arrangement a smaller diesel engine evaporators mounted in the “cold box” as an
is installed for backup. integrated module. The gas control unit ensures the
correct pressure and necessary filtering of the gas
before it enters the supply line to the engine. Safety
shutdown functions and ventilation are also handled
by this unit, which is normally installed in a gas-safe
room. From the gas control unit, the gas enters the
engine room. Each unit and gas room is made gas
safe through effective ventilation systems and double
barrier systems that leading any leaks to the gas mast.
All gas pipelines outside safe rooms are double walled
pipes, in which the annular space is continuously
Figure 16. Ro-Ro ship - Pure LNG operation – DM propulsion ventilated and monitored for gas leaks.

Whether to choose diesel-electric or diesel-mechanic

propulsion arrangement depend on operational and
safety issues, which must be evaluated for each ship
type.

On-board fuel system

The main peculiarity of LNG operation is the fuel
system, which requires special attention. Current
technology for small-scale LNG storage utilizes
cylindrical vacuum-insulated stainless steel tanks.
Until now, only relatively small tanks have been
commercially available, and only from a few suppliers.
LNG is thus still primarily interesting for regional
shipping, where the operational range and predictable
bunkering facilities are less of a problem.

LNG storage tanks require special arrangements, and

take up significantly more space than diesel fuel
tanks.

Traditionally, marine fuels utilize compartments that

cannot be used for payload anyway, and which form
part of the vessel’s trim and stability ballast system.

LNG cylindrical pressure tanks normally occupy more

valuable space onboard, and ship size may have to be
increased to make space for fuel. However, some ship
types that carry deck loads may have space available
below deck, and on ships carrying load below deck, Figure 17. LNG tank arrangement compared to MDO [18]
LNG tanks can be installed on upper decks (Figures
17 and 18).

The LNG fuel system consists of five main units as

shown in Figure 18. The bunkering station must be
located so as to ensure safe and effective access to
bunker facilities on-shore or by ship-to-ship bunkering
[19]. The bunkering system consists of two main
pipelines: one for LNG and one for the gas phase
return. During bunkering normally only the LNG pipe
is connected. LNG is spray-filled from the top of the
tank to re-condense the vapor phase and reduce tank
pressure. In special cases gas phase line may be
connected to utilize the vapor return system, in order
to avoid methane emissions during bunkering. LNG Figure 18. LNG fuel system arrangement example Ro-Ro
tanks are normally standard modules comprising the (source: Rolls-Royce Marine)
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

Safety regulations for onboard LNG systems same inherently safe standard. Unlike ESD designs,
An important concern for all onboard gas systems is the system and components do not require the engine
the safety of storage tanks, engines, fuel piping, rooms to be explosion-proof, and the engines do not
ventilation systems and bunker stations. The risk of need to be individually sectioned off in a “box” for gas
gas leakages from the systems, causing fires or leak containment. All components used are
explosions must be carefully analyzed and evaluated. inherently safe, built with double-walled piping (Figure
19), ventilation and leak detection systems. This
The IMO “INTERIM GUIDELINES ON SAFETY FOR design approach saves construction costs and
NATURAL GAS-FUELLED ENGINE INSTALLATIONS reduces building complexity and weight. The result is
IN SHIPS” allows for two different design principles for engine room spaces similar to conventional engine
configuration of the machinery spaces when it deals rooms, which offer better access for operation and
with safety. (Ref. subparagraph 2.6.1 Alternative maintenance (Figure 20).
system configurations)

These two alternatives are described as follows:

1 Gas safe machinery spaces (inherently safe

design): Arrangements in machinery spaces
are such that the spaces are considered gas
safe under all conditions, normal as well as
abnormal conditions, i.e. inherently gas safe.

2 ESD-protected machinery spaces (ESD

design): Arrangements in machinery spaces
are such that the spaces are considered
non-hazardous under normal conditions, but
under certain abnormal conditions may have
the potential to become hazardous. In the
event of abnormal conditions involving gas Figure 19. Detail from gas supply – double piping arrangement.
hazards, emergency shutdown (ESD) of Source: Wartsila Diesel [11]
non-safe equipment (ignition sources) and
machinery is to be automatically executed
while equipment or machinery in use or active Engine room space Gas safe
(gas safe design) room
during these conditions are to be of a certified
safe type.

Most of the LNG-fuelled vessels built recently Double wall

(2000-2010) are designed according to the ESD pipes
design. Each hazardous component is built within a
closed chamber that limits the maximum volume of
gas that can leak from the component and become an
explosion hazard. Each chamber (box) is continuously
ventilated to remove minor gas leaks before they
accumulate to beyond a hazardous limit. Gas
detection alarm systems are also installed in each
“box”, and detection triggers automatic shut-down and Figure 20. Detail of gas safe machinery space (inherently safe
ventilation. design) – ventilated double piping arrangement [10]

An explosion hazard analysis is required, and Built-in safety systems include the gas mast and
explosion forces must be calculated. The structure ventilation systems that ensure gas leakages are led
surrounding the hazardous components (engines and as far away from the vessel as possible. Gas
tanks, etc.) must be designed to minimize damage to detectors are also installed where gas may leak and
the vessel/structures in the event of an explosion. This collect. Gas detection alarms trigger automatic
approach leads to explosion ducts and strengthening shutdown or slow down engine functions, and may
of steel structures. also switch these to 100% bunker fuel operation for
DF engines.
For the latest designs (Ro-Ro Figure 18) [10],[17], the
inherently safe design is chosen. This is made When designing the ship all gas systems are located
possible as a result of the Wärtsilä 50DF engine [11] safely away from passenger and crew public areas, to
and Rolls-Royce C engine [10] being designed to the avoid implications for regular or emergency
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

operations. Re-fuelling is kept far away from crew and include some rough estimates for the three example
passenger accommodation areas in order to enable vessels described in the previous sections The cost
re-fuelling to take in parallel with most normal data concern only the total investment cost of the ship,
operations. and operating costs are excluded (Table 5).

LNG fuel system cost

The main obstacle to the use of LNG as fuel is still the Table 5: Additional investment cost related to LNG-fuelled
extra installation costs. Most of the extra costs are ships as a percentage of total vessel cost, compared to
MDO/HFO
related to the fuel tanks and safety design. The size
and availability of LNG tanks for marine applications
Additional Car Platform Ro-Ro
are still very limited, with only a few suppliers keeping
cost factor ferry supply vessel
prices high. However, as this is an expanding market,
more suppliers and a wider range of tank designs will (PSV) (5 MW /
(5 MW/ (8 MW /
450m3LNG)
be available within a few years. Several R&D projects 250m3LNG) 200 m3LNG)
are currently studying new LNG tank designs, with the Engines ~3% ~3% ~2%
aim of designing larger tanks and tanks which can be Fuel system ~4-5% ~2-3% ~5-8%
better integrated into the vessel structure [20]. New, Arrangement ~2-3% ~3-6% ~2-5%
larger and more cost-effective tank designs will be a and structure
critical factor in expanding the use of LNG as a fuel for Total ~10% ~8-12% ~9-15%
ships requiring longer operational distances.
Typical additional costs for these vessels are around
500-1000 €/kW installed power. The extra costs are
on top of a relatively high basis investment, and
increase with size. For large ships, the additional
costs will decrease as a proportion of total costs.

We also expect the additional fuel system costs to

decrease as more suppliers enter the market, and
more specialized and cost-effective technology is
developed. Emission restriction measures such as
exhaust post-treatment systems add significant cost
to ships operating on marine diesel and HFO. This
development will also contribute to reduce the cost
gap to LNG-fuelled ships.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Figure 21. LNG ships in operation and under construction [6]
LNG is a very promising alternative marine fuel.
LNG-fuelled ships are already a reality, based on
Figure 21 provides an overview of the LNG-fuelled relatively well-proven gas engine technologies
ships currently in operation, showing their power and combined with continuously developing LNG fuel
LNG fuel tank capacity. The sector lines in the figure systems.
indicate approximate operational time at maximum
Well-proven gas engine technology offers significant
power. These are all ships for short sea shipping in
reductions in emissions compared to traditional marine
regular routes, and re-fuelling is done regularly on a
fuels. NOx are reduced by up to 90 %, CO2 by up to
daily or weekly basis. For large ocean-going ships,
30% and SOx and particulates by nearly 100%.
much larger fuel capacities are required.
The engine design challenges are mainly related to
The added cost of using LNG fuel will vary greatly part loads, variable loads and variable LNG
according to the ship type involved. For multi-fuel composition.
machinery, LNG is an additional system to existing
liquid fuel systems, and therefore an additional cost. LNG-fuelled ships currently require an additional
For purely LNG-fuelled ships, the LNG system capital investment of approximately 8-15%, mainly
replaces the conventional fuel system for marine due to the fuel systems and arrangement. This must
diesel oil or heavy fuel oil. be balanced against operational cost savings. On the
basis of the expected price of LNG compared to oil,
Since the additional cost picture is relatively complex we may expect significant fuel cost savings using LNG.
and dynamic, we have chosen in this paper only to Further operational cost savings can be obtained
through emission taxes.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

The most important technical challenges are related to [6] Stuer-Lauridsen, F., Nielsen, J.B., Odgaard, T.,
fuel systems. More cost-effective tank systems will Birkeland, M., Graugaard, C.W., Blikom, L.P..
have to be developed. Larger tank systems for ships Muro-Suné, N., Andersen, M. and Øvlisen, F.,
in longer operational cycles are needed if LNG is to “Natural gas for ship propulsion in Denmark –
enter the main shipping market. Building fuel Possibilities for using LNG and CNG on ferry and
infrastructure and developing efficient LNG cargo routes”, Environmental Project No.1338,
bunkering logistics systems will also be a critical 2010.
success factor. In the meantime, LNG is primarily [7] Einang, P. M., “The Norwegian LNG Ferry”, paper
interesting in a regional shipping context, where the A-095, NGV 2000, Yokuhama, 2000.
ship’s range is less of an issue and the next bunkering
port is predictable and close at hand. LNG alone [8] Broman, R., Stålhammar P., Erlandsson, L.,
cannot solve the maritime fuel and emission challenge. “Enhanced Emission Performance and Fuel
However, LNG can contribute significantly to local and Efficiency for HD Methane Engines “, final report
regional environmental problems, and for short-sea 2010, AVL MTC 9913, 2010.
and coastal shipping it can also be cost-effective [9] Einang, P.M, “Gas Fuelled Ships”, [Link]. 261,
compared to traditional marine fuels. CIMAC Congress, Vienna, Austria, 2007.
[10] Hummerfelt, T., Johannessen, E., Vaktskjold, E.,
Skarbø, L.A., “Development of The Rolls-Royce
C26:33 Marine Gas Engine Series”, [Link]. 54,
CIMAC Congress, Bergen, Norway, 2010.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
[11] Nylund, I., “Field Experience with the Wärtsilä 50
We thank the Research Council of Norway for funding Dual-Fuel Engine” [Link].239, Proceedings
research and pilot projects, Gasnor and Nordic of the 25th CIMAC Conference, Vienna, Austria,
LNG/Skangass for close cooperation in developing 21–24 May, 2007.
infrastructure and LNG terminals on the long coast of
[12] Portin, K., “Wärtsilä Duel Fuel (DF) Engines for
Norway, and Wärtsilä, Rolls-Royce Marine, STX-OSV,
Offshore Applications and Mechanical Drive”,
Fjord1 and Seatrans/Sea-Cargo for sharing important
[Link]. 112, CIMAC Congress, Bergen,
information and experience.
Norway, 2010.
[13]MAN Diesel,”ME-GI Dual Fuel MAN B&W Engines
A Technical, Operational and Cost-effective
Solution for Ships Fuelled by Gas”, MAN Diesel,
REFERENCES Copenhagen,Denmark,
[Link]
[1] International Energy Agency, “International Energy 762/5510-0063-00ppr_web.pdf.
Outlook 2010” (IEO2010)
[Link] [14] Grøne, Ole [Link]., ”ME and ME-GI Engines for
LNG Application, System Control and Safety”,
[2] Buhaug, Ø., Corbett, J.J., Endresen, Ø., Eyring, V., Marine Propulsion Conference, 2005.
Faber, J., Hanayama, S., Lee, D.S., Lee, D.,
Lindstad, H., Markowska, A.Z., Mjelde, A., [15] Millno, Federico [Link]., “Wärtsilä; Knock in Dual
Nelissen, D., Nilsen, J., Pålsson, C., Winebrake, Fuel Engines: A Comparison between Different
J.J., Wu, W., Yoshida, K., “Second IMO GHG Techniques for Detection and Control”, paper no.
Study 2009”, International Maritime Organization 212, CIMAC Congress, Bergen, Norway, 2010.
(IMO) London, UK, 2009. [16] Numaguchi, H., Sato, T., Ishida, T., Matsumoto, S.,
[3] Endresen, Ø., “Improved Modelling of ship SO2 Hino, K., Iwasaki, T., “Japan’s First Dual-Fuel
emissions – a fuel-based approach”, Journal of Diesel-Electric Propulsion Liquefied Natural Gas
Atmospheric Environment. Vol. 39, pp.3621-3628, (LNG) Carrier”, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
2005. Technical Review Vol. 46 No.1, March, 2009.
[4] Corbett, J.J. and Koehler, H., “Updated Emissions [17] Marintek, “BigLNG consortium - Concepts for use
from Ocean Shipping”, Journal of Geophysical of LNG in large cargo and passenger ships,
Research,Vol. 108, 4650 15PP., 2003 ROPAX concept development”. MARINTEK
report MT22 F08-177, 2008.
[5] Einang,P.M, Koren,S., Kvamsdal, R., Hansen, T.,
Sarsten, A., “High-Pressure, Digital Controlled [18] Stenersen D., “NyFrakt - Fornyelsesprogram for
Injection of Gaseous Fuel in a Diesel Engine, With kysttransport, sluttrapport”, project 187304/I40.
Secial Reference from LNG Tankers”, CIMAC MARINTEK report MT22 A10-041 (in Norwegian),
Congress, Paris, France,1983. 2010.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Minnesota, Thursday, August 02, 2018

[19] Swedish Marine Technology Forum, “LNG

bunkering Ship to Ship procedure”. LNG02, 2010
[Link]
project-report%E2%80%9Dlng-ship-to-ship-bunk
ering-procedure%E2%80%9D.
[20][Link]
25&f=1372.

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

BMEP – Brake Mean Effective Pressure

BOG – Boil-off Gas (from LNG tanks)
DF – Dual-Fuel engine
DE – Diesel Electric transmission
DM – Diesel Mechanical transmission
ECA – Emission Control Area
ESD – Emergency Shut-down
GD – Gas Diesel engine
GHG – Green House Gas
HFO – Heavy Fuel Oil
IMO – International Maritime Organization (UN)
LNG – Liquefied Natural Gas
LBSI – Lean-Burn Spark-Ignited engine
MDO – Marine Diesel Oil
MGO- Marine Gas Oil
PSV – Platform Supply Vessel
SCR – Selective Catalytic Reduction
SFC – Specific Fuel Consumption

CONTACTS

Vilmar Æsøy,
ve@[Link]

Per Magne Einang,

[Link]@[Link]

$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG1RSDUWRIWKLVSXEOLFDWLRQPD\EHUHSURGXFHGVWRUHGLQD 3RVLWLRQVDQGRSLQLRQVDGYDQFHGLQWKLVSDSHUDUHWKRVHRIWKHDXWKRU V DQGQRW

UHWULHYDOV\VWHPRUWUDQVPLWWHGLQDQ\IRUPRUE\DQ\PHDQVHOHFWURQLFPHFKDQLFDO QHFHVVDULO\WKRVHRI6$(7KHDXWKRULVVROHO\UHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHFRQWHQWRIWKHSDSHU
SKRWRFRS\LQJUHFRUGLQJRURWKHUZLVHZLWKRXWWKHSULRUZULWWHQSHUPLVVLRQRI6$( 6$(&XVWRPHU6HUYLFH
7HO LQVLGH86$DQG&DQDGD
,661
7HO RXWVLGH86$
)D[
(PDLO&XVWRPHU6HUYLFH#VDHRUJ
6$(:HE$GGUHVVKWWSZZZVDHRUJ
3ULQWHGLQ86$