2.2 - iacs_tripartite-outcome mepc 61 on ee_2

8/10/2019 2.2 - IACS_Tripartite-Outcome MEPC 61 on EE_2

1/22

Outcome from MEPC 61 onEnergy Efficiency Regulations

Tripartite MeetingTokyo, 15-16 October 2010

A. K. Seah

IACS EG/ENV Chairman


2/22

2

Contents

Going into MEPC 61

Outcome from MEPC 61

Decisions in plenary

Draft regulations

Guidelines


3/22

3

IMO Intersessional EE-WG

Improved draft regulatory text for EEDI &SEEMP

Undecided issues: ship size cut-off; EEDIbaseline and reduction rates; phases of

implementation; SEEMP approval Guidelinesat various states of readiness

for calculating EEDI

for verification of EEDI

for calculating EEDI baselines

Influence on safety

Speed reduction; structural enhancements


4/22

4

EE-WG: Draft regulatory text

EEDI baseline

existing regression formula retained(EEDI = acapacityc)

Ship size400GT, EEDI to be calculated; ships cut-offlimits in DWT, attained EEDI required EEDI

Various cut-off limits to be decided in MEPC 61

Target years and phases2013, undecided as to phases

If 3 phases: 5 years each

If 4 phases, 1stphase (Phase 0) 2-5 years; rest 5 years

Reduction from baselineset with various reduction rates

E.g. for tankers 10, 25, 35%; if Phase 0, 0%

SEEMPloose agreement on whether Administrationapproval is needed; be part of SMS


5/22

5

EE-WG: Guidelines

Guidelines for calculation of EEDI

Shiptype issues: ro-ro ships (65% DWT?); diesel

electric propulsion (?); dual-fuel engines - use

primary fuel (?)

Correctionfactors: fjfor shuttle tankers withredundant propulsion; fifor voluntary structural

enhancement (?); fwneed for guidelines

emphasized

Electricpower table: guidelines introduced EEDIformula: PPTOneed to avoid over-

compensation; need to allow for CO2 abatement

system


6/22

6

EE-WG: Guidelines

Guidelines for verification of EEDI

Draft text for guidelines for survey and certification of

attained EEDI for further consideration; boxed texts

Calculation of EEDI baseline

Baselines are to be treated as reference lines for

developing required EEDI

Guidelines for calculating reference lines developed

Guidelines for development of SEEMP

Need to develop supplementary guidelines in future

for activities associated with search and rescue

operations


7/227

Safety issues

Safety should be not be compromised in seekingenvironment protection

Motivation for under power to minimize EEDI

minimum power and speed should be established

Voluntary structural safety enhancement should not bepenalized in EEDIcompensated by a fiin EEDI

formula (Greece)

Compensate for heavier scantling of CSR-compliant

ships with fCSR

in EEDI formula (China)


8/228

IACS Submission to MEPC 61:

Ambient conditions for electric power table

At issue:footnote in 2.5.6.3 of draft guidelineson method of calculation of attained EEDI onelectric power table referring to ambientconditions

IACS proposal Ambient conditions in class rules are for rating

of equipment; not relevant to electric powertable

Where ambient conditions affect electric powertable, contractual conditions should apply

MEPC 61/5/31 - IACS proposed revisedfootnote


9/229

IACS Submission to MEPC 61:Correction factor fifor structural enhancement

At issue: fi the capacity correction factor proposed forvoluntary structural safety enhancement

IACS shares the view that voluntary structural safetyenhancement beyond regulatory requirementsshould be compensated - but shares concerns for

reference ship

IACS proposed that compensation should not berecommended until guidelines are developed

At issue: fithe capacity correction factor proposed forCSR-compliant ships

IACS holds the view that the matter of slightlyheavier scantlings for CSR-compliant ships shouldbe addressed by the setting of the required EEDI

MEPC 61/5/30 - IACS proposed positions


10/22

10

IACS submission to MEPC 61:

Insert text for minimum installed power

At issue:the lack of provision in the draftRegulations for Energy Efficiency for Shipsto

address the issue of minimum installed power

to enable safe navigation in severe weather

MEPC 61/5/32 - IACS proposed text for a new

paragraph in Regulation 4

For each ship, to which this regulation applies, the installed

propulsion power shall not be less than the propulsion power

needed to maintain the manoeuvrability of the ship underadverse conditions as defined in the guidelines to be

developed by the Organisation.


11/22

11

IACS Initiative

Investigating minimum installed power

IACS forming project team with a view to submitpreliminary findings to MEPC 62

Issues to be investigated

Review literature and capture experience from

seafarers

Define reference severe conditions

Define maneuverability standard

Perform seakeeping and maneuverability analysesin reference severe conditions for given ships

Make preliminary proposals

Hold industry workshop to discuss preliminary findings


12/22

MEPC 61


13/22

13

Decisions in plenary for MEPC 61/5

Chosen presentations in plenary

Vanuatu paper on EEDI for ships of special circumstances(ships serving remote islands)

Not supported

USA paper on criteria for allowing correction factors in

EEDI formula

For WG consideration

Singapore paper on CO2 abatement technologies

For WG consideration; need further studies

IACS paper on minimum installed power

WG to incorporate

Other instruction to WG

Remove reference to Annex VI and the word mandatoryfrom the draft regulatory text


14/22

14

Draft Regulatory Text

Application of regulationsto ships 400 GT

EEDI requirements for only 7 ship types: 1) bulk carriers, 2)tankers, 3) gas tankers, 4) container ships, 5) general cargoships, 6) refrigerated cargo ships, and 7) combinationcarriers.

Exclude: ships with steam, diesel-electric and hybridpropulsions

CO2 abatement technologies

Singapores proposal not supported by WG as it deemed thetechnology not ready

* By linear interpolation


15/22

15

Draft Regulatory Text

Definition of major conversion Retained substantial

Survey after major conversion

partial survey if conversionis not extensive

Initial survey if conversion isextensive

Duration of certificate (IEEC)

Valid for the life of the ship except where there is majorconversion or change of flag

Improvement may be needed for survey for conversion, e.g.: A survey should be conducted to verify if the parameters

affecting EEDI are changed

If so, EEDI should be recalculated, EEDI Technical Filerevised, IEEC endorsed

Determination made if Vrefis to be re-verified

Major conversion

Substantially altersdimensions, DWT, power

Change ship type

Substantially prolong life

Substantially alters energy

efficiency


16/22

16

Method of calculation of EEDI

The Guidelines (MEPC 61/5/3 Annex 2) largely retained

Remaining uncertainties:

Derated engineuse MCR from NOx Technical file - to be

dealt with by CG

Ambient condition in electric power tableto be dealt withby CG

fw retained as is, Japan to submit detail report

Japan proposal to make fwoptional with EEDIweather- notsupported

Greece proposal to equate it to 0.85 - not supported

fi for CSR-compliant shipnot to have correction factor,

but to have reduced reduction ratesto be dealt with by

CG


17/22

17

Method of calculation of EEDI

fi for voluntary structural enhancement Example: is fiallowed for CSR Grab notation?

Commercial considerationnot deserving?

Example: is fiallowed for adding more corrosion addition thanthat required by CSR?

Commercial consideration, since reducing maintenance cost

Enhanced safety, since reducing risk of structural failure; alsoreducing lifecycle carbon footprint with reduced structuralmaintenance

Guidelines required:

How to define the referenced ship?

How to consider commercial v. safety?

Lightship weight regression line? An existing ship? First of aseries of sister ships?

IACS to consider co-sponsoring paper to MEPC 62


18/22

18

Survey and Certification of EEDI

Guidelines (MEPC 61/5/3 Annex 3) largely retained

discussions/reservations in boxes deleted

However, many uncertainties

for implementation:

Main issue: verification of

reference speed Vrefspeed at 75% MCR &

summer draft

Example issue: omission of

tank tests for ships of the

same or similar type

Should criteria be

established for waiver

of tank tests?

Ships of the same type

A ship of which the hull form,

excluding additional hull features

and of which principal particulars

are identical to the base ship

Ships of a similar type

A ship of which the hull form,

excluding additional hull features

and of which principal particulars

are largelyidentical to the base

ship

Omission of tank tests

A tank testmay be omitted based

on technical justifications such as

availability of results of tank tests

of ships of the same/similar type


19/22

19


Example issues:

Speed estimation at

design stage

Established methods forspeed/power curve

predictions hard to verify

Verifiers could ask forhighly proprietary info

In future: develop morerobust method

Quality of tank tests ITTC quality system

In future: considerauthorization of facilities

or witness of tests by

verifiers

4.2.6The estimation of the ship speed at

the design stage much depends on eachshipbuilder's experiences, and it may not be

practicable for any person/organization

other than the shipbuilder to fully examine

the technical aspects of experience-based

parameters such as the roughness

coefficient and wake scaling coefficient.

Note to 4.2.6 A possible way forward formore robust verification is to establish a

standard methodology of deriving the ship

speed from the outcomes of tank test

4.2.7allows verifiers to request additional

information

Note to 4.2.5 For ensuring the quality oftank tests, ITTC quality system should be

taken into account. It would be desirable in

the futurethat an organization conducting a

tank test be authorized or each tank test be

witnessed by the verifier in accordance with

the guidelines developed by the

Organization.


20/22

20


Other example issues:

Acceptance of numerical methods: for model propelleropen water test; for supplementing tank tests

Equivalent methods to ISO 15016 in calibrating speed-power curve at sea trial to account for wave, wind, etc.

Method of deriving Vreffrom speed-power curves from tanktests and from sea trials

Need for a more robust method of verification?

Option Astatus quo

Option Bapply standardin lieu of proprietary, experience-based parameters for ship speed estimates; derived specificspeed for EEDI purpose only

Option Capply verifiablyparameters (verified during seatrial) for ship speed estimates; derived specific speed forEEDI purpose only


21/22

21


Need for joint industry effort for mutuallyagreeable and technically sound method for

verification of Vref ?

Short-term solution

Make Option A as robust as practicabledevelopment of unified verification procedure

Quality of tank tests

Protection of intellectual properties Long-term solution

from lessons learned


22/22

22

Summary

Regulations on energy efficiency for ships - astep closer

Several issues need looking into

Safety issuesinstalled power; structural

Survey for conversion

Calculation methodscorrection factors

Survey and certification

SEEMP

2.2 - iacs_tripartite-outcome mepc 61 on ee_2

Documents