© 2013 Rolls-Royce plcThe information in this document is the property of Rolls-Royce plc and may not be copied or communicated to a third party, or used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of Rolls-Royce plc.This information is given in good faith based upon the latest information available to Rolls-Royce plc, no warranty or representation is given concerning such information, which must not be taken as establishing any contractual or other commitment binding upon Rolls-Royce plc or any of its subsidiary or associated companies.

LNG propulsion (conversion and new-building) for short-sea.

Oslo 20 Juni 2013.Stein Ruben Larsen

Vice President System Sales and Marketing of Cargo Vessels

stein.ruben.larsen@rolls-royce.com

Agenda

Some basic knowledge New-building example Conversions example Different solutions for conversion Financial

Some basic knowledge

CO2

NOX

SOX

PARTICLES'

Tromsø Aug 2012

Why LNG ?

0,38

0

0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

0,3

0,35

0,4

C-diesel C-gas

SO2 (0,1%)

598

420

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

C-diesel C-gas

CO2 (g/kWh)

8,2

1,2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

C-diesel C-gas

NOx (g/kWh)

0,25

0

0

0,05

0,1

0,15

0,2

0,25

C-diesel C-gas

Particles

- 85 %

- 99,9 %

- 99,9 %

- 30 %

Vessels to be delivered in 2013/14

Ro-Ro vessel built in China for Norwegian Norlines Winner of “Next Generation Shipping Award” 2011

Case study analysis environship

Operation Diesel LNG Unit

Annual operating hours 5500 5500 hrs

Installed power 4500 3940 kW

Engine Speed 750 750 rpm

System installation cost $10m $15.25m

HFO LNG

Fuel price USD 700/ton USD 700/ton

Add. capex USD 5,25 mill

Fuel consumption 0,198 kg/kWh 0151 kg/kWh

Lube oil consumption 0,80 g/kWh 0,40g/kWh

NPV USD 466.628

IRR 28%

Conversions (to LNG propulsion)

What needs to be done ?What to chose ?To what cost ? Some examples.

What needs to be done ?

Feasibility study Age of vessel Technical issues (Space, stability, classification, redesign etc) Timeframe (technical documentation, yard capacity, off-hire) Business case (Capex, Opex, Charter-agreement)

Technical agreement Engine type LNG fuel-tank Backup-systems Scope of design-work

Yard-work and testing/verification If NOx fund sopport, testing verification period

What to chose ?

Scrubber, SCR, Low-sulphur, MDO

Type of engine Lean burn gas engine Dual fuel engine

LNG fuel tank C-type (Pressurized) A-type (Atmospheric pressure)

Backup system (PTI)

Engines

Lean burn gas engines

IMO Tier III compliant High efficiency (49%) Low fuel-consumption Good tolerance for low methane

number

Not 1A1 approved (Backup needed)

Dual fuel gas engines

IMO Tier III compliant Fuel flexibility No need for back-up

Complex High maintenance cost Sensitive for methane-number

LNG tanks

C-type Handles Boil-off Simple system (Coldbox) References as fuel-tank

Take space Expensive

A-type Space-friendly Less cost

Boil-off issue Few references as fuel-tank Need of submerged pumps

Backup systems LNG Mechanical with PTI

Gas-Electric

Cost

Between 40 and 65 MNOKDepending on:

Size of fuel-tank(s) : 2 * 250 cbm. C-Tank : 16 MNOK Engine type and power: Example : 5 MW engine: 10-15 MNOK New gearbox incl. PTI and HSG : 5 – 10 MNOK Design : 2 – 4 MNOK Yard-work : 10 – 20 MNOK ?

Conversion (Case study Pachuca)

GL classed Container feederBuilt in 2004/20058,4 MW Medium speed engineTrade: Netherland, UK, Norway Member of NOx-fund (MS Lyspoint) Subject for NOx-fund support based on

CO2 emission (reduction) in Norwegian waters

Conversion (Case study Pachuca) Possible LNG tank installation Vertical to avoid sloosh 2 tanks for stability and

redundancy Bunkering available in Norway

Conversion (Case study Pachuca)

Example of LNG tank stern placed.

MS Høydal

Conversion (Case study Pachuca)

Thank You !