1) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Petroleum-Based...
Transcript of 1) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Petroleum-Based...
The Total Energy and Emissions Analysis for Marine Systems Model
The Center for Energy Analysis and Policy Rochester, New York
USER GUIDE
6 September 2007
The TEAMS Model and User Guide were developed by:
James J. Winebrake, Ph.D. Director, Center for Energy and Environmental Analysis
Chair, Department of Science, Technology & Society/Public Policy Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
James J. Corbett, Ph.D. Marine Policy Program University of Delaware
Newark, DE
Patrick E. Meyer Center for Energy and Environmental Policy
University of Delaware Newark, DE
Work Sponsored by:
United States Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration
Center for Climate Change Research under project number DTRS56-04-BAA-0001
Special Thanks to:
Mr. Daniel Yuska Office of Environmental Activities
Maritime Administration United States Department of Transportation
Thanks to Christopher Meyer for designing the TEAMS logo.
The authors would also like to thank members of the Technical Review Group who provided invaluable feedback related to the development of the TEAMS Model.
ii
This report is printed on recycled paper.
iii
SIMPLIFIED TABLE OF CONTENTS NOTATION .............................................................................................................................................XIII 1. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................... 2 3. TOTAL FUEL CYCLE ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 3 4. FUEL PATHWAYS INCLUDED IN THE TEAMS MODEL ............................................................. 5 5. USES OF THE TEAMS MODEL........................................................................................................... 6 6. INSTALLING AND NAVIGATING THE TEAMS MODEL.............................................................. 7 7. TEAMS MODEL STRUCTURE: SECTION BREAKDOWN ............................................................ 9 8. INTERPRETING THE ‘RESULTS’ AND ‘GRAPHS’ ...................................................................... 80 9. EXAMPLE RESULTS........................................................................................................................... 92 APPENDIX A. CASE STUDIES............................................................................................................. 104 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 138
iv
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS NOTATION .............................................................................................................................................XIII 1. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2. BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................... 2 3. TOTAL FUEL CYCLE ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 3 4. FUEL PATHWAYS INCLUDED IN THE TEAMS MODEL ............................................................. 5 5. USES OF THE TEAMS MODEL........................................................................................................... 6 6. INSTALLING AND NAVIGATING THE TEAMS MODEL.............................................................. 7
6.1 INSTALLATION ................................................................................................................................ 7 6.2 SPREADSHEET PROTECTION ........................................................................................................ 7 6.3 DATA VERIFICATION...................................................................................................................... 7 6.4 MANUAL CALCULATIONS............................................................................................................. 7 6.5 CIRCULAR CALCULATIONS.......................................................................................................... 8 6.6 ENABLE MACROS ............................................................................................................................ 8
7. TEAMS MODEL STRUCTURE: SECTION BREAKDOWN ............................................................ 9 Sheet 1: “TEAMS” (Introduction Sheet)............................................................................................. 10 Sheet 2: “Inputs” ................................................................................................................................ 11
1) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Petroleum-Based Fuels.................................................................... 11 1.1) Efficiency for Petroleum Recovery.......................................................................................................... 11 1.2) Petroleum Based Efficiency Options ....................................................................................................... 11 2) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Natural Gas-Based Fuels ................................................................. 12 2.1) Simulation Scenarios: Key Assumptions for Simulations for NG Based Fuel Pathways......................... 12 2.2) Selection of LNG & FTD Production Pathways: Share of NG or FG as Energy Feedstock.................... 13 2.3) Assumptions Regarding Boiling-Off Effects of Liquefied Natural Gas................................................... 13 2.4) Transportation Distances of Moving Feedstock or Fuel .......................................................................... 14 2.5) Distance from Gas Fields to Production Plants........................................................................................ 15 3) Simulation of Biodiesel: Allocation of Upstream Energy Use and Emissions............................................ 15 4) Key Input Parameters for Simulation of Electric Generation...................................................................... 16 4.1) Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Emission Factors.............................................................. 16 4.2) Electricity Generation Mix ...................................................................................................................... 16 5) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Main Engine Operations.................................................................. 17 5.1) Main Engine Variables ............................................................................................................................ 17 5.2) Trip Distance and Time ........................................................................................................................... 18 5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode........................................................................................................... 18 5.4) Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types.......................................................................................... 19 5.4a) Selection of Model-Calculated or User Input Fuel Consumption Values............................................... 19 5.4b) Calculation of Fuel Use using Convention Diesel as Baseline Fuel....................................................... 20 5.4c) Calculation of Fuel Use using Alternative Fuels.................................................................................... 20 5.4d) Fuel Consumption.................................................................................................................................. 21 6) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Auxiliary Engine Operations ........................................................... 21 6.1) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present on Results Sheet......................................................................... 21 6.2) Auxiliary Engine Variables...................................................................................................................... 22 6.3) Auxiliary Engine Characterization........................................................................................................... 22 6.4) Auxiliary: Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types......................................................................... 23 6.4a) Auxiliary: Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Fuel Consumption Values ............................. 23 6.4b) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use Using Convention Diesel as Baseline Fuel ......................... 24 6.4c) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use Using Alternative Fuels....................................................... 24 6.4d) Fuel Consumption.................................................................................................................................. 25 7) Fuel Blend Inputs........................................................................................................................................ 26 7.1) Share of an Alternative Fuel in an Alternative Fuel Blend ...................................................................... 26 7.2) Type of Diesel for Alternative Fuel Blends ............................................................................................. 26
Sheet 3: “EF” ..................................................................................................................................... 27
v
1) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion for Stationary Applications ............................................................ 27 2) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Feedstock and Fuel Transportation ............................................... 29 2.1) Emission Ratios by Fuel Type Relative to Baseline Fuel ........................................................................ 29 2.2) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Origin to Destination.................................................................. 31 2.3) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Destination to Origin.................................................................. 33 2.4) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Vessel Operation........................................................................ 35
Sheet 4: “Fuel_Specs”........................................................................................................................ 36 1) Specifications of Fuels................................................................................................................................ 36 2) Global Warming Potentials of Greenhouse Gasses: relative to CO2 ........................................................... 37 3) Carbon and Sulfur Ratios of Pollutants....................................................................................................... 37
Sheet 5: “T&D”.................................................................................................................................. 38 1) Cargo Payload by Transportation Mode and by Product Fuel Type: Tons ................................................. 38 2) Horsepower Requirements for Ocean Tanker and Barges: Calculated with Cargo Capacity: HP............... 38 3) Fuel Economy and Resultant Energy Consumption of Heavy-Duty Trucks............................................... 39 4) Calculation of Energy Consumption for Ocean Tanker and Barge............................................................. 39 5) Energy Intensity of Rail Transportation: Btu/ton-mile ............................................................................... 40 6) Share of Power Generation Technologies for Pipeline Compression Stations............................................ 40 7) Energy Intensity of Pipeline Transportation: Btu/ton mile ......................................................................... 41 8) Energy Intensity Ratios of Different Process Fuels Used in a Given Transportation Mode: Relative to Baseline Fuel for the Given Mode .................................................................................................................. 41 9) Energy Consumption and Emissions of Feedstock and Fuel Transportation .............................................. 42 10) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Fuel ............................................................. 44 11) Energy Consumption and Emissions from Transportation Related Fuel Production ................................ 46
Sheet 6: “Petroleum” ......................................................................................................................... 47 1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 47 2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Petroleum Fuels by Stage .................................. 48 3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage ............................................................................................................................................................... 50
Sheet 7: “NG” .................................................................................................................................... 51 1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters ............................................................................................... 51 2) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 52 3) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage ......................................................... 53 4) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage ............................................................................................................................................................... 55
Sheet 8: “AG_Inputs”......................................................................................................................... 57 1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 57 2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage ......................................................... 58
Sheet 9: “BD”..................................................................................................................................... 60 1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters ............................................................................................... 60 2) Soybean Use Key Variables........................................................................................................................ 61 3) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 62 4) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage ......................................................... 63 5) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage ............................................................................................................................................................... 65
Sheet 10: “Coal” ................................................................................................................................ 66 1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 66 2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage ......................................................... 67 3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput ........... 69
Sheet 11: “Uranium”.......................................................................................................................... 70 1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage ........................................................................................ 70 2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage ......................................................... 71 3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage ............................................................................................................................................................... 73
Sheet 12: “Electric” ........................................................................................................................... 74 1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters ............................................................................................... 74 2) Electricity Generation Mixes, Combustion Technology Shares, and Power Plant Energy Conversion Efficiencies ..................................................................................................................................................... 75 3) Electric Transmission and Distribution Loss .............................................................................................. 75 4) Power Plant Emissions: in Grams per kWh of Electricity available at Power Plant Gate........................... 76 5) Power Plant Emissions: Grams per kWh of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets) ................... 77 6) Power Plant Energy Use and Emissions: per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets). 78
vi
7) Fuel-Cycle Energy Use and Emissions of Electric Generation: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets) .............................................................................................................. 79 User Next Steps:.............................................................................................................................................. 79
8. INTERPRETING THE ‘RESULTS’ AND ‘GRAPHS’ ...................................................................... 80 Sheet 13: “Results”............................................................................................................................. 80
1) Well-to-Pump Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Available at Fuel Station Pumps ................................................................................................................................................. 81 2) Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions: Per Trip.......................................... 82 2.1) Auxiliary Engine Energy Consumption and Emissions: Feedstock, Fuel & Operation ........................... 82 2.2) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present in the Following Results Grids .................................................. 84 3) Main and Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions: per Trip.......................... 85
Sheet 14: “Graphs” ............................................................................................................................ 89 1) Contribution of Each Stage to Total Fuel-Cycle Energy Consumption and Emissions .............................. 89 2) Reductions in Energy Use and Emissions by Fuel Type............................................................................. 91
9. EXAMPLE RESULTS........................................................................................................................... 92 APPENDIX A. CASE STUDIES............................................................................................................. 104
A.1 CASE STUDY 1: FERRY VESSEL........................................................................................................ 104 A.2 CASE STUDY 2: TANKER VESSEL..................................................................................................... 114 A.3 CASE STUDY 3: CONTAINER VESSEL ............................................................................................... 125
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 138
vii
FIGURES
FIGURE 1: FUEL PATHWAYS INCLUDED IN TEAMS ........................................................................................ 5 FIGURE 2: THE 14 “TABS” OF THE TEAMS MODEL ........................................................................................ 9 FIGURE 3: TEAMS INTRODUCTION PANEL ................................................................................................... 10 FIGURE 4: INPUTS SECTION 1.1 ..................................................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 5: INPUTS SECTION 1.2 ..................................................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 6: INPUTS SECTION 2.1 ..................................................................................................................... 12 FIGURE 7: INPUTS SECTION 2.1 ..................................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 8: INPUTS SECTION 2.3 ..................................................................................................................... 13 FIGURE 9: INPUTS SECTION 2.4 ..................................................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 10: INPUTS SECTION 2.5 ................................................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 11: INPUTS SECTION 3 ...................................................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 12: INPUTS SECTION 4.1 ................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 13: INPUTS SECTION 4.2 ................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 14: INPUTS SECTION 5.1 ................................................................................................................... 17 FIGURE 15: INPUTS SECTION 5.2 ................................................................................................................... 18 FIGURE 16: INPUTS SECTION 5.3 ................................................................................................................... 18 FIGURE 17: INPUTS SECTION 5.4A ................................................................................................................. 19 FIGURE 18: INPUTS SECTIONS 5.4B AND 5.4C ................................................................................................ 20 FIGURE 19: INPUTS SECTION 5.4D ................................................................................................................. 21 FIGURE 20: INPUTS SECTION 6.1 ................................................................................................................... 21 FIGURE 21: INPUTS SECTIONS 6.2 AND 6.3 .................................................................................................... 22 FIGURE 22: INPUTS SECTION 6.4A ................................................................................................................. 23 FIGURE 23: INPUTS SECTIONS 6.4B AND 6.4C ................................................................................................ 24 FIGURE 24: INPUTS SECTION 6.4D ................................................................................................................. 25 FIGURE 25: INPUTS SECTIONS 7.1 AND 7.2 .................................................................................................... 26 FIGURE 26: EF SECTION 1 ............................................................................................................................. 28 FIGURE 27: EF SECTION 2.1 .......................................................................................................................... 30 FIGURE 28: EF SECTION 2.2 .......................................................................................................................... 32 FIGURE 29: EF SECTION 2.3 .......................................................................................................................... 34 FIGURE 30: EF SECTION 2.4 .......................................................................................................................... 35 FIGURE 31: FUEL SPECS SECTION 1............................................................................................................... 36 FIGURE 32: FUEL SPECS SECTION 2............................................................................................................... 37 FIGURE 33: FUEL SPECS SECTION 3............................................................................................................... 37 FIGURE 34: T&D SECTION 1 ......................................................................................................................... 38 FIGURE 35: T&D SECTION 2 ......................................................................................................................... 38 FIGURE 36: T&D SECTION 3 ......................................................................................................................... 39 FIGURE 37: T&D SECTION 4 ......................................................................................................................... 39 FIGURE 38: T&D SECTION 5 ......................................................................................................................... 40 FIGURE 39: T&D SECTION 5 ......................................................................................................................... 40 FIGURE 40: T&D SECTION 7 ......................................................................................................................... 41 FIGURE 41: T&D SECTION 8 ......................................................................................................................... 41 FIGURE 42: T&D SECTION 9 ......................................................................................................................... 43 FIGURE 43: T&D SECTION 10 ....................................................................................................................... 45 FIGURE 44: T&D SECTION 11 ....................................................................................................................... 46 FIGURE 45: PETROLEUM SECTION 1 .............................................................................................................. 47 FIGURE 46: PETROLEUM SECTION 2 .............................................................................................................. 49 FIGURE 47: PETROLEUM SECTION 3 .............................................................................................................. 50 FIGURE 48: NG SECTION 1 ............................................................................................................................ 51 FIGURE 49: NG SECTION 2 ............................................................................................................................ 52 FIGURE 50: NG SECTION 3 ............................................................................................................................ 54 FIGURE 51: NG SECTION 4 ............................................................................................................................ 56 FIGURE 52: AG INPUTS SECTION 1 ................................................................................................................ 57 FIGURE 53: AG INPUTS SECTION 2 ................................................................................................................ 59
viii
FIGURE 54: BD SECTION 1 ............................................................................................................................ 60 FIGURE 55: BD SECTION 2 ............................................................................................................................ 61 FIGURE 56: BD SECTION 3 ............................................................................................................................ 62 FIGURE 57: BD SECTION 4 ............................................................................................................................ 64 FIGURE 58: BD SECTION 5 ............................................................................................................................ 65 FIGURE 59: COAL SECTION 1......................................................................................................................... 66 FIGURE 60: COAL SECTION 2......................................................................................................................... 68 FIGURE 61: COAL SECTION 3......................................................................................................................... 69 FIGURE 62: URANIUM SECTION 1 .................................................................................................................. 70 FIGURE 63: URANIUM SECTION 2 .................................................................................................................. 72 FIGURE 64: URANIUM SECTION 3 .................................................................................................................. 73 FIGURE 65: ELECTRIC SECTION 1 .................................................................................................................. 74 FIGURE 66: ELECTRIC SECTION 2 .................................................................................................................. 75 FIGURE 67: ELECTRIC SECTION 3 .................................................................................................................. 75 FIGURE 68: ELECTRIC SECTION 4 .................................................................................................................. 76 FIGURE 69: ELECTRIC SECTION 5 .................................................................................................................. 77 FIGURE 70: ELECTRIC SECTION 6 .................................................................................................................. 78 FIGURE 71: ELECTRIC SECTION 7 .................................................................................................................. 79 FIGURE 72: RESULTS SECTION 1.................................................................................................................... 81 FIGURE 73: RESULTS SECTION 2.1................................................................................................................. 83 FIGURE 74: RESULTS SECTION 2.2................................................................................................................. 84 FIGURE 75: RESULTS SECTION 3 (PART 1 OF 2).............................................................................................. 86 FIGURE 76: RESULTS SECTION 3 (PART 2 OF 2).............................................................................................. 87 FIGURE 77: RESULTS SECTION 4.................................................................................................................... 88 FIGURE 78: GRAPHS SECTION 1 – EXAMPLE GRAPHICAL RESULTS ............................................................... 90 FIGURE 79: GRAPHS SECTION 2 – EXAMPLE GRAPHICAL RESULTS ............................................................... 91 FIGURE 80: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL) .......................................... 93 FIGURE 81: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL)....................................... 93 FIGURE 82: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) ......................................................... 94 FIGURE 83: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL)...................................................... 94 FIGURE 84: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL) .............................................. 95 FIGURE 85: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL)........................................... 95 FIGURE 86: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS)........................................................ 96 FIGURE 87: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS) .................................................... 96 FIGURE 88: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) ............................................................... 97 FIGURE 89: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL)............................................................ 97 FIGURE 90: TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH DIESEL) ...................................... 98 FIGURE 91: GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH DIESEL)................................... 98 FIGURE 92: TABULAR RESULTS - PERCENT CHANGES ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND EMISSIONS RELATIVE TO
CONVENTIONAL DIESEL ...................................................................................................................... 99 FIGURE 93: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION........................... 99 FIGURE 94: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION ............................... 99 FIGURE 95: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN PETROLEUM CONSUMPTION .............................. 100 FIGURE 96: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN CO2 EMISSIONS ................................................ 100 FIGURE 97: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN CH4 EMISSIONS ................................................ 100 FIGURE 98: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN N2O EMISSIONS ................................................ 101 FIGURE 99: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .......................... 101 FIGURE 100: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN VOC EMISSIONS ............................................. 101 FIGURE 101: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN CO EMISSIONS ................................................ 102 FIGURE 102: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN NOX EMISSIONS.............................................. 102 FIGURE 103: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN PM10 EMISSIONS ............................................ 102 FIGURE 104: GRAPHICAL RESULTS – PERCENT CHANGE IN SOX EMISSIONS .............................................. 103 FIGURE 105: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 1.2 ......................................................................... 104 FIGURE 106: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 2.4 ......................................................................... 105 FIGURE 107: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.1 ......................................................................... 105 FIGURE 108: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.2 ......................................................................... 105
ix
FIGURE 109: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.3 ......................................................................... 106 FIGURE 110: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.2 ......................................................................... 106 FIGURE 111: FERRY CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.3 ......................................................................... 106 FIGURE 112: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL).107FIGURE 113: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................107FIGURE 114: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL)............... 108 FIGURE 115: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) ........... 108 FIGURE 116: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL) ... 109 FIGURE 117: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL) .109FIGURE 118: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS) .............. 110 FIGURE 119: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS)........... 110 FIGURE 120: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) .................... 111 FIGURE 121: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) ................. 111 FIGURE 122: FERRY CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................112FIGURE 123: FERRY CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 112 FIGURE 124: FERRY CASE STUDY RESULTS W2H ENERGY & EMISSION % CHANGES .......................... 113 FIGURE 125: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 1.2...................................................................... 115 FIGURE 126: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 2.4...................................................................... 115 FIGURE 127: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.1...................................................................... 116 FIGURE 128: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.2...................................................................... 116 FIGURE 129: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.3...................................................................... 116 FIGURE 130: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.2...................................................................... 117 FIGURE 131: TANKER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.3...................................................................... 117 FIGURE 132: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................118FIGURE 133: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................118FIGURE 134: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) ........... 119 FIGURE 135: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) ........ 119 FIGURE 136: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL) .120FIGURE 137: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................120FIGURE 138: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS)........... 121 FIGURE 139: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS) ....... 121 FIGURE 140: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) ................. 122 FIGURE 141: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) .............. 122 FIGURE 142: TANKER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 123 FIGURE 143: TANKER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 123 FIGURE 144: TANKER CASE STUDY RESULTS W2H ENERGY & EMISSION % CHANGES ....................... 124 FIGURE 145: CONTAINER CASE STUDY ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS FOR TYPICAL CONTAINER SERVICE
...........................................................................................................................................................125FIGURE 146: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 1.2............................................................... 126 FIGURE 147: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 2.4............................................................... 127 FIGURE 148: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.1............................................................... 128 FIGURE 149: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.2............................................................... 128 FIGURE 150: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 5.3............................................................... 128 FIGURE 151: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.2............................................................... 129 FIGURE 152: CONTAINER CASE STUDY INPUTS SECTION 6.3............................................................... 129 FIGURE 153: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 130
x
FIGURE 154: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: CONVENTIONAL DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 130
FIGURE 155: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) .... 131 FIGURE 156: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: RESIDUAL OIL) ..131FIGURE 157: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR DIESEL)
...........................................................................................................................................................132FIGURE 158: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: LOW-SULFUR
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 132 FIGURE 159: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS).... 133 FIGURE 160: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: NATURAL GAS)..133FIGURE 161: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) .......... 134 FIGURE 162: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: BIODIESEL) ....... 134 FIGURE 163: CONTAINER CASE STUDY TABULAR RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 135 FIGURE 164: CONTAINER CASE STUDY GRAPHICAL RESULTS (MAIN ENGINE FUEL: FISCHER-TROPSCH
DIESEL) ............................................................................................................................................. 135 FIGURE 165: CONTAINER CASE STUDY RESULTS W2H ENERGY & EMISSION % CHANGES ................ 136
xi
xii
NOTATION Acronyms and Abbreviations AE auxiliary engine BD biodiesel BD20 fuel mixture of 20% biodiesel and 80% conventional diesel CD compact disk CH4 methane CNG compressed natural gas CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CTRL keyboard key: control DOE United States Department of Energy EF emission factor EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency F9 keyboard key: function 9 FG flared gas FT Fischer-Tropsch FTD Fischer-Tropsch diesel GHG greenhouse gas GREET Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation GUI graphic user interface GWP global warming potential LF Gas landfill gas LNG liquefied natural gas LS low-sulfur N2O nitrous oxide NA North American NE US Northeast United States NG natural gas NGCC natural gas combined cycle NNA non-North-American NOx nitrogen oxides O2 oxygen PC personal computer PM10 particulate matter with a mean aerodynamic diameter of 10 um or less PTH pump-to-hull SCF standard cubic foot SOx sulfur oxides SO2 sulfur dioxide T&D transportation and distribution VOC volatile organic compound WTH well-to-hull WTP well-to-pump
xiii
Units of Measure bbl barrel of oil or natural gas liquids with volume of 42 US gallons Btu British thermal unit(s) g gram(s) gal gallon(s) GPH gallons per hour HP horsepower kW kilowatt(s) kWh kilowatt hour(s) lb pound(s) MB megabyte(s) mi mile(s) mmBtu million British thermal units ppm part(s) per million µm micrometer(s)
xiv
The Total Energy and Emissions Analysis for Marine Systems Model
(TEAMS)
1. ABSTRACT This User Guide presents the development and operation of the Total Energy & Emissions Analysis for Marine Systems (TEAMS) model. TEAMS, developed in a spreadsheet format, is the first-ever model able to calculate total fuel-cycle emissions and energy use for marine vessels. TEAMS captures “well-to-hull” emissions—that is, emissions along the entire fuel pathway (extraction processing distribution use in vessels). TEAMS conducts analyses for six fuel pathways: (1) petroleum to residual oil; (2) petroleum to conventional diesel; (3) petroleum to low-sulfur diesel; (4) natural gas to compressed natural gas; (5) natural gas to Fischer-Tropsch diesel; and, (6) soybeans to Biodiesel.
TEAMS calculates total fuel-cycle emissions of three greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide [CO2], nitrous oxide [N2O], and methane [CH4]) and five criteria pollutants (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], carbon monoxide [CO], nitrogen oxides [NOx], particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters of 10 micrometers or less [PM10], and sulfur oxides [SOx]). TEAMS also calculates total energy consumption, fossil fuel consumption, and petroleum consumption associated with each of its six fuel cycles. TEAMS can be used to study emissions from a variety of user-defined vessels, including cargo ships, passenger ferries, and container ships. This User Guide provides information on how to use TEAMS and includes case studies for three different vessel types.
1
2. BACKGROUND Evidence has mounted that marine vessels are significant sources of air pollution domestically and internationally (Corbett 1997, 2000; Chan 1999; Gupta 2002; Isakson 2001). At the same time, marine transportation services are expanding rapidly in many regions. These trends combine to present a significant environmental problem with respect to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and local air pollution. This problem is especially daunting for transportation planners who seek to increase mobility by expanding marine transportation options. The problem is complex, since marine transportation can take many forms. In terms of passenger transport, ferry services are growing in the U.S., particularly in urban coastal waters (DOT 2000; Dunlap 2002; Bay Area Council 1999; Jacobs 2001). These services may offset landside transportation alternatives, but the impacts on GHG emissions and air quality is unclear (Corbett 2002; Farrell 2002, 2003). In addition, past studies have only looked at “end-of-pipe” emissions impacts of the landside v. waterside debate, without analysis of total fuel-cycle emissions. In terms of freight service, maritime freight may produce significantly lower GHG emissions than other means of freight transport. In fact, a recent European Commission White Paper on European Transport Policy for 2010 emphasized the role of Short Sea Shipping in maintaining an efficient transport system in Europe now and in the future, and the DOT Maritime Administration is exploring the development of a robust short sea shipping system to aid in the reduction of growing freight congestion on our Nation's rail and highway systems. But, once again, comparisons of maritime freight with other modes using a total fuel-cycle methodology have yet to be done. Lastly, there is still much uncertainty about the emissions impacts of alternative fuels in our marine transportation systems. The full impacts of switching marine transportation to natural gas, biodiesel, or other fuels are not well-understood, as analyses to date do not consider total fuel-cycle emissions. With the Total Energy & Emissions Analysis for Marine Systems (TEAMS) Model, a complete picture can be presented of the relative environmental impacts of multimodal transportation. If used in conjunction with existing models, waterside v. landside analyses may be conducted for passenger and freight transportation activities. TEAMS also provides the basis for “fair” comparisons between competing alternative marine fuels. Finally, TEAMS allows analysts to partition emissions from freight and ferry vessels into various stages of fuel production and use; this information is vitally important for international GHG inventories and agreements. This User Guide demonstrates how TEAMS can be used to study total fuel cycle emissions from marine vessels. Appendix A of this document presents three case studies to which users can refer to help study particular vessel emissions.
2
3. TOTAL FUEL CYCLE ANALYSIS Understanding the true emissions impacts from marine sources (and in order to accurately conduct technology and policy assessments related to multi-modal transportation networks) requires a total fuel-cycle analysis. Total fuel-cycle analysis involves consideration of energy use and emissions from the extraction of raw fuel (e.g., oil from the well) to use of the processed fuel in the vessel itself. Each stage in the fuel cycle includes activities that produce GHG and criteria pollutant emissions. These emissions are typically caused by fuel combustion during a particular stage, although some non-combustion emissions occur (e.g., natural gas emissions from pipeline leaks, evaporative losses in refueling). The goal of a total fuel-cycle analysis is to account for each of the emissions events along the entire fuel cycle. These analyses are not simple. Process fuel consumed at each upstream stage (for example, in the energy-intensive activity of petroleum refining) also has its own fuelcycle chain that must be considered. These processes are called “up-upstream” processes. Likewise, fuel used to produce the process fuel has an upstream chain associated with it (“up-up-upstream” processes). These upstream chains go on ad infinitum, in what we call the “upn-stream process” (Winebrake & Wang 2001). The concept that upstream chains go on ad infinitum is commonly referred to in biofuel literature as “system expansion” (Kim & Dale 2005). Moreover, marine transportation is the only transportation mode that routinely uses residual fuel, both a waste product of refining other processed fuels from crude oil and a blended product itself.
TEAMS conducts its analysis using a total fuel cycle algorithm similar to that developed by the Center for Transportation Research at Argonne National Laboratory. In 1996, Argonne developed a spreadsheet-based fuel-cycle model dubbed the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model. Since its creation, the model has been used extensively to calculate the total fuel cycle energy requirements of and emissions from various alternative transportation fuels and advanced vehicle technologies (Wang 1999). GREET has become the standard for total fuel-cycle analysis due to its ability to calculate emissions from upn-stream and downstream fuel-cycle stages for land-side transportation modes. Although GREET has become the standard model for land-side analysis, the model cannot easily be applied to the marine transportation sector. More detailed discussion on the GREET approach has been elaborated in previous work (Wang 1996, 1999).
TEAMS calculates Btu per trip (Btu/trip) energy use and grams per trip (g/trip) emissions for different marine vessels by taking into account energy use and emissions of combustion and noncombustion events in the upstream and downstream stages of the total fuel-cycle. Like GREET, TEAMS calculates total energy use (all energy sources), fossil energy use (petroleum, natural gas, and coal), and petroleum use. TEAMS calculates emissions of three major greenhouse gases (CO2, N2O, and CH4) and five criteria pollutants (VOCs, CO, NOx, PM10, and SOx). Upstream emissions of these pollutants are first calculated in grams per million Btu (g/mmBtu) of fuel throughput from each upstream stage. Emissions occurring during a stage include those resulting from the combustion of process fuels and from non-combustion processes such as
3
chemical reactions, fuel leakage, and evaporation. Emissions from the combustion of process fuels for a particular upstream stage are calculated by using the following formula:
000,000,1,,,, ÷⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛×= ∑∑
j kkjkjiicm ECEFEM
where, EMcm,i = Combustion emissions of pollutant i in g/mmBtu of fuel throughput,
EFi,j,k = Emission factor of pollutant i for process fuel j with combustion technology k (g/mmBtu of fuel burned), and ECj,k = Consumption of process fuel j with combustion technology k (Btu/mmBtu of fuel throughput).
ECj,k for a given stage is, in turn, calculated by using the following formula:
jtechkfueljkj ShareShareECEC ,, ××= where, EC = Total energy consumption for the given stage (in Btu/mmBtu of fuel throughput); Sharefuelj = Share of process fuel j out of all process fuels consumed during
the stage ; and ⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛=∑
jfueljShare 1
Sharetechk,j = Share of combustion technology k out of all combustion
technologies for fuel j . ⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎝
⎛=∑
kjtechkShare 1,
Combustion technology shares (Sharetechk,j) for a given process fuel are influenced by technology performance, technology costs, and emissions regulations for stationary sources. Therefore, the extension of the GREET algorithm in the TEAMS model allows for a comprehensive assessment of marine emissions at all major upstream processes. Adding to these the direct emissions from vessel operation and refueling activities allows one to generate total g/trip estimates of the key pollutants for various vessel types.
4
4. FUEL PATHWAYS INCLUDED IN THE TEAMS MODEL There are six fuel pathways available for simulation in the TEAMS model. For petroleum-based fuel pathways, TEAMS is able to simulate: 1) petroleum to conventional diesel; 2) petroleum to residual oil; and, 3) petroleum to low sulfur diesel. For natural gas-based fuel pathways, TEAMS is able to simulate: 4) petroleum + natural gas to Fischer-Tropsch diesel; and, 5) natural gas to compressed natural gas (including liquid natural gas in certain stages. Lastly, TEAMS is able to simulate: 6) petroleum + soybeans to biodiesel. These pathways are represented visually in Figure 1. Figure 1: Fuel Pathways Included in TEAMS
For plants producing Fischer-Tropsch diesel (FTD), TEAMS includes plant design options to produce: 1) fuels only; 2) fuels and steam (for export); and, 3) fuels and electricity (for export). For the second option, the energy and emission credits from cogenerated steam are estimated by using conventional steam generation with NG. For the third option, the energy and emission credits from cogenerated electricity are estimated by using conventional electricity generation with natural gas combined-cycle (NGCC) turbines.
5
5. USES OF THE TEAMS MODEL Without a total fuel-cycle analysis, comprehensive emissions assessments from transportation modes are not accurate. For this reason, much effort has been placed on understanding the total fuel-cycle impacts of landside technologies (Wang 1996, 1999, 2000; Delucchi 1996, 2002, 2004). With TEAMS, that research has for the first time been extended to marine modes. TEAMS allows decision makers to consider energy use and emissions from the entire fuel cycle when making technology and policy decisions related to marine transportation. Prior to the development of TEAMS, no analytical tools were available for multimodal transportation decision makers to conduct total fuel-cycle analyses. This means that transportation decisions that involve marine modes were not fully informed. This is particularly problematic with respect to situations where marine modes (e.g., passenger ferries and cargo ships) have been compared to other transportation modes (e.g., light-duty vehicles or light rail, and heavy duty diesel trucks and rail freight). TEAMS helps address this methodological gap.
TEAMS may be used in a variety of analyses and projects, such as: • Assessing the full energy and environmental impacts of marine transportation
technologies, including passenger ferry and marine freight transport; • Evaluating the tradeoffs among pollutants and modes; • Comparing emissions impacts of various alternative fuel marine technologies, for
example residual fuel v. diesel v. biodiesel v. natural gas vessels. • Providing supporting information to activities related to emissions inventories for
greenhouse gases; • Allocating emissions related to marine transportation along various parts of the
total fuel cycle, including an identification of where, geographically, those emissions occur;
• Enhancing broader inter-agency (DOT, DOE, EPA) cooperation in marine transportation issues by using a modeling platform (GREET) that is familiar and understood by these agencies; and,
• Assisting with local, regional, and national assessments related to criteria pollutants, greenhouse gas emissions, and petroleum use.
TEAMS may also be instrumental for environmental policy makers and analysts working to understand GHG inventories and sources. We believe the model will facilitate international discussions about GHG emissions from marine transportation fleets. Ultimately, TEAMS will help these decision makers understand the full GHG impacts from marine transport.
6
6. INSTALLING AND NAVIGATING THE TEAMS MODEL
6.1 INSTALLATION The TEAMS model is a multidimensional spreadsheet model developed in Microsoft Excel 2002. TEAMS is designed for users to run the model directly in Excel – although a Visual Basic user interface (or GUI) may be added with future versions. In order to run the model, Excel 97 (or later versions such as the Excel version in MS Office XP, 2002, or 2003) must be installed on a user’s computer. TEAMS requires about 1 MB of memory. If a user receives the model in a zipped format, it must be unzipped by means of zip/unzip software (such as Winzip or the built-in Windows Zip program). The model can then be stored on a computer and opened and run in Excel.
6.2 SPREADSHEET PROTECTION Upon opening the TEAMS spreadsheet, the user can modify or enter information or data only in certain cells. This is because the TEAMS spreadsheet is “protected”. All green-colored (user-input cells) are able to be modified; but if the user attempts to modify any other cell, TEAMS will return a user error. TEAMS has been protected so that the user does not accidentally alter a cell which contains a formula that, if modified, will the result in computational errors.
6.3 DATA VERIFICATION In addition to being protected, TEAMS input cells are “data verified”. This means that the input cells will only accept certain values. For example, if a user enters “0” for “Total Trip Distance” in Inputs Section 5.2, TEAMS will return an error stating that the “Value can not be equal to zero.” The user is then given the option to re-enter a new value greater than zero or to cancel the input (in which case the cell will return to its original value). The user will find all input cells are protected in a similar manner with maximum and minimum ranges, against prohibited values, and against non-numeric or negative values when appropriate. Please note that the verification process is not 100 percent infallible. In very rare circumstances it may be possible to assign a cell an invalid value (e.g., a symbol is assigned to a cell that requires a number). If the model is “run” under these circumstances, it may generate non-repairable error messages in many cells. Because of this, we recommend that users maintain the original TEAMS copy as a backup and use an operational copy for their own calculations.
6.4 MANUAL CALCULATIONS The user should note that automatic calculations are not enabled in the TEAMS model. Because of this, users must manually calculate new results by pressing F9 after new values are input in the model. Automatic calculations are deactivated for data validation purposes.
7
6.5 CIRCULAR CALCULATIONS TEAMS employs the circular calculation feature in Excel to account for the energy use and emissions associated with producing the process fuels that are used to make transportation fuels. To ensure that the circular feature in Excel is turned on, the user should always close all other Excel projects before opening TEAMS. (If a user currently has a different Excel file open which does not utilize circular calculations, the option will not be activated upon opening TEAMS.) Sometimes, the circular calculation feature is not turned on automatically by opening the TEAMS model. In this case, the user can open Excel first and turn this feature on. In addition, we recommend that users conduct TEAMS simulations manually after all inputs are made. To do this, users should turn on the manual calculation feature in Excel. Users can follow the steps below to turn both the manual calculation and the circular calculation features on.
1. Go to Tools button on the task bar. 2. Select Options. 3. Select Calculations. 4. Check Iteration. 5. Enter 100 in the box for Maximum Iterations. 6. Check Manual. 7. Click OK.
After following these steps, users can open the TEAMS model.
6.6 ENABLE MACROS When opening the model, Excel will ask users whether they want to enable the macro functions built into TEAMS. Users should click the Enable button so that TEAMS macro functions will be in operation.
8
7. TEAMS MODEL STRUCTURE: SECTION BREAKDOWN The TEAMS model is composed of 14 “sheets”. These sheets are accessible at the
bottom of the Excel window by clicking on each sheet “tab”. These are shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: The 14 “Tabs” of the TEAMS Model
The following sections of the Users Guide contain (1) an overview of each TEAMS sheet; (2) a detailed description of each section contained on each sheet; and, (3) figures (screenshots) representing each section as described. Please note that the terms “sheet” and “tab” are analogous.
9
Sheet 1: “TEAMS” (Introduction Sheet) This sheet serves as a brief introduction to the TEAMS model. It contains the TEAMS logo, the names of the development team, the current TEAMS version number, the date on which the version was updated, and TEAMS license information. Figure 3: TEAMS Introduction Panel
10
Sheet 2: “Inputs” Overview
This sheet presents: (1) key control variables for various scenarios to be simulated by TEAMS; (2) key parametric assumptions for TEAMS simulations; and (3) key input parameters for the specific marine vessel simulated by TEAMS. In this sheet a user can input all the key assumptions for his/her own simulations. In most cases, users do not need to go to any other TEAMS sheets to input data. Section Breakdown
1) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Petroleum-Based Fuels
1.1) Efficiency for Petroleum Recovery • Entries determine energy use during crude oil recovery on the Petroleum tab.
Figure 4: Inputs Section 1.1
1) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Petroleum-Based Fuels1.1) Efficiency for Petroleum Recovery
97.7%
1.2) Petroleum Based Efficiency Options • Sulfur Level entries are sent to the Fuel Specs tab and the EF tab to determine
emission factors during fuel combustion for feedstock and fuel transportation. • Refining Efficiency entries are used on the Petroleum tab to calculate energy use
during Diesel and Residual Oil refining. Figure 5: Inputs Section 1.2
1.2) Petroleum-Based Efficiency Options
Sulfur LevelRefining Efficiency
Conventional Diesel 350 87.5%Low-Sulfur Diesel 15 87.5%Crude Oil 16,000Residual Oil 27,000 95.5%
11
2) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Natural Gas-Based Fuels
2.1) Simulation Scenarios: Key Assumptions for Simulations for NG Based Fuel Pathways
• The selection of Feedstock Source determines how NG is transported by mode (tanker, barge, pipeline, rail, or truck). Non-North American Natural Gas will be transported by different modes and over greater distances than North American Natural Gas.
• The selection of Plant Design determines whether TEAMS considers co-production factors and/or energy/emissions output/credit due to flared gas.
• If the user selects “1” for “Steam co-production,” they should also alter the production credit level in Btu of steam per mmBtu of FTD produced.
Figure 6: Inputs Section 2.1
2) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Natural Gas-Based Fuels2.1) Simulation Scenarios: Key Assumptions for Simulations for NG Based Fuel Pathways
Feedstock Source
Plant Design Type When NG is
Feedstock
Plant Design Type When FG is
FeedstockCompressed Natural Gas 1
Liquified Natural Gas 1Fistcher-Tropsch Diesel 1 0 0
Feedstocks1 → North American Natural Gas2 → Non-North American Natural Gas
Plant Designs0 → No co-products1 → Steam co-production2 → Electricity co-production
202,000 North American Natural Gas; Steam production credit: Btu of steam per mmBtu of FT diesel produced 202,000 Non-North American Natural Gas; Steam production credit: Btu of steam per mmBtu of FT diesel produced 202,000 Non-North American Flared Gas; Steam production credit: Btu of steam per mmBtu of FT diesel produced
12
2.2) Selection of LNG & FTD Production Pathways: Share of NG or FG as Energy Feedstock
• Entries determine the percentage of NG or FG energy and emissions used by TEAMS when calculating the total (the sum of the two) energy and emissions of LNG or FTD production.
Figure 7: Inputs Section 2.1
2.2) Selection of LNG & FTD Production Pathways: Share of NG or FG as Energy Feedstock
2
F
Natural Gas Flared GasLiquefied Natural Gas 100.00% 0.00%
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel 100.00% 0.00%
.3) Assumptions Regarding Boiling-Off Effects of Liquefied Natural Gas • For each stage of storage, transportation and distribution, the user may enter the
boiling-off rate per day, the total days in each stage, and the rate of recovery of any gas that may have boiled-off. Entries under Storage at Production Plant will ultimately determine the CH4 “leakage”, or loss, at the production plant during liquefaction.
• Entries under Transportation/Storage/Distribution/Refueling will determine actual feedstock loss during processes of each stage (by factoring boiling off rate, days in storage, and recovery rate).
igure 8: Inputs Section 2.3
2.3) Assumptions Regarding Boiling-Off Effects of Liquefied Natural Gas
Transportation Distribution from Refueling Station
Storage at Production Plant
from Plant to Bulk Terminal
Bulk Terminal Storage
Bulk Terminal to Refueling Station
Storage for Central Plant
Boiling-Off Rate: % per Day 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.10%Duration of Storage or Transit: Days 5 1 5 0.1 3Rate of the Boiling-Off Gas Recovered 80% 80% 80% 80% 80%
13
2.4) Transportation Distances of Moving Feedstock or Fuel • All entries are in miles (not nautical miles)1. • Entries are used on the T&D tab to determine energy consumption and emissions
of transporting feedstock and fuel. Default values are based on industry averages. Figure 9: Inputs Section 2.4
2.4) Transportation Distances of Moving Feedstock or Fuel: Miles (One-W ay Distance)
Petroleum Based: Crude Oil Residual Oil US Diesel US LS DieselOcean Tanker 5080 3000 1,450 1,450
Barge 500 340 520 520Pipeline 750 400 400 400
Rail 800 800 800 800Truck for Distribution 30 30 30
Natural Gas: LNG: NA NG LNG: NNA NGOcean Tanker 0 5000
Barge 520 520Pipeline
Rail 800 800Truck for Distribution 30 30
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel: FTD: NA NG FTD: NNA NG FTD: NNA FGOcean Tanker 0 5000 5900
Barge 520 520 520Pipeline 400 400 400
Rail 800 800 800Truck for Distribution 30 30 30
Biodiesel: Ag Chemicals Soybeans BiodieselBarge 400 350 520
Pipeline 400Rail 750 400 800
Truck for Transportation 50 10Truck for Distribution 30 40 30
Electricity: Coal Uranium Ore Enriched UrainiumOcean Tanker
Barge 330Pipeline
Rail 440 100 100Truck for Distribution 50 20 200
1 One nautical mile of 1852 meters converts to 1.15 statute (land) miles. Due to the nautical mile’s relative equality to the statute mile, the statute mile has been used in TEAMS for purposes of simplification and consistency with landside analyses against which marine emissions may be compared.
14
2.5) Distance from Gas Fields to Production Plants • Entries are to be made in miles. • Entries are used to determine the energy used and emissions emitted during
transmission and distribution of NG at various stages of the NG fuel-cycle. Figure 10: Inputs Section 2.5
2.5) Distance from Gas Fields to Production Plants: Miles (to use for NG pipeline calculations)
Useage of NG or Production of Transportation Fuels Distance (miles)
NG Stationary Combustion 500Liquefied Natural Gas Plant 0
FT Diesel Plant 0NG Electric Power Plant 375
Refueling Station Use of NA NG for CNG 750
Refueling Station Use of NNA NG for CNG 500
3) Simulation of Biodiesel: Allocation of Upstream Energy Use and Emissions • Enter the allocation of soydiesel and co-product production as a percentage of
total energy consumed and emissions produced during the production of soy and soy products. Three stages are considered: soybean farming, soybean oil (soyoil) extraction, and soybean oil (soyoil) transesterification. Co-products would include soy used for food, among other purposes.
Figure 11: Inputs Section 3
3) Simulation of Biodiesel: Allocation of Upstream Energy Use and Emissions Between Biodiesel and Co-Products
Soydiesel Co-productsSoybean farming 33.6% 66.4%Soyoil extraction 33.6% 66.4%
Soyoil transesterification 70.1% 29.9%
15
4) Key Input Parameters for Simulation of Electric Generation
4.1) Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Emission Factors • An entry of “1” tells TEAMS to calculate total emissions from electricity
generation based on defaults located on the EF tab. • An entry of “2” tells TEAMS to calculate total emissions from electricity
generation based on values that the user must enter on the Electric tab. Figure 12: Inputs Section 4.1
4) Key Input Parameters for Simulation of Electric Generation
4
F
4.1) Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Emission Factors for Power Plants
1 1: Model-calculated emissions factors2: User-input emission factors
.2) Electricity Generation Mix • Entries determine the base fuel-source of the electricity used during a simulation. • The default values are based on average US values; these may be altered based on
local information or marginal production mixes.
igure 13: Inputs Section 4.2
4.2) Electricy Generation Mix
U.S. Average MixResidual oil 1.0%Natural gas 14.9%
Coal 53.8%Nuclear power 18.0%
Others 12.3%
16
A Note on Sections 5 and 6: In “Inputs” Sections 5 and 6 the user will enter parameters for simulating main and auxiliary engine operations for their vessel. The simulation can be run with main and auxiliary engines using the same or different fuel types, depending on the options selected. For example, the main engines may use conventional diesel while the auxiliary engines use biodiesel. Additionally, for both main and auxiliary engines, the user has the option of allowing TEAMS to determine fuel consumption from engine specification data or from fuel consumption (gallons per hour) values.
5) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Main Engine Operations
5.1) Main Engine Variables • Enter the vessel type, name, and/or identification number. This is for display
purposes in the Results section and has no impact on any calculations. The space may be left blank.
• Enter the number of main engines on the vessel and the horsepower (HP) per each engine. TEAMS assumes that each engine is sized similarly. If the vessel has engines of different size, the user could indicate one (1) engine with a HP value equal to the total combined HP on the vessel.
• Press F9 to calculate total onboard HP.
Figure 14: Inputs Section 5.1
5) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Main Engine Operations5.1) Main Engine Variables
Vessel Type IDNumber of Engines
Single Engine HPTotal Onboard HP
1Container Ship - 6500 TEU
8227282272
17
5.2) Trip Distance and Time • Enter the total trip distance in statute-miles (not nautical miles) and the trip time
in hours and/or minutes. • Press F9 to calculate total trip time in hours.
Figure 15: Inputs Section 5.2
5.2) Trip Distance and Time
Total Trip Distance (miles) 4800.00
Trip TimeHours 308.00
Minutes 45.00
Total Trip Time (hours) 308.75
5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode • Enter the percent of the total trip spent in each engine mode (idle, maneuvering,
precautionary, slow cruise, and full cruise). This value is based on the total time that the user entered in Section 5.2. For example, if the user entered a total time of 100 hours and the vessel spent ten of those hours in Slow Cruise, the user would enter 10% under “Slow Cruise”. Press F9 to calculate the time spent in each engine mode.
• Enter the horsepower (HP) load factor per single engine for each engine mode; for example, at full cruise, the vessel may have a load factor of 95% of the installed HP capacity.
• Press F9 to calculate: 1) HP per engine per mode; 2) kWh energy produced per each engine mode for the vessel; and, 3) total kWh “energy out” for the entire trip using conventional diesel as the baseline fuel.
Figure 16: Inputs Section 5.3
5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
Idle Maneuvering Precautionary Slow Cruise Full Cruisepercent of trip in mode based on time 1.00% 4.00% 5.00% 10.00% 80.00%
time per mode (hours) 3.09 12.34 15.43 30.86 246.84
HP load factor (single engine) 12.50% 25.00% 50.00% 85.00% 95.00%HP per engine 10,284 20,568 41,136 69,931 78,158 Total
Energy Production (kWh) (all engines) 23662.02 189296.14 473240.34 1609017.16 14386506.33 16681721.98 kWh out
Engine Mode
18
5.4) Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types
5.4a) Selection of Model-Calculated or User Input Fuel Consumption Values • Enter a “1” for TEAMS to calculate energy and emissions based on gallons per
hour fuel consumed by the vessel as derived from the engine characteristics that entered in Sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3.
• Enter a “2” for TEAMS to calculate energy and emissions based on gallons per hour fuel consumed by the vessel using GPH data that the user enters in 5.4d.
• Thus, if the user enters “1”, the user should complete Sections 5.4b and 5.4c and skip Section 5.4d; if the user enters “2”, the user should skip Sections 5.4b and 5.4c and enter the gallons per hour fuel consumption values in Section 5.4d.
Figure 17: Inputs Section 5.4a
5.4) Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types5.4a) Selection of Model-Calculated or User Input Fuel Consumption Values (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
1
If you have entered "1" please complete sections 5.4b and 5.4c and skip section 5.4d.If you have entered "2" please skip sections 5.4b and 5.4c and enter GPH values in section 5.4d.
1: Simulate using GPH derived from user-entered engine specifications 2: Simulate using user-entered GPH
19
5.4b) Calculation of Fuel Use using Convention Diesel as Baseline Fuel • This section should only be completed if the user entered a “1” in Section 5.4a. • Enter the rate of efficiency that the engine uses conventional diesel as a fuel. • Press F9 to calculate the kWh out per trip and mmBtu out per trip energy use and
to calculate the total gallons of conventional diesel used per each trip based on the trip characteristics the user entered in Section 5.2.
5.4c) Calculation of Fuel Use using Alternative Fuels • This section should only be completed if the user entered a “1” in Section 5.4a. • Enter the efficiency of the main engines when using each alternative fuel. • Press F9 to calculate the alternative fuel consumption in gallons or SCF2 per trip. • If the user selected “1” in Section 5.4a, and has completed 5.4b and 5.4c, skip
Section 5.4d and continue to Section 6. Figure 18: Inputs Sections 5.4b and 5.4c
5.4b) Calculation of Fuel Use using Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel
Engine Efficiency 35%kWh out/trip 16681721.98
mmBtu out/trip 56918.04mmBtu in/trip 162622.96
gallon/trip 1265548.31
5.4c) Calculation of Fuel Use using Alternative Fuels (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
Engine Efficiency mmbtu in/tripResidual Oil 34% 167,405.99 1195757.05 gallon/trip
Low Sulfur Diesel 33% 172,478.90 1347491.37 gallon/tripNatural Gas 32% 177,868.86 191669030.79 SCF/trip
Biodiesel 33% 172,478.90 1473045.48 gallon/tripFischer-Tropsch Diesel 32% 177,868.86 1497212.63 gallon/trip
Alternative Fuel Consumption
Baseline Fuel Consumption
2 Here pertaining to natural gas, a standard cubic foot (SCF) is defined as a cubic foot of volume at 60 degrees Fahrenheit and 14.7 pounds per square inch (PSI) of pressure.
20
5.4d) Fuel Consumption • This section should only be completed if the user entered a “2” in Section 5.4a. • Enter the fuel consumption in gallons per hour for each fuel type in each engine
mode. If the user does not know this information, it is recommended that they calculate GPH based on user-entered engine specifications (see Inputs Section 5.4a).
• Press F9 to calculate total gallons or SCF consumed per trip. Figure 19: Inputs Section 5.4d
5.4d) Fuel Consumption (Only necessary if you are simulating using user-entered GPH)
6
6
F
Idle Maneuvering Precautionary Slow Cruise Full Cruise TotalConventional Diesel 30 40 60 90 100 28991.625 gallon/trip
Residual Oil 21 31 52 75 92 26290.0625 gallon/tripLow Sulfur Diesel 31 41 61 91 101 29300.375 gallon/trip
Natural Gas (SCF) 3200 4100 7800 10000 11000 3206677.5 SCF/tripBiodiesel 35 45 65 95 120 34240.375 gallon/trip
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel 34 44 63 92 111 31878.4375 gallon/trip
Fuel Consumption (GPH per engine per mode)
) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Auxiliary Engine Operations
.1) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present on Results Sheet • Given the six fuel options, enter the type of fuel that the auxiliary engines will
use. The fuel type selected here is independent of the fuel type used in the main engines and energy and emissions will be calculated along its own fuel-cycle. 1 Conventional Diesel 2 Residual Oil 3 Low Sulfur Diesel 4 Natural Gas 5 Biodiesel 6 Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
• The selection of auxiliary engine fuel type will be factored into the calculation of total vessel energy and emissions per trip on the Results tab. Please see the Results tab documentation for more information.
• Press F9 to calculate results based on the selection of a new auxiliary fuel type.
igure 20: Inputs Section 6.1
6) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Auxiliary Engine Operations6.1) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present on Results Sheet
1 1: Conventional Diesel 4: Natural Gas2: Residual Oil 5: Biodiesel3: Low Sulfur Diesel 6: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
21
6.2) Auxiliary Engine Variables • Enter the total number of onboard auxiliary engines. (This value is for reference
only and will not be used in calculations.) • Enter the number of auxiliary engines in use during the trip. (This value will be
used in calculations.) • Enter the rated horsepower (HP) per each auxiliary engine. • Press F9 to calculate total onboard auxiliary horsepower.
6.3) Auxiliary Engine Characterization • Enter the percent of the trip that the auxiliary engine is active (based on time); for
example, the auxiliary engines may be deactivated when the vessel is in idle. Press F9 to calculate the total time that the auxiliary engine(s) are active.
• Enter the HP load factor per auxiliary engine; for example, the auxiliary engine may run at only 50 percent of the installed HP capacity. Press F9 to calculate the total HP per each auxiliary engine and the total energy production in kWh of all onboard auxiliary engines.
Figure 21: Inputs Sections 6.2 and 6.3
22
6.4) Auxiliary: Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types
6.4a) Auxiliary: Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Fuel Consumption Values
• Enter a “1” and TEAMS will calculate energy and emissions based on gallons per hour fuel consumed by the vessel derived from the engine characteristics that the user entered in Sections 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3.
• Enter a “2” and TEAMS will calculate energy and emissions based on gallons per hour fuel consumed by the vessel using GPH data from Section 6.4d.
• Thus, if the user enters “1”, the user should complete Sections 6.4b and 6.4c and skip Section 6.4d; if the user enters “2”, the user should skip Sections 6.4b and 6.4c and enter the GPH fuel consumption values in Section 6.4d.
Figure 22: Inputs Section 6.4a
6.4) Auxiliary: Fuel and Energy Consumption of Fuel Types6.4a) Auxiliary: Selection of Model-Calculated or User-Input Fuel Consumption Values (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
1
If you have entered "1" please complete sections 6.4b and 6.4c and skip section 6.4d.If you have entered "2" please skip sections 6.4b and 6.4c and enter GPH values in section 6.4d.
1: Simulate using GPH derived from user-entered Auxiliary engine specifications 2: Simulate using user-entered GPH
23
6.4b) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use Using Convention Diesel as Baseline Fuel
• This section should only be completed if the user entered a “1” in Section 6.4a. • Enter the engine efficiency using conventional diesel as a fuel. • Press F9 to calculate the kWh and mmBtu consumed per trip and the total gallons
of conventional diesel used per trip based on the trip characteristics in Section 6.2.
6.4c) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use Using Alternative Fuels • This section should only be completed if the user entered a “1” in Section 6.4a. • The efficiencies of the auxiliary engine(s) when using each alternative fuel are
derived from the efficiencies entered for the main engines in Section 5.4c. However, the user may override those values here if the main and auxiliary engines run at different efficiency levels.
• Press F9 to calculate the alternative fuel consumption in gallons or SCF per trip. • If the user has selected “1” in Section 6.4a, and has completed 6.4b and 6.4c, skip
Section 6.4d and continue to Section 7. Figure 23: Inputs Sections 6.4b and 6.4c
6.4b) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use using Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel
Auxiliary Engine Efficiency 35%kWh out/trip 13661.34
mmBtu out/trip 46.61mmBtu in/trip 133.18
gallon/trip 1036.41
6.4c) Calculation of Auxiliary Engine Fuel Use using Alternative Fuels (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
Engine Efficiency (from 5.4c)
Auxiliary mmbtu in/trip
Residual Oil 34% 137.10 979.25 gallon/tripLow Sulfur Diesel 33% 141.25 1103.52 gallon/trip
Natural Gas 32% 145.66 156965.56 SCF/tripBiodiesel 33% 141.25 1206.34 gallon/trip
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel 32% 145.66 1226.13 gallon/trip
Auxiliary Engine Alternative Fuel Consumption
Baseline Fuel Consumption
24
6.4d) Fuel Consumption • This section should only be completed if the user entered a “2” in Section 6.4a. • Enter the fuel consumption in gallons per hour for each fuel type for the auxiliary
engines. Unlike the main engines, which are simulated using all six fuel types, TEAMS will only simulate the auxiliary engines using the one fuel type selected in Inputs Section 6.1. Thus, in this section, the user may enter all values for all fuel types, but it is only necessary to enter values for the fuel being used by the auxiliary engines. In other words, if the user is simulating a vessel using biodiesel for auxiliary engine fuel, the user does not necessarily need to enter fuel consumption values for FTD (but the user may leave the default values in place – they will not be considered).
• Press F9 to calculate total gallons or SCF consumed per trip. Figure 24: Inputs Section 6.4d
6.4d) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Consumption (Only necessary if you are simulating using user-entered GPH)
Fuel Consumption (GPH per
Auxiliary engine) TotalConventional Diesel 9 2639.8125 gallon/trip
Residual Oil 10 2933.125 gallon/tripLow Sulfur Diesel 11 3226.4375 gallon/trip
Natural Gas (SCF) 800 234650 SCF/tripBiodiesel 9 2639.8125 gallon/trip
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel 10 2933.125 gallon/trip
25
7) Fuel Blend Inputs
7.1) Share of an Alternative Fuel in an Alternative Fuel Blend • FTD and BD may be a blend of alternative and conventional diesel. • Entries are used to determine total energy and emissions of the vessel using
blended fuels.
7.2) Type of Diesel for Alternative Fuel Blends • FTD may be a blend of FTD and Conventional Diesel or FTD and LS Diesel. • BD may be a blend of BD and Conventional Diesel or BD and LS Diesel.
Figure 25: Inputs Sections 7.1 and 7.2
7) Fuel Blend Inputs (applies to fuel for main and Auxiliary engines)7.1) Share of an Alternative Fuel in an Alternative Fuel Blend: Volumetric Percentage
Volumetric content of FT diesel in FTD blend 100%Volumetric content of biodiesel in biodiesel blend 20%
7.2) Type of Diesel for Alternative Fuel Blends
Diesel for Fischer-Tropsch diesel blend 1 1: Conventional Diesel Diesel for biodiesel blend 1 2: Low-Sulfur Diesel
26
Sheet 3: “EF” Overview This sheet contains emission factors (EFs) for individual combustion technologies that burn various fuels. Table 1 lists EFs for combustion technologies applied to stationary sources3. Table 2.1 lists emission ratios for alternative fuels relative to baseline fuel for power units applied to transportation modes (ocean tankers, barges, locomotives, trucks, pipelines, etc.). Table 2.2 lists the emission rates for different transportation modes fueled by different fuels for trips from product origin to destination. Table 2.3 lists the emission rates for different transportation modes fueled by different fuels for trips from product destinations back to origins (back-haul trips). Table 2.4 lists the emission rates for the simulation vessel (as identified in Inputs) fueled by the six alternative fuel types. These emission factors are used in other TEAMS sheets to calculate emissions associated with fuel combustion in various upstream stages. Section Breakdown
1) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion for Stationary Applications • This section lists the emission factors (EFs) for combustion technologies applied
to stationary sources. The following eight emission types are considered: VOC, CO, NOx, PM10, SOx, CH4, N2O, and CO2.
• EFs for stationary application are based on GREET data. GREET’s original source was EPA’s AP-42 compilation of stationary application emission factors.
• EFs for stationary applications cannot be altered without special permission. Figure 26: EF Section 1 located on next page.
3 Emission factors for stationary applications are based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s AP-42 compilation.
27
Figure 26: EF Section 1
28
1) Em
ission
Facto
rs of
Fuel
Comb
ustio
n for
Stat
ionar
y App
licati
ons (
gram
s per
mmB
tu of
fuel
burn
ed)
Crud
e:
Utilit
y/Ind
ustri
al Bo
iler
Small
Ind
ustri
al Bo
iler
Larg
e Gas
Tu
rbine
CC G
as
Turb
ineSm
all
Turb
ine
Stati
onary
Re
cipro
cati
ng E
ngine
NG
Fla
ring i
n Oi
l Fiel
dUtili
ty Bo
iler
Indus
trial
Boile
rCo
mmerc
ial
Boile
rInd
ustri
al Bo
iler
Comm
ercial
Bo
iler
Stati
onary
Re
cipro
cati
ng E
ngine
Turb
ineFa
rming
Tr
actor
Utilit
y Boil
erGa
sifica
tion
Turb
ineInd
ustri
al Bo
iler
Indus
trial
Boile
rVO
C2.7
002.7
001.0
501.0
500.9
0837
.280
2.500
2.460
0.910
1.103
0.710
1.200
39.86
01.3
3590
.000
1.140
1.477
0.960
0.820
CO41
.100
41.10
07.5
007.5
0077
.180
1006
.365
26.00
016
.200
16.20
016
.214
17.70
017
.700
413.6
408.7
1433
4.000
9.610
12.30
996
.100
23.74
0NO
x48
.900
48.90
049
.400
49.40
015
4.360
1567
.500
48.90
010
3.700
178.2
0019
.457
84.70
070
.430
1557
.200
131.6
6093
9.000
211.4
0044
.068
211.4
0018
1.600
PM10
3.700
3.700
3.290
3.290
11.60
77.3
303.7
006.1
506.1
5014
.083
3.530
6.150
48.66
016
.989
43.52
012
.661
6.524
12.66
129
.712
SOx
0.309
0.309
0.309
0.309
0.309
0.309
0.309
700.0
7170
0.071
700.0
7117
.650
17.65
017
.650
17.65
017
.650
600.2
3044
.068
600.2
3039
3.846
154
CH4
1.100
1.100
4.260
4.260
23.15
436
8.940
49.00
00.9
103.2
400.7
000.1
800.7
603.9
400.8
444.4
100.7
505.0
981.1
200.3
60N2
O1.1
001.1
001.5
001.5
002.0
001.5
001.1
000.3
600.3
600.3
570.3
900.3
902.0
002.0
002.0
001.0
605.0
980.7
602.0
00CO
259
,863
59,86
3
59
,912
59,91
2
59
,751
57,22
7
59
,756
82,67
7
82
,675
82,68
1
80
,402
80,39
9
79
,648
80,41
3
79
,615
107,9
87
10
7,970
10
7,850
76
,677
Coal:
Natur
al Ga
s:Re
sidua
l Oil:
Dies
el:
2) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Feedstock and Fuel Transportation
2.1) Emission Ratios by Fuel Type Relative to Baseline Fuel • Emission factors of fuel combustion for feedstock and fuel transportation are
affected by load factors. Thus, emission factors are determined for the destination trip and the back-haul trip, separately.
• Section 2.1 lists emission ratios for alternative fuels relative to baseline fuel for power units applied to transportation modes (ocean tankers, barges, locomotives, trucks, pipelines, etc.); these values may be altered.
Figure 27: EF Section 2.1 located on next page.
29
2) E
mis
sion
Fac
tors
of F
uel C
ombu
stio
n: F
eeds
tock
and
Fue
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
From
Pro
duct
Orig
in to
Pro
duct
Des
tinat
ion
(gra
ms
per m
mB
tu o
f fue
l bur
ned)
2.1)
Em
issi
on R
atio
s by
Fue
l Typ
e R
elat
ive
to B
asel
ine
Fuel
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
Electricity
LNG
FTD
Biodiesel
Residual Oil
FTD
Biodiesel
VOC
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
0.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0C
O1.
000
0.50
01.
000
1.00
00.
500
666.
000
1.00
00.
500
1.00
01.
000
0.00
00.
500
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0N
Ox
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
0.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0PM
101.
000
0.01
01.
000
1.00
00.
010
1.00
01.
000
0.01
01.
000
1.00
00.
000
0.01
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
CH
41.
000
20.0
001.
000
1.00
020
.000
1.00
01.
000
20.0
001.
000
1.00
00.
000
20.0
001.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
N2O
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
0.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0
Hea
vy-D
uty
Truc
k: D
iese
l as
Bas
elin
e Fu
elPi
pelin
e: D
iese
l as
Bas
elin
e Fu
elO
cean
Tan
ker:
Res
idua
l Oil
as
Bas
elin
e Fu
elB
arge
: Res
idua
l Oil
as B
asel
ine
Fuel
Loco
mot
ive:
Die
sel a
s B
asel
ine
Fuel
Figure 27: EF Section 2.1
30
2.2) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Origin to Destination • Lists the emission rates for different transportation modes fueled by different
fuels for trips from product origin to destination. • Enter Residual Oil EFs for each transportation mode. • Press F9 to calculate values for the other applicable fuels based on the user-
entered values for residual oil and fuel specifications from the Fuel Specs tab. Figure 28: EF Section 2.2 located on next page.
31
Figure 28: EF Section 2.2
2.2)
Em
issi
on F
acto
rs o
f Fue
l Com
bust
ion:
Fee
dsto
ck a
nd F
uel T
rans
port
atio
n fr
om P
rodu
ct O
rigin
to P
rodu
ct D
estin
atio
n (g
ram
s pe
r mm
Btu
of f
uel b
urne
d)
Residual Oil
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Residual Oil
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
ElectricityHHD Diesel Truck Emission Factors (g/mi.)
Diesel
LNG
FTD
BiodieselMHD Diesel Truck Emission Factors (g/mi.)
Diesel
LNG
FTD
Biodiesel
NG
Diesel
Electricity
Residual Oil
FTD
Biodiesel
NG
Diesel
Electricity
Residual Oil
FTD
Biodiesel
VOC
82.5
5682
.556
82.5
5682
.556
37.6
9237
.692
37.6
9237
.692
37.6
9277
.821
77.8
2177
.821
77.8
210.
000
0.67
831
.658
31.6
5831
.658
31.6
580.
694
39.4
2639
.426
39.4
2639
.426
0.90
81.
335
0.00
01.
335
1.33
51.
335
230.
400
40.8
600.
000
40.8
6040
.860
40.8
60C
O21
9.87
121
9.87
110
9.93
521
9.87
110
0.38
410
0.38
450
.192
100.
384
100.
384
207.
004
103.
502
207.
004
207.
004
0.00
03.
274
152.
872
76.4
3615
2.87
215
2.87
22.
025
115.
039
57.5
1911
5.03
911
5.03
977
.180
8.71
40.
000
8.71
48.
714
8.71
437
9.84
745
9.60
00.
000
459.
600
459.
6045
9.60
0N
Ox
2229
.844
2229
.844
2229
.844
2229
.844
1018
.055
1018
.055
1018
.055
1018
.055
1018
.055
2101
.167
2101
.167
2101
.167
2101
.167
0.00
013
.726
640.
903
640.
903
640.
903
640.
903
10.0
4657
0.70
757
0.70
757
0.70
757
0.70
715
4.36
013
1.66
00.
000
131.
660
131.
660
131.
660
1074
.467
2133
.600
0.00
021
33.6
0021
33.6
0021
33.6
00PM
1055
.290
55.2
900.
553
55.2
9025
.243
25.2
430.
252
25.2
4325
.243
52.1
400.
521
52.1
4052
.140
0.00
00.
237
11.0
660.
111
11.0
6611
.066
0.19
411
.021
0.11
011
.021
11.0
2111
.607
16.9
890.
000
16.9
8916
.989
16.9
8911
.607
16.9
890.
000
16.9
8916
.989
16.9
89SO
x14
00.1
4317
.650
0.30
90.
000
1400
.143
17.6
500.
309
0.00
00.
000
17.6
500.
309
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
378
17.6
500.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.31
117
.650
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
309
17.6
500.
000
1400
.143
0.00
00.
000
0.30
917
.650
0.00
014
00.1
430.
000
0.00
0C
H4
4.04
54.
045
80.9
054.
045
1.84
71.
847
36.9
381.
847
1.84
73.
813
76.2
653.
813
3.81
30.
000
0.03
31.
551
31.0
241.
551
1.55
10.
034
1.93
238
.637
1.93
21.
932
23.1
540.
844
0.00
00.
844
0.84
40.
844
328.
393
4.54
00.
000
4.54
04.
540
4.54
0N
2O2.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
02.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
0.00
00.
051
2.40
02.
400
2.40
02.
400
0.05
12.
897
2.89
72.
897
2.89
72.
000
2.00
00.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
0C
O2
82,0
9879
,819
59,2
8676
,760
82,4
3280
,152
59,6
4177
,093
81,4
4879
,854
59,3
2476
,795
81,1
500
1,71
580
,090
58,8
3877
,030
81,3
851,
410
80,1
2458
,823
77,0
6481
,419
59,7
5180
,413
082
,692
77,3
5381
,708
57,7
2179
,571
081
,850
76,5
1180
,866
Loco
mot
ive
Hea
vy-H
eavy
-Dut
y Tr
uck:
gra
ms
per M
MB
tuB
arge
Pipe
line
Rec
ipro
catin
g En
gine
Med
ium
-Hea
vy-D
uty
Truc
k: g
ram
s pe
r mm
Btu
Pipe
line
Turb
ine
Oce
an T
anke
r
0
32
2.3) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Destination to Origin • Lists the emission rates for different transportation modes fueled by different
fuels for trips from product destinations back to origins (back-haul trips). • Enter Residual Oil EFs for each transportation mode. • Press F9 to calculate values for the other applicable fuels based on the user-
entered values for residual oil and fuel specifications from the Fuel Specs tab. Figure 29: EF Section 2.3 located on next page.
33
Figure 29: EF Section 2.3
2.3)
Em
issi
on F
acto
rs o
f Fue
l Com
bust
ion
for F
eeds
tock
and
Fue
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion:
Trip
from
Pro
duct
Des
tinat
ion
Bac
k to
Pro
duct
Orig
in (g
ram
s pe
r mm
Btu
of f
uel b
urne
d)
Residual Oil
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Residual Oil
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
Diesel
Natural Gas
FTD
Biodiesel
ElectricityHHD Diesel Truck Emission Factors (g/mi.)
Diesel
LNG
FTD
BiodieselMHD Diesel Truck Emission Factors (g/mi.)
Diesel
LNG
FTD
Biodiesel
VOC
85.5
8585
.585
85.5
8585
.585
41.8
3041
.830
41.8
3041
.830
41.8
3077
.821
77.8
2177
.821
77.8
210.
000
0.67
826
.381
26.3
8126
.381
26.3
810.
694
39.4
2639
.426
39.4
2639
.426
CO
247.
488
247.
488
123.
744
247.
488
131.
695
131.
695
65.8
4813
1.69
513
1.69
520
7.00
410
3.50
220
7.00
420
7.00
40.
000
3.27
412
7.39
363
.696
127.
393
127.
393
2.02
511
5.03
957
.519
115.
039
115.
039
NO
x22
04.0
3822
04.0
3822
04.0
3822
04.0
3810
10.4
1410
10.4
1410
10.4
1410
10.4
1410
10.4
1421
01.1
6721
01.1
6721
01.1
6721
01.1
670.
000
13.7
2653
4.08
653
4.08
653
4.08
653
4.08
610
.046
570.
707
570.
707
570.
707
570.
707
PM10
54.8
3354
.833
0.54
854
.833
25.2
5725
.257
0.25
325
.257
25.2
5752
.140
0.52
152
.140
52.1
400.
000
0.23
79.
222
0.09
29.
222
9.22
20.
194
11.0
210.
110
11.0
2111
.021
SOx
1400
.143
17.6
500.
309
0.00
014
00.1
4317
.650
0.30
90.
000
0.00
017
.650
0.30
90.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.45
417
.650
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
311
17.6
500.
000
0.00
00.
000
CH
44.
194
4.19
483
.873
4.19
42.
050
2.05
040
.994
2.05
02.
050
3.81
376
.265
3.81
33.
813
0.00
00.
033
1.29
325
.854
1.29
31.
293
0.03
41.
932
38.6
371.
932
1.93
2N
2O2.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
0.00
00.
051
2.00
02.
000
2.00
02.
000
0.05
12.
897
2.89
72.
897
2.89
7C
O2
82,0
4579
,766
59,2
4776
,706
82,3
6980
,090
59,5
9277
,030
81,3
8579
,854
59,3
2476
,795
81,1
500
1,71
580
,147
58,8
8977
,087
81,4
421,
410
80,1
2458
,823
77,0
6481
,419
Oce
an T
anke
rB
arge
Loco
mot
ive
Hea
vy-H
eavy
-Dut
y Tr
uck:
gra
ms
per M
MB
tuM
ediu
m-H
eavy
-Dut
y Tr
uck:
gra
ms
per m
mB
tu
34
2.4) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Vessel Operation • Lists the emission rates for the simulation vessel identified on the Inputs sheet
fueled by the six alternative fuel types. Although this data is based on best available estimates, it may be beneficial for the user to alter these inputs to reflect the most recent available data pertaining to their vessel.
Figure 30: EF Section 2.4
2.4) Emission Factors of Fuel Combustion: Vessel Operation (grams per mmBtu of fuel burned)
Res
idua
l Oil
Die
sel
Nat
ural
Gas
FTD
Bio
dies
el
Ultr
a-lo
w S
ulfu
r D
iese
l
VOC 82.556 82.556 82.556 82.556 82.556 82.556CO 247.480 247.480 123.744 247.480 247.480 219.223NOx 2229.884 2229.884 2229.884 2229.884 2229.884 2229.884PM10 55.290 55.290 0.540 55.290 55.290 55.290SOx 259.280 17.600 0.309 0.001 0.001 0.001CH4 4.040 4.040 83.870 4.040 4.040 4.040N2O 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 4.000 2.000CO2 82,098 79,766 59,247 76,707 82,098 82,098
Simulation Vessel
35
Sheet 4: “Fuel_Specs” Overview This sheet contains specifications for individual fuels. Table 1 specifies the energy content, fuel density, carbon weight ratio, and sulfur weight ratio for each fuel. The parametric values for these fuel specifications are needed to estimate energy consumption and emissions, as well as to make conversions for mass, volume, and energy contents. Table 2 lists the GWPs for individual GHGs, which are used in TEAMS to convert emissions of GHGs into CO2-equivalent emissions. Table 3 lists carbon content in VOCs, CO, CO2, and CH4 and the sulfur content in sulfur dioxide (SO2). These conversion factors are used for carbon emission and SOx emission calculations throughout the TEAMS model. Section Breakdown
1) Specifications of Fuels • Lists the energy content (in Btu/gal or Btu/SCF or Btu/ton), density (in grams/gal
or grams/SCF), carbon weight ratio (in percent by weight), and sulfur weight ratio (in parts per million by weight and in the actual ratio by weight). The sulfur weight ratio of key fuel types (crude oil, conventional diesel, low-sulfur diesel, and residual oil) is entered by the user on the Inputs sheet. This sheet takes the sulfur weight ratio in parts per million and converts to actual ratio by weight. It is the value in the actual ratio by weight column that is used to calculate results during a TEAMS simulation.
• All values on this sheet may be directly altered but it is highly recommended that users do not alter these values. Default values are based on best available data. In the case that the user does make changes, press F9 to simulate using the updated values.
Figure 31: Fuel Specs Section 1
1) Specifications of Fuels
Fuel Energy Content Density C ratio S ratio S ratioLiquid Fuels: Btu/gal grams/gal (% by wt) (ppm by wt) Actual ratio by wtCrude oil 130,000 3,200 85.0% 16,000 0.016000Conventional diesel 128,500 3,240 87.0% 350 0.000350Low-sulfur diesel 128,000 3,240 87.0% 15 0.000015Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) 84,000 2,000 82.0% 0 0.000000Residual oil 140,000 3,630 87.0% 27,000 0.027000Liquefied natural gas (LNG) 72,900 1,589 74.0% 0 0.000000Methyl ester (biodiesel, BD) 117,090 3,346 78.0% 0 0.000000Fischer-Tropsch diesel (FTD) 118,800 2,915 86.0% 0 0.000000
Gaseous Fuels: Btu/SCF gms/SCFNatural gas 928 20.5 74.0% 7 0.000007
Solid Fuels: Btu/tonCoal 18,495,000 60.0% 11,100 0.011100
36
2) Global Warming Potentials of Greenhouse Gasses: relative to CO2
• Lists the global warming potentials (GWPs) for individual GHGs.4 These values are used directly within the Results sheet to convert emissions of GHGs into CO2-equivalent emissions.
• All values on this sheet may be directly altered but it is highly recommended that users do not alter these values. Default values are based on best available data. In the case that the user does make changes, press F9 to simulate using the updated values.
Figure 32: Fuel Specs Section 2
2) Global Warming Potentials of Greenhouse Gases: relative to CO2
CO2 1CH4 21N2O 310VOC 0
CO 0NO2 0
3) Carbon and Sulfur Ratios of Pollutants • Lists the carbon content in VOCs, CO, CO2, and CH4 and the sulfur content in
SO2. These conversion factors are used for carbon emission and SOx emission calculations on the EF sheet, which are then used throughout the TEAMS model.
• All values on this sheet may be directly altered but it is highly recommended that users do not alter these values. Default values are based on best available data. In the case that the user does make changes, press F9 to simulate using the updated values.
Figure 33: Fuel Specs Section 3
3) Carbon and Sulfur Ratios of Pollutants
4
IC
Carbon ratio of VOC 0.85Carbon ratio of CO 0.43
Carbon ratio of CH4 0.75Carbon ratio of CO2 0.27
Sulfur ratio of SO2 0.50
Global warming potentials are based on default values for a 100 year timeframe from the ntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC’s) Climate Change 1994, Radiative Forcing of limate Change (1995) and Climate Change 1995, The Science of Climate Change (1996).
37
Sheet 5: “T&D” Overview This sheet is for calculations of energy use and emissions for transportation and distribution (T&D) of energy feedstocks and fuels. The results of this sheet – energy use (in Btu) and emissions (in grams per million Btu or g/mmBtu) of energy feedstocks and fuels transported and distributed – are used in other sheets for calculations associated with particular fuels. Section Breakdown
1) Cargo Payload by Transportation Mode and by Product Fuel Type: Tons • Enter the cargo payload for each transportation mode and fuel type. These values
are used to determine: a) ocean tanker and barge horsepower requirements, b) energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile during origin to destination trips for feedstock and fuel transportation, and c) energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile during back-haul trips for feedstock and fuel transportation.
• Placeholder values are based on industry averages. For example, on average, an ocean tanker carrying a shipment of crude oil will have a cargo payload of 140,000 tons.
Figure 34: T&D Section 1
1) Cargo Payload By Transportation Mode and by Product Fuel Type: Tons
Fuel Transported Crude Oil Diesel Residual Oil LNG FT Diesel Biodiesel SoybeanAgri. Chemicals Coal Uranium
Ocean Tanker 140,000 120,000 100,000 58,333 150,000Barge 22,500 22,500 22,500 15,000 20,000 22,500 20,000 22,500 30,000 30,000Medium-Heavy-Duty Truck 23Heavy-Heavy-Duty Truck 25 25 25 15 25 25 15 8 25 25
2) Horsepower Requirements for Ocean Tanker and Barges: Calculated with Cargo Capacity: HP
• Calculates the horsepower requirements for ocean tankers and barges based on the cargo payload value entered in Section 1. These values will be used to determine: a) energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile during origin to destination trips for feedstock and fuel transportation; and, b) energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile during back-haul trips for feedstock and fuel transportation.
Figure 35: T&D Section 2
2) Horsepower Requirements for Ocean Tanker and Barges: Calculated with Cargo Capacity: HP
Crude Oil Diesel Residual Oil LNG FT Diesel Biodiesel SoybeanAgri. Chemicals Coal Uranium
Ocean Tanker 23,210 21,190 19,170 14,962 24,220Barge 5,600 5,600 5,600 3,733 4,978 5,600 4,978 5,600 7,467 7,467
38
3) Fuel Economy and Resultant Energy Consumption of Heavy-Duty Trucks • Enter the fuel economy in miles per diesel gallon for heavy-heavy duty trucks and
for medium heavy-duty trucks. • Enter values for both product origin to destination and for product destination
back to origin. • Press F9 to calculate the energy consumption in Btu per mile of heavy-heavy duty
trucks and medium-heavy duty trucks. • These values will be used along with fuel specification data to determine EFs of
heavy-heavy duty and medium-heavy duty trucks on the EF sheet. Figure 36: T&D Section 3
3) Fuel Economy and Resultant Energy Consumption of Heavy-Duty Trucks
Heavy-Heavy-Duty Truck
Medium-Heavy-Duty Truck
Heavy-Heavy-Duty Truck
Medium-Heavy-Duty Truck
Trip from Product Origin to Destination 6 7.3 21,417 17,603 Trip from Product Destination Back to Origin 5 7.3 25,700 17,603
Fuel Economy: miles/diesel gallon
Energy Consumption: Btu/mile
4) Calculation of Energy Consumption for Ocean Tanker and Barge • Enter the overall average speed in miles per hour of ocean tankers and barges, not
considering cargo payload, fuel type, or other factors. • Enter the load factor (% of installed HP) used for the trip. Enter the load factor for
ocean tankers and barges for origin to destination trips. Enter the load factor for ocean tankers and barges for destination back to origin.
• Press F9 to calculate energy consumption in Btu per HP-hr for ocean tankers and barges during origin to destination and destination to origin trips.
Figure 37: T&D Section 4
4) Calculation of Energy Consumption for Ocean Tanker and Barge
Ocean Tanker BargeAverage Speed (Miles/Hour) 19 5Trip from Product Origin to Destination:Load Factor 80% 80%Energy Consumption: Btu/hphr 4,763 10,432Trip from Product Destination Back to OriginLoad Factor 70% 60%Energy Consumption: Btu/hphr 4,836 10,603
39
5) Energy Intensity of Rail Transportation: Btu/ton-mile • Enter the energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile for rail transportation during origin
to destination and destination to origin trips. • These values are transferred directly to the “energy intensity” row of Section 9 of
this sheet. They are then multiplied by the distances (in miles) entered on the Inputs sheet to calculate energy consumption and total emissions from fuel transportation.
Figure 38: T&D Section 5
5) Energy Intensity of Rail Transportation: Btu/ton-mile
Trip from Product Origin to Destination 370Trip from Product Destination Back to Origin 370
6) Share of Power Generation Technologies for Pipeline Compression Stations • Emission factors differ depending on whether specific pipelines use turbine or
engine technologies for compression. Energy and emissions of pipeline transportation are calculated by factoring the percent share of these technologies.
• Enter the percentage of pipelines utilizing turbine technologies, then press F9 to have TEAMS determine the remaining percentage utilizing NG engine technology.
Figure 39: T&D Section 5
6) Share of Power Generation Technologies for Pipeline Compression Stations
Turbine NG EngineCrude Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%Residual Oil Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%Diesel Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%Biodiesel Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%NG Pipelines 55.0% 45.0%
40
7) Energy Intensity of Pipeline Transportation: Btu/ton mile • Enter the energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile for pipeline transportation during
origin to destination trips. • These values are transferred directly to the “energy intensity” row of Section 9 of
this sheet. They are then multiplied by the distances (in miles) entered on the Inputs sheet, and the technology shares entered in Section 6 of this sheet, to calculate energy consumption and total emissions from fuel transportation.
Figure 40: T&D Section 7
7) Energy Intensity of Pipeline Transportation: Btu/ton-mile
Crude Pipelines 240Residual Oil Pipelines 240Diesel Pipelines 240Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Pipelines 240Biodiesel Pipelines 240NG Pipelines 336
8) Energy Intensity Ratios of Different Process Fuels Used in a Given Transportation Mode: Relative to Baseline Fuel for the Given Mode
• For each transportation mode, enter the intensity ratio for each alternative process fuel. In this case, energy intensity is measured in Btu/ton-mile. For example, an ocean tanker being used to transport fuels may run on residual oil, natural gas, Fischer-Tropsch diesel, or conventional diesel. Relative to residual oil, enter the energy intensity ratios for each of the other three alternatives. Note that this section is independent from the overall simulation in which an ocean tanker may be simulated to run on any alternative (such as biodiesel or low-sulfur diesel).
• These values should be close to, if not always “1.0”. Figure 41: T&D Section 8
8) Energy Intensity Ratios of Different Process Fuels Used in a Given Transportation Mode: Relative to Baseline Fuel for the Given Mode
Res
idua
l Oil
Nat
ural
Gas
fo
r LN
G
FTD
Bio
dies
el
Elec
tric
ity
Die
sel
Ocean Tanker: Residual Oil as Baseline Fuel 1.0 1.0 1.0Barge: Residual Oil as Baseline Fuel 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Locomotive: Diesel as Baseline Fuel 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Truck: Diesel as Baseline Fuel 1.0 1.0 1.0Pipeline: NG as Baseline Fuel 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
41
9) Energy Consumption and Emissions of Feedstock and Fuel Transportation • In the subsection entitled “Share of Fuel Type Used” (rows 78 through 84), enter
the shares of fuel types used for each transportation mode transporting each feedstock and fuel type. For example, an ocean tanker transporting crude oil may run on either diesel or residual oil. Enter the share of diesel in cell C79 and TEAMS will calculate the related share of residual oil in cell C80. Note that this section pertains only to the fuel transportation vessels, and not to the simulation vessel (which may run on more diverse alternative fuel options.)
• Press F9 to calculate values in the remaining cells of this section. • Based on inputs entered and calculations conducted in Sections 1 through 8 of this
sheet, along with values entered on the inputs and T&D sheet, Section 9 will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The one-way distance in miles for each transportation mode and fuel type for feedstock and fuel transportation;
o The share of fuel type used for each transportation mode and fuel type transported;
o The energy intensity in Btu per ton-mile for both the origin to destination and the destination to origin (back-haul) trips;
o The energy consumption in Btu per mmBtu of fuel transported displayed in total energy, fossil energy, and petroleum energy consumed; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel transported for the following emission types: VOC, CO, NOx, PM10, SOx, CH4, N2O, and CO2.
Figure 42: T&D Section 9 located on the next page.
42
9) E
nerg
y C
onsu
mpt
ion
and
Emis
sion
s of
Fee
dsto
ck a
nd F
uel T
rans
port
atio
n
Feed
stoc
k/Fu
el
NG
to
Ref
uelin
g St
atio
ns v
ia
Pipe
line
Tran
spor
tatio
n M
ode
Oce
an T
anke
rB
arge
Pipe
line
Rai
lTr
uck
Oce
an T
anke
rB
arge
Pipe
line
Rai
lTr
uck
Oce
an
Tank
erB
arge
Pipe
line
Rai
lTr
uck
Oce
an
Tank
erB
arge
Pipe
line
Rai
lTr
uck
Oce
an
Tank
erB
arge
Rai
lTr
uck
Oce
an
Tank
erB
arge
Pipe
line
Rai
lTr
uck
Dis
tanc
e (M
iles,
one
-way
)5,
080
500
750
800
01,
450
520
400
800
301,
450
520
400
800
303,
000
340
400
800
3075
00
520
800
300
520
400
800
30Sh
are
of F
uel T
ype
Use
d:D
iese
l0%
0%20
%10
0%10
0%0%
0%20
%10
0%10
0%0%
0%20
%10
0%10
0%0%
0%20
%10
0%10
0%0%
0%0%
80%
100%
0%0%
20%
50%
50%
Res
idua
l Oil
100%
100%
50%
100%
100%
50%
100%
100%
50%
100%
100%
50%
0%10
0%50
%10
0%10
0%50
%N
atur
al G
as24
%24
%24
%24
%94
%0%
50%
20%
0%24
%FT
D50
%50
%Bi
odie
sel
Ele
ctric
it y6%
0%6%
0%6%
0%6%
0%6%
0%6%
Ener
gy In
tens
ity: B
tu/to
n-m
ileO
rigin
to D
estin
atio
n34
415
240
370
857
3641
524
037
085
736
415
240
370
857
3941
524
037
085
733
653
415
370
1,42
833
415
240
370
857
Back
-Hau
l30
317
1,02
832
317
1,02
832
317
1,02
835
317
1,02
831
731
71,
713
3031
71,
028
Ener
gy C
onsu
mpt
ion:
Btu
/mm
Btu
of fu
el tr
ansp
orte
dTo
tal E
nerg
y9,
795
10,9
585,
895
9,70
80
3,05
011
,673
3,22
19,
944
1,90
03,
062
11,7
193,
233
9,98
31,
907
7,04
67,
849
3,31
210
,226
1,95
37,
070
010
,479
8,56
72,
737
011
,360
3,13
411
,577
2,21
1Fo
ssil
Ene
rgy
9,77
410
,934
5,78
79,
678
03,
044
11,6
483,
162
9,91
31,
894
3,05
611
,694
3,17
49,
952
1,90
17,
031
7,83
23,
251
10,1
941,
947
6,94
40
10,4
638,
544
2,72
80
11,3
363,
077
11,5
602,
208
Petro
leum
9,28
110
,382
3,64
18,
804
02,
890
11,0
601,
989
9,01
81,
723
2,90
111
,103
1,99
79,
053
1,72
96,
676
7,43
72,
046
9,27
41,
771
220
4,78
16,
237
2,48
20
10,7
631,
936
15,5
4483
8To
tal E
mis
sion
s: g
ram
s/m
mBt
u fu
el tr
ansp
orte
dVO
C0.
783
0.87
40.
195
0.69
20.
000
0.24
40.
932
0.10
70.
708
0.05
80.
245
0.93
50.
107
0.71
10.
059
0.56
30.
626
0.11
00.
729
0.06
00.
601
0.00
00.
385
0.60
20.
084
0.00
00.
450
0.00
00.
678
0.05
5C
O2.
160
2.40
60.
932
1.76
90.
000
0.67
32.
563
0.50
91.
812
0.23
90.
675
2.57
30.
511
1.81
90.
240
1.55
41.
723
0.52
41.
863
0.24
61.
008
0.00
00.
873
1.41
40.
345
0.00
01.
281
0.00
01.
855
0.25
0N
Ox
20.0
7722
.470
3.98
317
.270
0.00
06.
252
23.9
372.
176
17.6
900.
995
6.27
724
.031
2.18
517
.760
0.99
914
.441
16.0
952.
238
18.1
921.
023
2.89
10.
000
9.63
515
.268
1.43
40.
000
10.9
090.
002
17.1
530.
956
PM
100.
584
0.65
30.
054
0.51
40.
000
0.18
20.
696
0.03
00.
527
0.03
50.
182
0.69
80.
030
0.52
90.
035
0.42
00.
468
0.03
10.
542
0.03
50.
037
0.00
00.
171
0.36
60.
050
0.00
00.
370
0.00
00.
467
0.02
5SO
x12
.690
14.1
961.
744
0.48
50.
000
3.95
215
.123
0.95
20.
497
0.09
53.
967
15.1
820.
956
0.49
90.
095
9.12
710
.168
0.97
90.
511
0.09
80.
192
0.00
06.
586
0.35
90.
137
0.00
014
.717
0.00
40.
277
0.05
3C
H4
0.87
50.
978
0.42
50.
838
0.00
00.
272
1.04
20.
232
0.85
80.
160
0.27
31.
046
0.23
30.
862
0.16
10.
629
0.70
10.
239
0.88
30.
165
1.18
70.
000
1.42
00.
951
0.23
10.
000
0.99
20.
001
0.87
70.
164
N2O
0.01
90.
021
0.00
30.
018
0.00
00.
006
0.02
30.
001
0.01
90.
004
0.00
60.
023
0.00
10.
019
0.00
40.
014
0.01
50.
001
0.01
90.
004
0.00
60.
000
0.01
50.
016
0.00
60.
000
0.02
20.
000
0.01
70.
004
CO
280
3.69
989
9.10
920
4.57
077
0.69
00.
000
250.
286
957.
814
111.
758
789.
432
151.
210
251.
263
961.
555
112.
195
792.
516
151.
801
578.
094
644.
011
114.
925
811.
805
155.
496
199.
635
0.00
074
6.35
864
8.43
421
7.86
40.
000
935.
488
0.82
778
7.34
515
0.80
1
FT D
iese
lC
rude
Oil
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lR
esid
ual O
ilLN
G
Figure 42: T&D Section 9
(This section has been divided into two screenshots for easier user viewing.)
Bar
geR
ail
Truc
kTr
uck
Truc
kB
arge
Rai
lTr
uck
Bar
geP
ipel
ine
Rai
lTr
uck
Bar
geR
ail
Truc
kR
ail
Truc
kR
ail
Truc
k40
075
050
3010
350
400
4052
040
080
030
330
440
5010
020
100
200
0%10
0%10
0%10
0%10
0%0%
100%
100%
0%20
%10
0%70
%0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
50%
100%
24%
0%0%
0%0%
0%30
%0%
0%6%
0%0%
0%0%
415
370
931
2,20
01,
174
415
370
1,42
841
524
037
085
741
537
085
737
085
737
085
793
12,
200
1,17
431
71,
713
317
1,02
8P
er T
onP
er T
on18
3,49
833
5,73
411
2,65
715
9,72
528
,396
282,
948
179,
058
152,
011
13,2
303,
650
11,2
713,
470
151,
386
196,
964
51,8
2244
,765
20,7
2944
,765
207,
288
183,
104
334,
689
112,
306
159,
228
28,3
0728
2,34
017
8,50
115
1,53
813
,202
3,58
311
,235
3,28
615
1,06
119
6,35
151
,661
44,6
2520
,664
44,6
2520
6,64
317
3,85
830
4,46
010
2,16
314
4,84
725
,751
268,
083
162,
379
137,
851
12,5
352,
884
10,2
211,
367
143,
433
178,
617
46,9
9540
,595
18,7
9840
,595
187,
979
6.97
123
.919
3.48
26.
310
1.12
211
.207
12.7
574.
668
0.52
40.
000
0.80
30.
068
5.75
114
.032
1.71
53.
189
0.68
63.
189
6.85
818
.447
61.1
6314
.297
16.9
573.
015
31.9
1632
.621
19.1
461.
492
0.00
02.
053
0.30
415
.219
35.8
837.
122
8.15
52.
849
8.15
528
.489
176.
757
597.
246
59.4
6182
.087
14.5
9327
1.70
631
8.53
179
.622
12.7
040.
002
20.0
491.
188
145.
825
350.
384
29.6
4079
.633
11.8
5679
.633
118.
558
5.97
617
.778
2.05
53.
029
0.53
99.
216
9.48
22.
762
0.43
10.
000
0.59
70.
038
4.93
010
.430
0.98
52.
370
0.39
42.
370
3.93
923
7.71
616
.770
5.62
77.
978
1.41
836
6.55
08.
944
7.59
317
.139
0.00
50.
563
0.10
019
6.11
69.
838
2.58
82.
236
1.03
52.
236
10.3
5416
.008
28.9
789.
501
13.5
382.
407
24.7
0715
.455
12.8
191.
155
0.00
10.
973
0.16
013
.207
17.0
004.
376
3.86
41.
750
3.86
417
.504
0.35
60.
627
0.22
90.
417
0.07
40.
549
0.33
50.
307
0.02
60.
000
0.02
10.
006
0.29
40.
368
0.11
40.
084
0.04
60.
084
0.45
615
115.
473
2665
2.02
289
67.7
2512
715.
253
2260
.489
2330
0.56
914
214.
412
1210
0.77
610
89.4
870.
963
894.
704
178.
497
1247
0.26
515
635.
853
4123
.928
3553
.603
1649
.571
3553
.603
1649
5.71
4
Ura
nium
Soy
bean
sB
iodi
esel
Coa
lA
gric
ultu
ral C
hem
ical
s
43
10) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Fuel • Enter the percentage of fuel transported by a given mode. For example, during all
crude oil transportation, 40 percent of the fuel may be transported by ocean tanker, 40 percent by pipeline, and the remaining 20 percent by barge. These are averages and users may want to model cases particular to their situation.
• In each case, the total percentage of all modes may exceed 100% for some feedstocks or fuels because more than one transportation legs may be involved for transporting the feedstocks or fuels.
• Press F9 to calculate total energy and emissions for each fuel type transported. TEAMS will multiple the user-entered percentages by the energy and emissions calculated in Section 9 for all transportation modes to determine total energy and emissions for each fuel type based on mode usage.
Figure 43: T&D Section 10 located on next page.
44
Figure 43: T&D Section 10
10) S
umm
ary
of E
nerg
y C
onsu
mpt
ion
and
Emis
sion
s fo
r Eac
h Fu
el
Cru
de O
ilR
esid
ual O
ilN
atur
al G
asC
oal
Stag
e
Crude Transportation
Diesel Transportation
Diesel Distribution
Diesel Transportation
Diesel Distribution
Residual Oil Transportation
Natural Gas Transportation
LNG Transportation
LNG Distribution
LNG Transportation
LNG Distribution
FT Diesel Transportation
FT Diesel Distribution
Plant to bulk center
Bulk Center to Mixer
Mixer to Farm
Farm to Collection Stack
Stack to Biodiesel Plant
Biodiesel Transportation
Biodiesel Distribution
Mines to power plants
Uranium Ore transportation
Enriched uranium transportation
Perc
enta
ge o
f Fue
l Tra
nspo
rted
by a
Giv
en M
ode
O
cean
Tan
ker
57.0
%16
.0%
16.0
%24
.0%
100.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Bar
ge1.
0%6.
0%6.
0%40
.0%
0.0%
50.0
%33
.0%
50.0
%0.
0%8.
0%10
.0%
0.0%
P
ipel
ine
100.
0%75
.0%
75.0
%60
.0%
100.
0%60
.0%
63.0
%
Rai
l0.
0%7.
0%7.
0%5.
0%0.
0%50
.0%
7.0%
50.0
%0.
0%29
.0%
90.0
%10
0.0%
0.0%
T
ruck
0.0%
100.
0%10
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.
0%10
0.0%
0.0%
100.
0%10
0.0%
100.
0%10
0.0%
100.
0%0.
0%20
.0%
100.
0%En
ergy
Con
sum
ptio
n: B
tu/m
mB
tu o
f fue
l tra
nspo
rted
Btu
per
ton
Btu
per
ton
Btu
per
ton
T
otal
Ene
rgy
11,5
884,
300
1,90
04,
317
1,90
77,
329
7,07
00
09,
523
2,73
76,
440
2,21
139
311
2,65
715
9,72
528
,396
152,
011
6,62
63,
470
192,
406
48,9
1020
7,28
8
F
ossi
l Ene
rgy
11,4
684,
251
1,89
44,
268
1,90
17,
281
6,94
40
09,
504
2,72
86,
396
2,20
825
8,89
711
2,30
615
9,22
828
,307
151,
538
6,57
23,
286
191,
822
48,7
5820
6,64
3
Pet
role
um9,
035
3,24
91,
723
3,26
21,
729
6,26
822
00
5,50
92,
482
5,80
183
823
9,15
910
2,16
314
4,84
725
,751
137,
851
5,78
41,
367
175,
098
44,3
5418
7,97
9To
tal E
mis
sion
s: g
ram
s/m
mB
tu o
f fue
l tra
nspo
rted
VO
C0.
650
0.22
40.
058
0.22
50.
059
0.48
80.
601
0.00
00.
000
0.49
40.
084
0.19
60.
055
15.4
453.
482
6.31
01.
122
4.66
80.
275
0.06
813
.204
3.32
66.
858
CO
2.18
80.
770
0.23
90.
773
0.24
01.
470
1.00
80.
000
0.00
01.
143
0.34
50.
553
0.25
039
.805
14.2
9716
.957
3.01
519
.146
0.71
50.
304
33.8
168.
725
28.4
89
N
Ox
15.6
525.
307
0.99
55.
328
0.99
912
.156
2.89
10.
000
0.00
012
.452
1.43
44.
802
0.95
638
7.00
159
.461
82.0
8714
.593
79.6
226.
832
1.18
832
9.92
882
.004
118.
558
PM
109.
119
0.13
00.
035
0.13
10.
035
0.33
30.
037
0.00
00.
000
0.26
90.
050
0.15
50.
025
11.8
772.
055
3.02
90.
539
2.76
20.
208
0.03
89.
880
2.44
93.
939
SO
x9.
119
2.28
90.
095
2.29
80.
095
6.87
10.
192
0.00
00.
000
3.47
20.
137
4.87
80.
053
127.
243
5.62
77.
978
1.41
87.
593
1.53
70.
100
28.4
662.
443
10.3
54
C
H4
0.93
40.
340
0.16
00.
342
0.16
10.
619
1.18
70.
000
0.00
01.
186
0.23
10.
389
0.16
422
.493
9.50
113
.538
2.40
712
.819
0.37
50.
160
16.6
214.
214
17.5
04
N
2O0.
014
0.00
50.
004
0.00
50.
004
0.01
10.
006
0.00
00.
000
0.01
60.
006
0.00
80.
004
0.49
20.
229
0.41
70.
074
0.30
70.
008
0.00
60.
361
0.09
30.
456
CO
267
223
715
123
815
250
620
00
069
721
836
415
120
883.
748
8967
.725
1271
5.25
322
6012
101
347
178
1531
938
83.5
1649
6
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lLN
G (f
or m
ovin
g N
NA
NG
fe
edst
ock
to N
A lo
catio
ns)
LNG
(as
a tr
ansp
orta
tion
fuel
)FT
Die
sel
Soyb
eans
Bio
dies
elU
rani
umAg
ricul
raul
Che
mic
als
45
11) Energy Consumption and Emissions from Transportation Related Fuel Production
• TEAMS uses data from Section 9 of this sheet to calculate energy consumption and emissions from the process of producing the fuel used to transport feedstock and vessel fuel. Those data are summarized in this section for easier comparison. (The data from this section are then re-input into Section 9 and are ultimately used to determine the final energy and emissions presented in Section 10.)
Figure 44: T&D Section 11
11) Energy Consumption and Emissions from Transportation Related Fuel Production
Diesel Residual Oil Natural Gas LNG FTD Biodiesel Electricity
Energy Consumption (Btu per Btu or Grams Per mmBtu) Total Energy 0.210 0.103 0.056 0.187 0.683 0.415 2.676 Fossil Energy 0.206 0.101 0.056 0.186 0.683 0.404 2.341 Petroleum 0.097 0.045 0.004 0.011 0.011 0.087 0.060 VOC 8.346 4.157 0.338 1.033 5.425 11.190 17.399 CO 13.333 10.355 6.395 9.363 36.355 74.175 36.197 NOx 50.400 43.074 12.013 31.736 34.038 162.940 444.130 PM 11.843 10.582 0.323 1.080 0.457 8.898 38.552 SOx 42.350 28.749 3.927 9.170 7.039 45.529 1093.248 CH4 100.583 94.376 110.567 175.290 111.017 59.304 296.607 N2O 0.260 0.141 0.067 0.259 0.077 4.107 2.912 CO2 16161.406 8425.578 4479.855 12643.340 23909.279 28187.769 231478.817
46
Sheet 6: “Petroleum” Overview This sheet is used to calculate the WTH (well-to-hull) energy use and emissions of petroleum-based fuels. Three petroleum-based fuels are included in TEAMS: conventional diesel, residual oil, and low-sulfur diesel. Section Breakdown
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies during petroleum-based fuel
recovery and refining. Each subsection should equal 100 percent. • These values are used in Section 2 of this sheet to determine total emissions of
petroleum-based fuel throughput. Figure 45: Petroleum Section 1
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each StageC
rude
R
ecov
ery
Res
i. O
il R
efin
ing
Die
sel F
uel
Ref
inin
g
Residual oil industrial or commercial boiler 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%Diesel commercial boiler 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Diesel stationary engine 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Diesel turbine 34.0% 34.0% 34.0%NG engine 25.0%NG large turbine 25.0% 25.0% 25.0%NG large industrial boiler 25.0% 60.0% 60.0%NG small industrial boiler 25.0% 15.0% 15.0%Coal industrial boiler 100.0% 100.0%
47
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Petroleum Fuels by Stage • Certain values in this section may be altered (green input cells), but it is
recommended that only advanced users alter these values. • The shares of process fuels are estimated on the basis of historical statistical data
on fuel use by fuel type. This data relies primarily on results from Delucchi (1997).
• Based on the technologies established in Section 1 of this sheet, information from the Inputs sheet, and information from the T&D sheet, this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The energy efficiency of recovering and refining crude oil into residual oil, conventional diesel, and/or low-sulfur diesel;
o The loss factor during recovery and refining of petroleum fuels. The loss factor calculates the fuel loss in each stage due to evaporation or leakage. The loss factor is determined by the following formula:
⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡×⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛
−+ B
A 111
where, A is the efficiency of recovery or refining, and B is the feed loss. Feed loss is the percentage of process fuels “unaccounted for”. In this case the feed loss is 0.1% and is typically very low;
o The shares of process fuels. This is the share of each fuel type used during the recovery or refining processes. These values are based on industry averages;
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of fuel throughput for each process and each process fuel. These values are directly dependent on share or process fuels percentages;
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy for each process. This includes a sum of all process fuel types; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel throughput. This is determined by the technology percentages entered in Section 1 of this sheet, and the energy use per process fuel.
Figure 46: Petroleum Section 2 is located on the next page.
48
Figure 46: Petroleum Section 2
2) C
alcu
latio
ns o
f Ene
rgy
Con
sum
ptio
n an
d Em
issi
ons
for P
etro
leum
Fue
ls B
y St
age
Recovery
Transportation to U.S. Refineries
Storage
Residual Oil Refining
Resi. Oil Refining: Non-Combustion Emissions
Resi. Oil Transportation and Distribution
Resi. Oil Storage
Conv. Diesel Refining
Conv. Diesel Refining: Non-Combustion Emissions
Conv. Diesel Transportation and Distribution
Conv. Diesel Storage
LS Diesel Refining
LS Diesel Refining: Non-Combustion Emissions
LS Diesel Transportation Distribution
LS Diesel Storage
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
97.7
%95
.5%
87.5
%87
.5%
Loss
fact
or1.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0Sh
ares
of p
roce
ss fu
els
C
rude
oil
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
R
esid
ual o
il1.
0%3.
0%3.
0%3.
0%
Die
sel f
uel
17.0
%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Nat
ural
gas
61.9
%30
.0%
30.0
%30
.0%
C
oal
0.0%
13.0
%13
.0%
13.0
%
Ele
ctric
ity19
.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
R
efin
ery
still
gas
0.0%
50.0
%50
.0%
50.0
%
Fee
d lo
ss0.
1%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Ener
gy u
se: B
tu/m
mB
tu o
f fue
l thr
ough
put
C
rude
oil
235
00
0
Res
idua
l oil
235
1,41
44,
286
4,28
6
Die
sel f
uel
4,00
20
00
N
atur
al g
as14
,578
14,1
3642
,857
42,8
57
Coa
l0
6,12
618
,571
18,5
71
Ele
ctric
ity4,
467
1,88
55,
714
5,71
4
Fee
d lo
ss29
620
00
00
138
00
138
0
Ref
iner
y st
ill g
as23
,560
71,4
2971
,429
N
atur
al g
as fl
ared
16,8
00
Tot
al e
nerg
y32
,791
11,6
500
52,4
597,
329
015
9,04
46,
338
015
9,04
46,
362
0
Fos
sil f
uels
31,2
7211
,530
051
,776
7,28
10
156,
972
6,28
30
156,
972
6,30
70
P
etro
leum
5,22
79,
097
025
,631
6,26
80
77,7
075,
110
077
,707
5,12
90
Tota
l em
issi
ons:
gra
ms/
mm
Btu
of f
uel t
hrou
ghpu
t
VO
C0.
380.
650.
190.
310.
490.
580.
760.
280.
580.
900.
28
CO
5.34
2.19
1.51
0.11
1.47
4.59
0.27
1.01
4.59
0.32
1.01
N
Ox
11.8
515
.65
4.63
1.32
12.1
614
.02
3.23
6.30
14.0
23.
826.
33
PM
100.
469.
120.
360.
440.
331.
091.
080.
161.
091.
280.
17
SO
x5.
469.
126.
892.
016.
8720
.89
4.92
2.38
20.8
95.
812.
39
CH
4: c
ombu
stio
n5.
560.
933.
070.
629.
300.
509.
300.
50
N2O
0.06
0.01
0.06
0.01
0.18
0.01
0.18
0.01
C
O2
3395
.60
671.
6735
60.7
736
4.00
505.
8910
795.
3488
9.00
387.
8010
795.
3410
51.0
038
9.32
V
OC
loss
: eva
pora
tion
0.70
1.53
V
OC
loss
: spi
llage
3.49
3.50
C
H4:
non
-com
bust
ion
14.7
769
.54
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
rude
Oil
49
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
• Provides a summary of total energy consumed and total emissions emitted from petroleum-based fuel sources. This includes energy consumed and emissions emitted during crude oil recovery, and the refining processes of residual oil, conventional diesel, and low sulfur diesel. Furthermore, this includes energy consumed and emissions emitted during relevant transportation, distribution, and storage.
• These data are carried to the Results tab for final summarization. Figure 47: Petroleum Section 3
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
FeedstockCrude Oil Resi. Oil Diesel LS Diesel
Loss factor 1.000 1.000 1.000Total energy 44,444 59,788 165,403 165,428Fossil fuels 42,804 59,057 163,277 163,301Petroleum 14,324 31,899 82,828 82,847VOC 3.267 0.989 5.104 5.258CO 7.533 3.094 5.871 5.924NOx 27.508 18.103 23.559 24.171PM10 9.580 1.137 2.343 2.541SOx 14.583 15.773 28.196 29.100CH4 90.801 3.685 9.799 9.801N2O 0.073 0.070 0.188 0.188CO2 4,089 4,439 12,099 12,263
Energy Use and Total Emissions
Fuels
50
Sheet 7: “NG” Overview This sheet presents calculations of energy use and emissions for NG-based fuels: CNG, LNG, and FTD. TEAMS can simulate production of these fuels from NA and NNA gas and from NNA flared gas (FG). For production of CNG in North America, TEAMS assumes that NNA NG and NNA FG are converted into LNG for transportation to North America where CNG is produced. Section Breakdown
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters • In Inputs Section 2.2, you may enter (1) the percentage of NG or FG used for
LNG production; and (2) the percentage of NG or FG used for FTD production. Those inputs are copied here but cannot be altered directly on this sheet. (See Inputs Section 2.2.)
Figure 48: NG Section 1
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters (from the Inputs sheet)
LNG Production Natural Gas Flared Gas100.0% 0.0%
FT Diesel Production Natural Gas Flared Gas100.0% 0.0%
51
2) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies during natural gas recovery,
processing, compression, liquefaction, and production stages. Each section should total 100 percent.
• These values will be used in Section 3 of this sheet to determine total emissions of natural gas-based fuel throughput during various stages.
Figure 49: NG Section 2
2) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage
NG
Rec
over
y
NG
Pro
cess
ing
NG
C
ompr
essi
on
NG
Liq
uefa
ctio
n
FT D
iese
l Pr
oduc
tion
Elec
tric
ity C
o-G
ener
atio
n in
C
hem
ical
Pla
nts
Resi. oil industrial or commercial boiler 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%Diesel comm. Boiler 33.0% 33.0% 33.0% 33.0%Diesel stationary engine 33.0% 33.0% 50.0% 33.0% 33.0%Diesel turbine 34.0% 34.0% 50.0% 34.0% 34.0%NG engine 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%NG large turbine 50.0% 50.0% 100.0% 0.0%NG industrial boiler 0.0% 50.0% 100.0%NG small industrial boiler 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%NG CC Turbine 100%Coal Gasification/turbine 100%
52
3) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage • Enter the energy efficiency of natural gas recovery, compression, liquefaction,
and various stages of natural gas to FTD conversion. • The shares of process fuels are estimated on the basis of historical statistical data
on fuel use by fuel type. This data relies primarily on results from Delucchi (1997).
• Certain additional values in this section may be altered (such as CH4 Leakage), but it is recommended that only advanced users alter these values.
• Based on the technologies established in Section 2 of this sheet, information from the Inputs sheet, and information from the T&D sheet, this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The loss factor during various stages of natural gas processing. The loss factor ultimately calculates the fuel loss in each stage due to evaporation or leakage. The loss factor is determined by the following formula:
⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡×⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛
−+ B
A 111
where, A is the efficiency of the process, and B is the feed loss. Feed loss is the percentage of process fuels “unaccounted for”. Feed loss for natural gas (or other gaseous fuels) is typically considerably higher than that of petroleum (or other liquid fuels);
o The shares of process fuels. This is the share of each fuel type used during the various recovery, compression, liquefaction or other processes. These values are based on industry averages;
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of fuel throughput for each process and each process fuel. These values are directly dependent on share or process fuels percentages;
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy for each process. This includes a sum of all process fuel types; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel throughput. This is determined by the technology percentages entered in Section 2 of this sheet, and the energy use per process fuel.
Figure 50: NG Section 3 table is located on the next page.
53
Figure 50: NG Section 3
3) C
alcu
latio
ns o
f Ene
rgy
Con
sum
ptio
n an
d Em
issi
ons
for E
ach
Stag
e
NG Recovery
NG Processing
NG Processing: Non-Combustion Emissions
NG Transmission and Distribution
NG Recovery
NG Processing
NG Processing: Non-Combustion Emissions
NG Transmission to LNG Plant
NG Transmission to FT Plant
NG Transmission to NG Electric Power Plant
NG Transmission to Refueling Stations for CNG Production
Gas Compression
Flared Gas Energy and Emission Credits
NG LiquefactionLNG Transportation and Distribution: Non-North American NG Sources
LNG Storage: Non-North American NG SourcesLNG Transportation and Distribution: As a Transportation Fuel
LNG Storage: As a Transportation Fuel
Gas Liquefaction
Flared Gas Energy and Emission CreditsLNG Transportation and Distribution: Non-North American FG Sources for
LNG Storage: Non-North American FG Sources for CNG
Gas Liquefaction
Flared Gas Energy and Emission CreditsLNG Transportation and Distribution: As a Transportation Fuel
LNG Storage: As a Transportation Fuel
FT Diesel Production
FT Diesel Production: Non-Combustion Emissions
Production of Displaced Steam
Electricity Co-Generation in Fischer-Tropsch Plant
Generation of Displaced Electricity
FT Diesel Transportation and Distribution
FT Diesel Storage
FT Diesel Production
FT Diesel Production: Non-Combustion Emissions
Production of Displaced Steam
Electricity Co-Generation in Fischer-Tropsch Plant
Generation of Displaced Electricity
Flared Gas Energy and Emission Credits
FT Diesel Transportation and Distribution
FT Diesel Storage
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
97.5
%97
.5%
97.5
%97
.5%
95.0
%90
.3%
90.3
%90
.3%
63.0
%80
.0%
30.0
%55
.0%
63.0
%80
.0%
30.0
%55
.0%
Loss
fact
or1.
003
1.00
11.
000
1.00
31.
001
1.00
01.
000
1.00
31.
006
1.00
01.
005
1.00
11.
005
1.00
11.
008
1.00
51.
001
1.00
51.
005
1.00
11.
008
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
Shar
e of
nat
ural
gas
inpu
t as
feed
(for
fuel
pla
nt, t
he re
mai
ning
nat
ural
gas
inpu
t as
proc
ess
fuel
)10
0.0%
100.
0%St
eam
or e
lect
ricity
exp
ort (
for f
uel p
lant
s): B
tu (f
or s
team
) or K
Wh
(for e
lect
ricity
) per
mm
Btu
of f
uel p
rodu
ced
00.
000
0.00
Shar
es o
f pro
cess
fuel
s
Res
idua
l oil
1.7%
0.0%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
D
iese
l fue
l9.
5%0.
9%9.
5%0.
9%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Nat
ural
gas
74.6
%90
.4%
74.6
%90
.4%
50.0
%98
.0%
98.0
%98
.0%
99.7
%10
0.0%
100.
0%99
.7%
100.
0%10
0.0%
C
oal
0.0%
0.0%
N
-but
ane
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
E
lect
ricity
0.9%
2.8%
0.9%
2.8%
50.0
%2.
0%2.
0%2.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Fee
d lo
ss13
.3%
5.8%
13.3
%5.
8%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Ener
gy u
se: B
tu/m
mB
tu o
f fue
l thr
ough
put (
exce
pt a
s no
ted)
Per k
Wh
Per k
Wh
R
esid
ual o
il44
50
445
00
00
00
00
00
0.0
D
iese
l fue
l2,
447
242
2,44
724
20
00
00
00
00
0.0
N
atur
al g
as: p
roce
ss fu
el19
,128
23,1
9119
,128
23,1
9126
,316
105,
271
105,
271
105,
271
01,
250,
000
6204
01,
250,
000
6203
.6
Coa
l0
0.0
N
atur
al g
as: f
eed
loss
585,
540
585,
540
N
atur
al g
as fl
ared
-1,0
26,3
16-1
,105
,271
-1,1
05,2
71-1
,585
,540
N
-but
ane
1,76
2
0
1,76
2
0
E
lect
ricity
222
725
222
725
26,3
162,
148
2,14
82,
148
00
00
F
eeds
tock
loss
3,40
01,
484
-36
3,40
01,
484
00
2,78
65,
571
01,
005
200
1,00
522
01,
005
1,00
51,
001
5,02
51,
005
1101
5025
00
013
80
00
013
80
T
otal
ene
rgy
27,6
4228
,202
4,67
727
,642
28,2
020
0.00
063
20.4
4512
,641
98,2
22-1
,026
,316
117,
905
200
1,00
512
,480
1,00
511
6,96
9-1
,105
,271
1,00
15,
025
116,
969
-1,1
05,2
7113
,361
5,02
562
0,09
91,
319,
805
6,58
98,
789
0.00
062
0,09
91,
319,
805
6,58
9-1
,585
,540
8,78
90.
000
F
ossi
l fue
ls27
,551
27,9
504,
594
27,5
5127
,950
00.
000
2785
.622
12,5
1689
,395
-1,0
26,3
1611
7,14
920
01,
005
12,4
521,
005
116,
212
-1,1
05,2
711,
001
5,02
511
6,21
2-1
,105
,271
13,3
335,
025
619,
897
1,31
9,37
66,
565
8,74
20.
000
619,
897
1,31
9,37
66,
565
-1,5
85,5
408,
742
0.00
0
Pet
role
um3,
233
393
14.9
123,
233
393
0.00
00.
000
0.00
022
1,69
60
512
00
7,99
10
517
00
051
70
7,99
10
2,12
94,
532
226,
640
0.00
02,
129
4,53
222
06,
640
0.00
0To
tal e
mis
sion
s: g
ram
s/m
mB
tu o
f fue
l thr
ough
put
V
OC
0.26
90.
069
0.40
10.
269
0.06
90.
000
0.00
00.
301
0.60
11.
448
-2.5
660.
184
0.00
00.
578
0.18
4-2
.763
0.00
00.
184
-2.7
630.
578
0.00
11.
53.
798
0.01
0475
970.
251
0.00
11.
53.
798
0.01
0475
97-3
.964
0.25
1
CO
5.61
10.
776
0.67
25.
611
0.77
60.
000
0.00
00.
504
1.00
827
.606
-26.
684
1.54
00.
000
1.48
81.
540
-28.
737
-0.0
041.
540
-28.
737
1.48
80.
011
29.3
59.3
590.
0892
7789
0.80
30.
011
29.3
59.3
590.
0892
7789
-41.
224
0.80
3
NO
x10
.108
1.89
31.
928
10.1
081.
893
0.00
00.
000
1.44
62.
891
53.2
70-5
0.18
77.
419
0.00
013
.885
7.41
9-5
4.04
8-0
.007
7.41
9-5
4.04
813
.885
0.02
117
.676
.127
0.38
9879
645.
758
0.02
117
.676
.127
0.38
9879
64-7
7.53
35.
758
P
M10
0.19
80.
125
0.02
50.
198
0.12
50.
000
0.00
00.
019
0.03
71.
217
-3.7
970.
463
0.00
00.
318
0.46
3-4
.090
-0.0
010.
463
-4.0
900.
318
0.00
15.
028
0.02
2527
580.
180
0.00
15.
028
0.02
2527
58-5
.866
0.18
0
SO
x0.
797
0.90
62.
226
0.12
80.
797
0.90
62.
226
0.00
00.
000
0.09
60.
192
28.9
02-0
.317
2.79
70.
000
3.60
92.
797
-0.3
420.
001
2.79
7-0
.342
3.60
90.
007
5.29
80.
0268
8775
4.93
10.
007
5.29
80.
0268
8775
-0.4
904.
931
C
H4:
com
bust
ion
2.21
90.
362
0.79
22.
219
0.36
20.
000
0.00
00.
594
1.18
717
.584
-50.
289
12.7
130.
000
1.41
61.
357
-54.
158
0.02
11.
357
-54.
158
1.41
60.
005
139.
441
0.04
6118
140.
553
0.00
513
9.44
10.
0461
1814
-77.
691
0.55
3
N2O
0.03
30.
034
0.00
40.
033
0.03
40.
000
0.00
00.
003
0.00
60.
118
-1.1
290.
171
0.00
00.
021
0.17
1-1
.216
0.00
00.
171
-1.2
160.
021
0.00
01.
459
0.00
9741
770.
012
0.00
01.
459
0.00
9741
77-1
.744
0.01
2
CO
215
46.1
1916
83.5
131,
237
199.
635
1546
.119
1683
.513
1,23
70.
000
0.00
099
.818
199.
635
7716
.386
-613
28.0
5272
74.6
570.
000
915.
260
7274
.657
-660
46.0
82-1
0.94
372
74.6
57-6
6046
.082
915.
260
7.87
018
956.
3947
8041
1.92
940
0.00
1871
515.
122
7.87
019
007.
1126
8041
1.92
940
0.00
1871
-947
44.7
7751
5.12
2
CH
4: le
akag
e75
.098
32.7
74-0
.792
75.0
9832
.774
0.00
00.
000
61.5
3612
3.07
210
9.5
21.8
109.
524
.017
5.1
109.
521
.810
9.5
109.
524
.017
5.1
V
OC
: spi
llage
FT P
lant
Car
bon
effic
ienc
y3.
391
0.00
0FT
Pla
nt C
arbo
n ef
ficie
ncy
3.39
10.
000
M
isc.
Item
s21
.94.
421
.94.
835
.021
.94.
421
.921
.94.
835
.080
.0%
80.0
%
Nat
ural
Gas
to F
isch
er-T
rops
ch D
iese
lFl
ared
Gas
to F
isch
er-T
rops
ch D
iese
lN
G o
r FG
to C
ompr
esse
d N
atur
al G
asN
atur
al G
as to
Liq
uefie
d N
atur
al G
asFl
are
Gas
to L
ique
fied
Nat
ural
Gas
(for
CN
G a
nd
G.H
2, a
nd S
tatio
n L.
H2
Prod
uctio
n)Fl
are
Gas
to L
ique
fied
Nat
ural
Gas
N
atur
al G
as a
s a
Feed
stoc
k to
Pro
duce
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Fuel
sN
atur
al G
as a
s a
Proc
essi
ng F
uel
(If you are viewing this document electronically, you can “zoom in” for a more detailed view.)
54
4) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
• Provides a summary of total energy consumed and total emissions emitted from natural gas-based fuel sources. This includes energy consumed and emissions during natural gas recovery, liquefaction, compression, and/or processing into FTD. Furthermore, this includes energy consumed and emissions during relevant transportation, distribution, and storage.
• These data are carried to the Results tab for final summarization. Figure 51: NG Section 4 is located on the next page.
55
4) S
umm
ary
of E
nerg
y C
onsu
mpt
ion
and
Emis
sion
s: B
tu o
r Gra
ms
per m
Btu
of F
uel T
hrou
ghpu
t at E
ach
Stag
e
Feed
stoc
kFu
elFe
edst
ock
Fuel
Feed
stoc
kFu
elFe
edst
ock
Fuel
Feed
stoc
kFu
elFe
edst
ock
Fuel
Feed
stoc
kFu
elFe
edst
ock
Fuel
Feed
stoc
kFu
elLo
ss fa
ctor
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.01
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.00
Tota
l ene
rgy
6055
9.99
6236
0.85
5588
4.73
1198
21.7
855
884.
73-9
8823
6.76
6883
6.97
9822
1.83
5588
4.73
1324
69.0
255
884.
73-9
7895
2.98
5588
4.73
1324
69.0
255
884.
7362
8973
.67
5588
4.73
-956
785.
1655
884.
7362
8973
.67
Foss
il fu
els
6013
3.34
5848
1.90
5554
1.56
1190
61.2
755
541.
56-9
8899
8.39
6836
6.65
8939
5.49
5554
1.56
1316
78.1
055
541.
56-9
7974
5.02
5554
1.56
1316
78.1
055
541.
5662
8725
.13
5554
1.56
-957
033.
7055
541.
5662
8725
.13
Pet
role
um36
45.2
936
40.6
336
30.5
151
5.41
3630
.51
519.
6536
73.1
116
95.6
236
30.5
185
07.6
036
30.5
185
11.8
536
30.5
185
07.6
036
30.5
187
69.2
336
30.5
187
69.2
336
30.5
187
69.2
3V
OC
0.74
0.64
0.34
0.18
0.34
-2.6
00.
941.
450.
340.
760.
34-2
.03
0.34
0.76
0.34
5.14
0.34
1.18
0.34
5.14
CO
7.07
6.92
6.40
1.55
6.40
-27.
377.
4427
.61
6.40
3.04
6.40
-25.
966.
403.
046.
4030
.12
6.40
-11.
116.
4030
.12
NO
x13
.94
13.5
012
.02
7.46
12.0
2-4
6.92
14.9
753
.27
12.0
221
.37
12.0
2-3
3.17
12.0
221
.37
12.0
223
.38
12.0
2-5
4.16
12.0
223
.38
PM
100.
350.
340.
320.
000.
32-3
.65
0.36
1.22
0.32
0.79
0.32
-3.3
40.
320.
790.
320.
180.
32-5
.69
0.32
0.18
SO
x4.
064.
043.
930.
003.
932.
474.
1428
.90
3.93
6.43
3.93
6.09
3.93
6.43
3.93
4.94
3.93
4.45
3.93
4.94
CH
411
0.56
173.
0011
0.57
61.4
511
0.57
-4.4
423
5.44
17.5
811
0.57
63.4
211
0.57
-2.6
911
0.57
63.4
211
0.57
0.56
110.
57-7
7.14
110.
570.
56N
2O0.
070.
070.
070.
170.
07-1
.05
0.07
0.12
0.07
0.19
0.07
-1.0
30.
070.
190.
070.
010.
07-1
.73
0.07
0.01
CO
246
81.8
145
94.0
644
80.0
373
21.5
444
80.0
3-5
9187
.92
4701
.09
7764
.28
4480
.03
8240
.95
4480
.03
-583
93.5
744
80.0
382
40.9
544
80.0
319
545.
3744
80.0
3-7
5238
.93
4480
.03
1954
5.37
Nat
ural
Gas
to F
isch
er-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Flar
ed G
as to
Fis
cher
-Tr
opsc
h D
iese
lFi
stch
er-T
rops
ch D
iese
l: C
ombi
ned
Nat
ural
Gas
as
St
atio
nary
Fu
els
Nat
ural
Gas
fo
r El
ectr
icity
ge
nera
tion
Nat
ural
Gas
to L
ique
fied
Nat
ural
Gas
(for
CN
G
Prod
uctio
n)
Flar
e ga
s to
Liq
uefie
d N
atur
al G
as (f
or C
NG
Pr
oduc
tion)
NG
or F
G to
Com
pres
sed
Nat
ural
Gas
Nat
ural
Gas
to L
ique
fied
Nat
ural
Gas
(as
a tr
ansp
orta
tion
fuel
)
Flar
e ga
s to
Liq
uefie
d N
atur
al G
as (a
s a
tran
spor
tatio
n fu
el)
Liqu
efie
d N
atur
al G
as:
Com
bine
d
Figure 51: NG Section 4
56
Sheet 8: “AG_Inputs” Overview This sheet presents calculations for agricultural chemicals (or agricultural inputs, Ag_Inputs), including synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, which are used for growing soybeans. Soybeans are feedstock for Biodiesel. Three fertilizers are included: nitrogen, phosphate, and potash. Pesticides include herbicides and insecticides. This sheet includes the following two stages: (1) manufacture of chemicals; and, (2) transportation of chemicals from the manufacturing plants to farms. Section Breakdown
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies during the production of
fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides for soybeans. Each subsection should total 100 percent.
• These values will be used in Section 2 of this sheet to determine total energy consumption and emissions during each stage of fertilizer, herbicide, and insecticide production.
Figure 52: AG Inputs Section 1
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage
Nitr
ogen
Pr
oduc
tion
P2O
5 Pr
oduc
tion
K2O
Pro
duct
ion
Her
bici
de
Prod
uctio
n
Inse
ctic
ide
Prod
uctio
nResidual oil industrial boiler 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%Diesel commercial boiler 80.0% 80.0% 80.0% 80.0% 80.0%Diesel stationary engine 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0%Diesel turbine 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%NG engine 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%NG large turbine 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%NG large industrial boiler 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0%NG small industrial boiler 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0%Coal industrial boiler 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
57
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage • Enter the energy use in Btu per gram of nutrient during the production of each
fertilizer, herbicide and insecticide. The default values are based on industry averages.
• Enter the loss factor. Unlike other sheets, the loss factor for fertilizer, herbicide, and insecticide production and transportation is not TEAMS-calculated and must be entered by the user. This value should always be either 1 or very close to that number (1.01 would be an acceptable value.) (See the documentation on Petroleum Section 2 or NG Section 3 for more information on how TEAMS calculates the loss factor for other feedstocks.)
• Enter the shares of the process fuels used during fertilizer, herbicide, and insecticide production. Placeholder percentages are based on industry averages – the user may wish to alter these to reflect a specific scenario.
• Press F9 to calculate changes due to newly input data. • Based on the technologies in Section 1 of this sheet, information from the Inputs
sheet, and information from the T&D sheet, the remainder of this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of each chemical for each process fuel type. These values are directly dependent on share of process fuel percentages.
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy consumed during the production of each fertilizer, herbicide, and insecticide type. This includes a sum of all process fuel types.
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of each chemical during the production and transportation of each fertilizer, herbicide, and insecticide type. This is determined by the technology shares entered in Section 1 of this sheet and the energy use per process fuel.
Figure 53: AG Inputs Section 2 is located on the next page.
58
Figure 53: AG Inputs Section 2
2) C
alcu
latio
ns o
f Ene
rgy
Con
sum
ptio
n an
d Em
issi
ons
for E
ach
Stag
e
Her
bici
de
Prod
uctio
n Av
erag
e
Inse
ctic
ide
Prod
uctio
n Av
erag
e
Nitrogen
P2O5
K2O
Atrazine
Metolachlor
Acetochlor
Cyanazine
Soybeans
Soybeans
Plant to Bulk Distribution Center
Bulk Distribution Center to Mixer
Mixer to Farm
Ener
gy u
se: B
tu/g
ram
of n
utrie
nt46
.510
.85.
018
0.6
262.
126
4.3
191.
325
7.7
Loss
fact
or1.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
01.
000
1.00
0
Shar
es o
f Her
bici
de T
ypes
for S
oybe
ans
36.2
%63
.8%
0.0%
0.0%
Shar
es o
f pro
cess
fuel
s
Res
idua
l oil
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0
%30
.0%
30.0
%30
.0%
0.0%
D
iese
l fue
l0.
0%27
.0%
31.0
%30
.0%
30.0
%30
.0%
30.0
%60
.0%
N
atur
al g
as90
.0%
26.0
%27
.0%
23.0
%23
.0%
23.0
%23
.0%
23.0
%
Coa
l0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%0.
0%
Ele
ctric
ity10
.0%
47.0
%42
.0%
17.0
%17
.0%
17.0
%17
.0%
17.0
%
Ener
gy u
se: B
tu/g
ram
of c
hem
ical
R
esid
ual o
il0.
000.
000.
0054
.18
78.6
379
.29
57.3
969
.78
0.00
D
iese
l fue
l0.
002.
921.
5554
.18
78.6
379
.29
57.3
969
.78
154.
62
Nat
ural
gas
: pro
cess
fuel
41.8
52.
811.
3541
.54
60.2
860
.79
44.0
053
.50
59.2
7
Coa
l0.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
000.
00
Ele
ctric
ity4.
655.
082.
1030
.70
44.5
644
.93
32.5
239
.54
43.8
1
Tot
al e
nerg
y56
.83
20.0
98.
9325
1.61
365.
1514
50.5
726
6.51
324.
0536
7.19
F
ossi
l fue
ls55
.25
18.3
88.
2224
0.97
349.
7135
2.65
255.
2531
0.35
351.
90
Pet
role
um0.
443.
521.
8311
8.15
171.
4617
2.90
125.
1515
2.16
172.
52
Tota
l em
issi
ons:
gra
ms/
gram
of c
hem
ical
V
OC
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
002
0.00
30.
003
0.00
20.
002
0.00
30.
000
0.00
00.
000
C
O0.
002
0.00
10.
000
0.00
90.
014
0.01
40.
010
0.01
20.
018
0.00
00.
000
0.00
0
NO
x0.
005
0.00
30.
002
0.03
90.
056
0.05
70.
041
0.05
00.
077
0.00
00.
001
0.00
0
PM
100.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
40.
006
0.00
60.
004
0.00
50.
006
0.00
00.
000
0.00
0
SO
x0.
005
0.00
60.
002
0.07
70.
111
0.11
20.
081
0.09
90.
058
0.00
00.
000
0.00
0
CH
40.
006
0.00
20.
001
0.02
40.
035
0.03
60.
026
0.03
10.
035
0.00
00.
000
0.00
0
N2O
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
0.00
00.
000
C
O2
3.78
21.
639
0.72
419
.979
28.9
9529
.238
21.1
6225
.731
28.8
860.
017
0.03
00.
010
Che
mic
als
Tran
spor
tatio
n fo
r So
ybea
nsFe
rtili
zer P
rodu
ctio
nH
erbi
cide
Pro
duct
ion
59
Sheet 9: “BD” Overview This sheet calculates energy use and emissions associated with producing Biodiesel (BD) from soybeans5. The sheet includes soybean farming and transportation, soyoil extraction, and soyoil transesterification to Biodiesel. Energy use and emissions are allocated between BD and co-products according to the market value method6. Section Breakdown
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters • These values can be altered in Section 3 on the Inputs sheet. • Enter the allocation of soydiesel and co-product production as a percentage of
total energy consumed and emissions produced during the production of soy and soy products. Three stages are considered: soybean farming, soybean oil (soyoil) extraction, and soybean oil (soyoil) transesterification. Co-products would include soy used for food, among other purposes.
Figure 54: BD Section 1
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters (from the Inputs sheet)
Soydiesel Co-products Soybean farming 33.6% 66.4% Soyoil extraction 33.6% 66.4%
Soyoil transesterification 70.1% 29.9%
Allocation shares
5 Default assumptions located within the Biodiesel (BD) sheet are based on values provided in Wang (2000). 6 The market value approach uses a price of $220.36 per metric ton for soy meal and $498.56 per metric ton for soy oil. These prices are the average of the prices predicted by the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute in 1997 for the period of 1996-2006 (Wang 1999).
60
2) Soybean Use Key Variables • Enter the attributes for soybean farming, soybean oil (soyoil) extraction, and
biodiesel production: soybean density in pounds per bushel, pounds of soybeans required to produce one pound of soyoil, and pounds of soyoil required to produce one pound of biodiesel.
• Placeholder values are based on industry averages. Figure 55: BD Section 2
2) Soybean use Key Variables
Soybean density: lbs./bushel 60Soybean use:: lbs. soybean/lb. soy oil 5.7Soyoil use: lbs. soy oil/lb. biodiesel 1.04
61
3) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies used during soybean farming
and biodiesel production. Each subsection should total 100 percent. • These values are used in Section 4 of this sheet to determine total emissions
during various stages of soybean farming, soyoil extraction, and BD production. Figure 56: BD Section 3
3) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage
Soyb
ean
Farm
ing
Bio
dies
el
Prod
uctio
n
Residual oil industrial or commercial boiler 100.0% 100.0%Diesel commercial boiler 10.0% 33.0%Diesel stationary engine 10.0% 33.0%Diesel turbine 10.0% 34.0%Diesel farming tractor 70.0%NG engine 25.0% 25.0%NG large turbine 25.0% 25.0%NG large industrial boiler 25.0% 25.0%NG small industrial boiler 25.0% 25.0%Coal industrial boiler 100.0%
62
4) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage • Enter the material inputs: Btu required to farm 1 bushel of soybeans; grams of
nitrogen, P2O5, and K2O required to farm 1 bushel of soybeans; and, Btu required to extract 1 pound of soyoil.
• The shares of process fuels are estimated on the basis of historical statistical data on fuel use by fuel type. This data relies primarily on results from Delucchi (1997).
• Enter the energy consumed during soyoil transesterification per pound of soydiesel in cells K52 through K60. The default values represent industry averages but may be altered to pertain more specifically to the simulation.
• Certain additional values in this section may be altered (such as VOC loss due to evaporation and spillage), but it is recommended that only advanced users alter these values.
• Press F9 to reflect any changes due to newly inputted data. • Based on the technology shares in Section 3 of this sheet, information from the
Inputs sheet, and information from the T&D sheet, this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The loss factor during biodiesel transportation, distribution, and storage. The loss factor calculates the fuel loss in each stage due to evaporation or leakage. The biodiesel loss factor is directly dependent to the user-entered VOC loss due to spillage;
o The shares of process fuels. This is the share of each fuel type used during soybean farming and soyoil extraction. These values are based on industry averages;
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of fuel throughput for each process and each process fuel. Energy use during soybean farming, soyoil extraction, and biodiesel production are directly dependent on the share of process fuels percentages. Energy due to fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide use is calculated based on results from the Ag_Inputs sheet;
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy for each process. This includes a sum of all process fuel types; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel throughput. This is determined by the technology shares entered in Section 3 of this sheet, and the energy use per process fuel. Data are organized in emissions per bushel of soybeans, per pound of soyoil, per pound of soydiesel, and per mmBtu of biodiesel.
Figure 57: BD Section 4 is located on the next page.
63
Figure 57: BD Section 4
64
4) C
alcu
latio
ns o
f Ene
rgy
Con
sum
ptio
n an
d Em
issi
ons
for e
ach
stag
e
Soybean Farming
Soybean Transportation
Soyoil Extraction
Soyoil Transesterification
Biodiesel Transportation and Distribution
Biodiesel Storage
Btu
/bus
hel
Nitr
ogen
P2O
5K
2OH
erbi
cide
Pes
ticid
eP
er b
ushe
lP
er lb
. of
soyo
ilP
er lb
. of
biod
iese
lM
ater
ial I
nput
s32
,140
11
9.0
373.
063
5.0
47.8
00.
486,
519
Loss
fact
or1.
000
1.00
0Sh
ares
of p
roce
ss fu
els
R
esid
ual o
il0.
0%0.
0%
Die
sel f
uel
98.4
%0.
0%
Nat
ural
gas
0.0%
87.5
%
Coa
l0.
0%0.
0%
Ele
ctric
ity1.
6%9.
4%
N-h
exan
e (a
sol
vent
from
cru
de)
3.1%
F
eed
loss
0.0%
0.0%
Ener
gy c
onsu
med
: Btu
/mm
Btu
of f
uel
thro
ughp
ut, e
xcep
t as
note
dPe
r lb.
of
soyo
ilPe
r lb.
of
soyd
iese
l
Res
idua
l oil
00
0
Die
sel f
uel
31,6
260
0
Nat
ural
gas
05,
704
2,66
4
Coa
l0
00
E
lect
ricity
514
613
341
N
-hex
ane
(a s
olve
nt fr
om c
rude
)20
20
S
odiu
m h
ydro
xide
263
S
odiu
m m
etho
xide
10
Hyd
roch
loric
aci
d32
138
0.00
T
otal
ene
rgy
3963
8.93
7667
6374
9456
6915
489
176
5051
.395
77,
690
4,04
310
,234
0.00
F
ossi
l fue
ls39
,348
6575
6856
5218
1483
516
950
35.6
7058
7,48
23,
928
9,85
80.
00
Pet
role
um34
,730
5213
1211
6472
7383
4580
.852
1258
173
7,15
10.
00
Tota
l em
issi
ons:
gra
ms/
mm
Btu
of f
uel
thro
ughp
ut, e
xcep
t as
note
dPe
r lb.
of
soyo
ilPe
r lb.
of
soyd
iese
l
VO
C2.
400
0.03
10.
067
0.06
50.
113
0.00
20.
1621
1231
0.07
90.
037
0.34
2446
2
CO
9.22
80.
272
0.25
60.
244
0.58
70.
009
0.62
0486
141.
627
0.76
11.
0185
4279
N
Ox
28.1
950.
668
1.62
81.
572
2.42
20.
037
2.63
8029
382.
799
1.33
18.
0195
1567
P
M10
1.58
70.
045
0.11
50.
098
0.25
10.
003
0.09
2420
820.
053
0.02
60.
2451
6287
S
Ox
2.47
40.
661
2.24
91.
704
4.73
10.
028
0.25
2312
10.
697
0.38
51.
6372
3324
C
H4
3.45
00.
727
0.81
20.
630
1.50
60.
017
0.42
6307
51.
349
0.64
60.
5348
1983
N
2O0.
068
0.00
80.
008
0.00
70.
013
0.00
00.
0106
6745
0.01
10.
005
0.01
4568
23
CO
231
54.0
4445
6.73
463
2.35
649
5.10
012
32.6
1913
.892
402.
1154
3750
6.36
224
9.17
652
5.72
6445
V
OC
loss
: eva
pora
tion
1.65
8N
O fr
om n
itrog
en fe
rtiliz
er
VO
C lo
ss: s
pilla
ge2.
431
N2O
from
nitr
ogen
ferti
lizer
3.95
0
(per
mm
Btu
)
Per b
ushe
l of s
oybe
ans
Per m
mB
tu o
f bio
dies
el
Per b
ushe
l of s
oybe
ans
Per m
mB
tu o
f bio
dies
el
Soyb
eans
Bio
dies
el
Soyb
ean
Farm
ing
Fert
ilize
r Use
(g
ram
s/bu
shel
)
Soyb
ean
Farm
ing
Her
bici
de a
nd P
estic
ide
Use
(gra
ms/
bush
el)
5) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
• Provides a summary of total energy consumed and total emissions during the various stages of biodiesel production. The results are summed from Section 4 of this sheet and converted to energy consumed per gallon of biodiesel. Output includes energy and emissions during the farming of soybeans (including the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides), the extraction of soyoil, the conversion to soydiesel, and the transportation of soydiesel.
• The relevant data are multiplied by the proper fuel specification criteria and then summed into the Feedstock and Fuel columns to accurately reflect fuel-cycle results.
• This data is carried to the Results tab for final summarization. Figure 58: BD Section 5
5) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each StageSo
ybea
ns
Soyo
il
Soyd
iese
l
Soyd
iese
l Tr
ansp
orta
tion,
St
orag
e, a
nd
Dis
trib
utio
n
Feed
stoc
k
Fuel
Unit Per bushel per lb. per lb. per mmBtu per mmBtu per mmBtu
Conversion factor to gallons of biodiesel 1.37 0.141 0.136 1.000 1.000
gallon gallon gallon mmBtu Loss factorTotal energy 80,261 7,689 4,043 9,834 117,578 297,870 Fossil fuels 78,014 7,482 3,927 9,458 114,287 289,441 Petroleum 49,174 58 173 6,771 72,038 15,230 VOC 2.836 0.079 0.037 4.277 4.154 7.035CO 11.203 1.627 0.761 0.973 16.412 57.761NOx 38.692 2.799 1.331 7.634 56.682 106.251PM10 4.615 0.053 0.026 0.232 6.761 2.136SOx 11.954 0.696 0.384 1.120 17.512 28.014CH4 7.558 1.349 0.646 0.500 11.073 48.230N2O 2.546 0.011 0.005 0.014 3.729 0.377CO2 6,404 509 250 493 9381.746 18804.726
Energy Use and Total Emissions
65
Sheet 10: “Coal” Overview The purpose of this sheet is to calculate energy use and emissions for coal mining, cleaning, and transportation. The results are used for other fuel cycles in which coal is used as a process fuel. For example, in calculating energy use and emissions associated with refining crude oil to low-sulfur diesel, TEAMS will consider the energy use and emissions associated with electricity generation in coal-fired power plants – including coal mining, cleaning, and transportation to the plant. Section Breakdown
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies used for coal mining and
cleaning. Each subsection should equal 100 percent. • These values will be used in Section 2 of this sheet to determine total emissions
during coal mining and cleaning per fuel throughput. Figure 59: Coal Section 1
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage
Coa
l Min
ing
and
Cle
anin
g
Residual oil industrial boiler 100.0%Diesel commercial boiler 33.0%Diesel stationary engine 33.0%Diesel turbine 34.0%NG engine 25.0%NG large turbine 25.0%NG large industrial boiler 25.0%NG small industrial boiler 25.0%Coal industrial boiler 100.0%
66
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage • Enter the energy efficiency for coal mining and cleaning. • The shares of process fuels are estimated on the basis of historical statistical data
on fuel use by fuel type. This data relies primarily on results from Delucchi (1997).
• The user may manually enter the VOC, PM10, and SOx emissions associated with coal cleaning, and the CH4 emissions associated with coal mining. However, the default values are based on industry averages and should only be altered by advanced users.
• Based on the technologies established in Section 1 of this sheet, information from the Inputs sheet, and information from the T&D and other sheets, this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The loss factor during coal mining and cleaning, and coal transportation. The loss factor ultimately calculates the fuel loss in each stage due to evaporation or leakage. The loss factor is determined by the following formula:
⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡×⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛
−+ B
A 111
where, A is the efficiency of the process, and B is the feed loss. Feed loss is the percentage of process fuels “unaccounted for”. Feed loss for coal (and other solid fuels) is typically zero or very close to zero;
o The shares of process fuels. This is the share of each fuel type used during the mining and cleaning of coal. These values are based on industry averages;
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of fuel throughput for cleaning and mining and each fuel type used during that process. The energy consumption associated with coal mining and cleaning is directly dependent on share of process fuels percentages;
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy for mining and cleaning, and transportation of coal. The energy consumption associated with coal mining and cleaning includes a sum of all process fuel types. The energy consumption associated with coal transportation is derived from distances on the T&D sheet and relevant fuel specifications from the Fuel Specs sheet; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel throughput. This is determined by the technology shares entered in Section 1 of this sheet, and the energy use per process fuel.
Figure 60: Coal Section 2 is located on the next page.
67
Figure 60: Coal Section 2
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage
Coa
l Min
ing
and
Cle
anin
g
Coa
l Min
ing:
Non
-C
ombu
stio
n Em
issi
ons
Coa
l Cle
anin
g: N
on-
Com
bust
ion
Emis
sion
s
Coa
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Energy efficiency 99.3%
Loss factor 1.000 1.000
Shares of process fuels Residual oil 7.0% Diesel fuel 56.0% Natural gas 1.0% Coal 9.0% Electricity 24.0% Feed loss 0.0%
Energy consumed: Btu/mmBtu of fuel throughput Residual oil 493 Diesel fuel 3,948 Natural gas 70 Coal 634 Electricity 1,692 Feed loss 0 Total energy 10,565 10,403 Fossil fuel 9,982 10,372 Petroleum 4,954 9,467
Total Emissions: grams/mmBtu of fuel throughput VOC 0.126 6.890 0.714 CO 0.782 1.828 NOx 3.451 17.839 PM10 0.232 6.784 0.534 SOx 2.835 3.906 1.539 CH4 1.044 117.286 0.899 N2O 0.013 0.019 CO2 890.546 828.294
68
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput
• Provides a summary of total energy consumed and total emissions during the mining, cleaning, and transportation of coal.
• These data are carried to other sheets to be used in fuel cycles in which coal is used as a process fuel.
• Press F9 to reflect any changes due to new data input. Figure 61: Coal Section 3
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput
TotalTotal energy 20,968Fossil fuels 20,353Petroleum 14,421VOC 7.730CO 2.611NOx 21.290PM10 7.550SOx 8.280CH4 119.229N2O 0.032CO2 1747.0344
69
Sheet 11: “Uranium” Overview This sheet is used to calculate energy use and emissions associated with uranium mining, transportation, and enrichment. The results are used in the Electric sheet for calculating energy use and emissions associated with nuclear electric power plants. That is, even though nuclear power plants have zero operational energy use and emissions, the upstream processing and transportation of uranium consumes energy and generate emissions. Section Breakdown
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage • Enter the share of combustion process technologies used during uranium mining
and enrichment. Each subsection should equal 100 percent. • These values will be used in Section 2 of this sheet to determine total emissions of
fuels throughput during uranium mining and enrichment. Figure 62: Uranium Section 1
1) Shares of Combustion Processes for Each Stage
Ura
nium
Min
ing
Ura
nium
En
richm
ent
Residual oil commercial/industrial boiler 100.0% 100.0%Diesel commercial boiler 33.0% 33.0%Diesel stationary engine 33.0% 33.0%Diesel turbine 34.0% 34.0%NG engine 25.0% 25.0%NG large turbine 25.0% 25.0%NG large industrial boiler 25.0% 25.0%NG small industrial boiler 25.0% 25.0%Coal industrial boiler 100.0% 100.0%
70
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage • Enter the energy efficiency of uranium mining and uranium enrichment. • The shares of process fuels are estimated on the basis of historical statistical data
on fuel use by fuel type. This data relies primarily on results from Delucchi (1997).
• Based on the technologies established in Section 1 of this sheet, information from the Inputs sheet, and information from the T&D and other sheets, this section will summarize and/or calculate the following:
o The loss factor during uranium mining, transportation and enrichment. The loss factor calculates the fuel loss in each stage due to evaporation or leakage. The loss factor is determined by the following formula:
⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡×⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛
−+ B
A 111
where, A is the efficiency of the process, and B is the feed loss. Feed loss is the percentage of process fuels “unaccounted for”. Feed loss for uranium (and other solid fuels) is typically zero or very close to zero;
o The shares of process fuels. This is the share of each fuel type used during the mining and enrichment of uranium. These values are based on industry averages;
o The energy use in Btu per mmBtu of fuel throughput for mining and enrichment and each fuel type used during that process. The energy consumption associated with uranium mining and enrichment is directly dependent on share of process fuels percentages;
o The total energy, fossil fuel based energy, and petroleum based energy consumption for mining, transporting and enriching uranium. The energy consumption associated with uranium mining and enriching includes a sum of all process fuel types. The energy consumption associated with uranium transportation is derived from distances on the T&D sheet and relevant fuel specifications from the Fuel Specs sheet; and,
o The total emissions in grams per mmBtu of fuel throughput. This is determined by the technology percentages entered in Section 1 of this sheet, and the energy use per process fuel.
Figure 63: Uranium Section 2 is located on the next page.
71
Figure 63: Uranium Section 2
2) Calculations of Energy Consumption and Emissions for Each Stage
Ura
nium
Min
ing
Ura
nium
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Ura
nium
En
richm
ent
Energy efficiency 99.5% 95.8%
Loss factor 1.000 1.000 1.000Shares of process fuels Residual oil 1.0% 0.0% Diesel fuel 22.0% 0.0% Natural gas 43.0% 3.0% Coal 0.0% 0.0% Electricity 29.0% 97.0% Feed loss 0.0% 0.0%Energy Use: Btu/mmBtu of fuel throughput Residual oil 50 0 Diesel fuel 1,106 0 Natural gas 2,161 1,315 Coal 0 0 Electricity 1,457 42526.096 Feed loss 0 0 Total energy 7,585 177.319943 115,220 Fossil fuels 7,092 177 100,970 Petroleum 1,362 161 2,591
Total Emissions: grams/mmBtu of fuel throughput VOC 0.08 0.01 0.76 CO 0.84 0.03 1.91 NOx 2.31 0.30 19.50 PM10 0.11 0.01 1.65 SOx 1.71 0.01 46.53 CH4 0.99 0.02 12.88 N2O 0.01 0.00 0.13 CO2 586.57 14.08 9930.08
72
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
• Provides a summary of total energy consumed and total emissions during the mining, transportation, and enrichment of uranium. The results are in Btu or grams per mmBtu of electricity generated from nuclear power plants.
• This data is carried to the Electric sheets to be used in Electric fuel cycles in which uranium is used as a process fuel.
• Press F9 to reflect any changes due to newly inputted data. Figure 64: Uranium Section 3
3) Summary of Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Throughput at Each Stage
TotalTotal energy 122,982Fossil fuels 108,239Petroleum 4,114VOC 0.844CO 2.780NOx 22.100PM10 1.763SOx 48.247CH4 13.892N2O 0.135CO2 10537.7287
73
Sheet 12: “Electric” Overview This sheet calculates energy use and emissions associated with the generation of electricity for transportation fuel production. In this sheet, TEAMS calculates emission factors for electric power plants according to combustion emission factors incorporated in the model, or it can take emission factors directly from the user. Energy use and emissions during processing and transportation of power plant fuels, as well as during power plant electricity generation, are taken into account. The results in this sheet are provided in Btu or grams per mmBtu of electricity available at user sites. That is, electricity loss during transmission and distribution of electricity from power plants to user sites is taken into account in TEAMS. Section Breakdown
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters • This field may be altered in Section 4.1 of the Inputs sheet. It is copied as Section
1 of the Electric sheet for reference purposes. • Enter “1” to calculate total emissions from electricity generation based on defaults
located on the EF sheet. • Enter “2” to calculate total emissions from electricity generation based on values
that the user must enter in Section 4 of this sheet. Figure 65: Electric Section 1
1) Scenario Control and Key Input Parameters (entered on the Inputs sheet)
1 1 → Model-calculated emissions factors2 → User-input emission factors
74
2) Electricity Generation Mixes, Combustion Technology Shares, and Power Plant Energy Conversion Efficiencies
• “Generation Mix for Stationary Applications”: These data are taken from the user-entered “Electricity Generation Mix” values in Section 4.2 of the Inputs sheet. Refer to that section to make changes. Default values are based on national averages but may be altered on the Inputs sheet to reflect a specific scenario or regional conditions.
• “Combustion Technology Shares for a Given Fuel”: Enter the share of combustion process technologies used during electricity generation. Each subsection should equal 100 percent.
• “Power Plant Energy Conversion Efficiency”: Enter the energy conversion efficiency of each power plant type. Default values are based on best available data. For more details on these inputs, please see the appropriate cell-comments in the TEAMS Model.
• Press F9 to reflect any changes due to newly inputted data and to calculate the overall average energy conversion efficiency for each power plant type (in cells E16, E18, and E22).
Figure 66: Electric Section 2
2) Electricity Generation Mixes, Combustion Technology Shares, and Power Plant Energy Conversion Efficiencies
Gen
erat
ion
Mix
for
Stat
iona
ry A
pplic
atio
ns
Com
bust
ion
Tech
nolo
gy S
hare
s fo
r A
Giv
en F
uel
Pow
er P
lant
Ene
rgy
Con
vers
ion
Effic
ienc
y
Residual Oil-Fired Power Plants 1.0% 35.0% Utility boiler 100.0% 35.0%Natural Gas-Fired Power Plants 14.9% 38.2% Utility boiler 40.0% 34.0% Simple-cycle gas turbine 40.0% 34.0% Combined-cycle gas turbine 20.0% 55.0%Coal-Fired Power Plants 53.8% 32.5% Utility boiler 95.0% 32.0% Advanced tech. with combined cycle 5.0% 41.5%Nuclear Power Plants 18.0% 100.0%Other Power Plants (hydro, wind, etc.) 12.3% 100.0%
3) Electric Transmission and Distribution Loss • Enter the transmission and distribution loss in percentage.
Figure 67: Electric Section 3
3) Electric Transmission and Distribution Loss
8.0%
75
4) Power Plant Emissions: in Grams per kWh of Electricity available at Power Plant Gate
• This section represents the first of four stages of results for the Electric sheet. • Power plant emissions are presented based on electricity available at power plant
gates prior to accounting for transmission and distribution losses (Wang 2001; GREET 1.6).
• If the user entered “1” in Section 1 of this sheet, there are no required inputs in this section. TEAMS will use the emission factors (EFs) listed under “TEAMS-Calculated Emission Factors; By Fuel-Type Plants” to calculate emissions during electricity generation. These values are derived from values located in Section 1 of the EF Sheet, along with the technology percentages that the user entered in Section 2 of this sheet, and represent industry averages. The values will be multiplied by the user-entered percentages for generation mix in Section 2 of this sheet and summed into the column titled “TEAMS-Calculated Emission Factors: Stationary Use; Total”.
• If the user entered “2” in Section 1 of this sheet, the user is required to input the emission factors under “User-Input Emission Factors: Stationary Electricity Use”. The values will be multiplied by the user-entered percentages for generation mix in Section 2 of this sheet and summed into the column titled “User-Input Emission Factors: Stationary Use; Total”.
Figure 68: Electric Section 4
4) Power Plant Emissions: in Grams per kWh of Electricity Available at Power Plant Gate
TEA
MS-
Cal
cula
ted
Emis
sion
Fac
tors
Use
r-In
put
Emis
sion
Fac
tors
Stationary Use
Stationary Use
Oil-Fired NG-Fired Coal-Fired Oil-Fired NG-Fired Coal-Fired Total TotalVOC 0.0240 0.0164 0.0122 0.0041 0.0041 0.0041 0.0092 0.0029CO 0.1579 0.2044 0.1024 0.0288 0.0288 0.0288 0.0871 0.0201NOx 1.0109 0.4559 2.1595 0.4838 0.4838 0.4838 1.2398 0.3372PM10 0.0600 0.0321 0.1309 0.0463 0.0463 0.0463 0.0758 0.0323SOx 6.8247 0.0029 6.0981 0.8796 0.8796 0.8796 3.3494 0.6131CH4 0.0089 0.0268 0.0097 0.0089 0.0268 0.0097 0.0093 0.0093N2O 0.0035 0.0123 0.0128 0.0035 0.0123 0.0128 0.0088 0.0088CO2 805.9779 555.1259 1138.2239 806.2428 535.2391 1134.7015 703.1380 698.2825
TEAMS-Calculated Emission FactorsUser-Input Emission Factors:
Stationary Electricity Use
By Fuel-Type Plants By Fuel-Type Plants
76
5) Power Plant Emissions: Grams per kWh of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
• This section represents the second of four stages of results for the Electric sheet. • Power plant emissions are presented in grams per kWh of electricity available at
user sites. Electricity loss during transmission and distribution of electricity from power plants to user sites is taken into account when calculating and presenting these results.
Figure 69: Electric Section 5
5) Power Plant Emissions: Grams per kWh of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
Stationary Use
Oil-Fired Power Plants
NG-Fired Power Plant
Coal-Fired Power Plant
Nuclear Power Plant
Other Power Plants
NGCC Power Plants
VOC 0.0089 0.0261 0.0104 0.0132 0.0000 0.0000 0.0071CO 0.0751 0.1717 0.0909 0.1113 0.0000 0.0000 0.0506NOx 1.3378 1.0988 0.4294 2.3472 0.0000 0.0000 0.3331PM10 0.0815 0.0652 0.0289 0.1423 0.0000 0.0000 0.0222SOx 3.6406 7.4181 0.0027 6.6283 0.0000 0.0000 0.0021CH4 0.0109 0.0096 0.0347 0.0105 0.0000 0.0000 0.0287N2O 0.0094 0.0038 0.0127 0.0139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0101CO2 752.0377 876.0630 521.2318 1237.1999 0 0 403.9927
77
6) Power Plant Energy Use and Emissions: per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
• This section represents the third of four stages of results for the Electric sheet. • Power plant energy use and emissions are presented in Btu per mmBtu or grams
per mmBtu of electricity available at user sites. Electricity loss during transmission and distribution of electricity from power plants to user sites is taken into account when calculating and presenting these results.
• The emissions presented here are simply a kWh to Btu conversion of the emissions presented in Section 5 of this sheet.
Figure 70: Electric Section 6
6) Power Plant Energy Use and Emissions: per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
Energy Use: BtuStationary
UseOil-Fired
Power PlantNG-Fired
Power PlantCoal-Fired
Power PlantNuclear
Power PlantOther Power
Plants
NGCC Power Plants
Residual oil 31,056 3,105,590 0 0 0 0 0 NG 358,867 0 2,408,501 0 0 0 1,976,285 Coal 1,800,716 0 0 3,347,056 0 0 0 Uranium 195,652 0 0 0 1,086,957 0 0 Other energy sources 133,696 0 0 0 0 1,086,957 0
Emissions: grams VOC 2.614 7.640 3.047 3.872 0.000 0.000 2.075 CO 22.024 50.311 26.644 32.622 0.000 0.000 14.822 NOx 392.084 322.050 125.858 687.938 0.000 0.000 97.628 PM10 23.895 19.099 8.481 41.710 0.000 0.000 6.502 SOx 1067.007 2174.135 0.789 1942.655 0.000 0.000 0.611 CH4 3.203 2.826 10.156 3.088 0.000 0.000 8.419 N2O 2.767 1.118 3.735 4.088 0.000 0.000 2.964 CO2 220,410 256,759 152,764 362,603 0 0 118,403
78
7) Fuel-Cycle Energy Use and Emissions of Electric Generation: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
• This section represents the fourth of four stages of results for the Electric sheet. • Power plant energy use and emissions are presented in Btu or grams per mmBtu
of electricity available at user sites. Output is presented in both fuel-cycle summaries – including the feedstock and fuel stages. Electricity loss during transmission and distribution of electricity from power plants to user sites is taken into account when calculating and presenting these results.
• The results under the columns titled “Fuel” are simply a summary of the results located in Section 6 of this sheet.
• The results under the columns titled “Feedstock” are calculated based on fuel-cycle data from the appropriate sheet (petroleum for oil-fired, NG for NG-fired, coal for coal-fired, and uranium for nuclear power).
Figure 71: Electric Section 7
7) Fuel-Cycle Energy Use and Emissions of Electric Generation: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Electricity Available at User Sites (wall outlets)
Feedstock Fuel Feedstock Fuel Feedstock Fuel Feedstock Fuel Feedstock Fuel Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 86,556 2,519,987 322,163 3,105,590 149,991 2,408,501 69,752 3,347,056 130,326 1,086,957 123,075 1,976,285Fossil fuels 81,106 2,190,639 314,805 3,105,590 140,681 2,408,501 67,696 3,347,056 114,313 0 115,435 1,976,285Petroleum 29,512 31,056 143,545 3,105,590 8,768 0 48,267 0 4,460 0 7,194 0VOC 14.44 2.61 13.21 7.64 1.54 3.05 25.87 3.87 0.90 0.00 1.26 2.08CO 7.98 22.02 32.87 50.31 16.64 26.64 8.70 32.62 2.72 0.00 13.66 14.82NOx 48.87 392.08 141.57 322.05 32.49 125.86 71.23 687.94 23.84 0.00 26.66 97.63PM10 14.39 23.89 33.28 19.10 0.82 8.48 25.27 41.71 1.90 0.00 0.68 6.50SOx 26.74 1,067.01 94.27 2,174.13 9.72 0.79 27.71 1,942.65 52.43 0.00 7.98 0.61CH4 282.34 3.20 293.36 2.83 416.68 10.16 399.06 3.09 14.57 0.00 341.91 8.42N2O 0.11 2.77 0.44 1.12 0.17 3.74 0.11 4.09 0.15 0.00 0.14 2.96CO2 7,129.18 220,452.41 26,495.06 256,862.24 11,085.08 152,815.66 5,917.52 362,665.89 11,271.80 0.00 9,095.81 118,433.24
Nuclear Power Plant NGCC Power PlantsStationary Use Oil-Fired Power Plant NG-Fired Power Plant Coal-Fired Power Plant
User Next Steps: At this point of the TEAMS simulation, the user has entered all required information on all sheets. It is recommended that the user double-check the entered information to ensure accuracy. Finally, be sure to press F9 to reflect any changes in data inputs. Continue to the Results Sheet to view the results of the simulation.
79
8. INTERPRETING THE ‘RESULTS’ AND ‘GRAPHS’ The following is a section by section breakdown and analysis of the “Results” and “Graphs” sheets of the TEAMS model. This section is aimed at assisting the user in interpreting the results of their simulation. Please continue to Section 10 to see preliminary results.
Sheet 13: “Results” Overview This sheet presents results for the simulation vessel as entered on the Inputs sheet using each of the six alternative fuel options and based on user-inputs from the other 10 sheets of the TEAMS model. The sheet is constructed in four main sections. Table 1 (Well-to-Pump Energy Consumption and Emissions) presents energy and emission results from wells to refueling station pumps (in mmBtu/trip or g/mmBtu of fuel available at pumps). Table 2.1 (Auxiliary Engine Energy Consumption and Emissions) presents the fuel-cycle (well-to-hull) energy consumption and emissions for the auxiliary engines of the simulation vessel (in mmBtu/trip or g/trip). For each fuel alternative, energy use and emissions are presented separately for three stages: feedstock (including recovery, transportation, and storage), fuel (including production, transportation, storage, and distribution), and vessel operation. Section 2.2 identifies the auxiliary engine fuel type (as selected on the Inputs sheet) to use in Table 3 to calculate total well-to-hull energy consumption and emissions (auxiliary and main engines). Table 3 (Main and Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions) presents the fuel-cycle energy consumption and emissions for the main and auxiliary engines of the simulation vessel (in mmBtu/trip or g/trip). For each fuel alternative, energy use and emissions are presented separately for the feedstock, fuel, and operation stages. The type of auxiliary engine fuel used in the sum of total energy and emissions is determined in Inputs Section 6.1. Any main engine fuel and auxiliary engine fuel combination may be used. For example, if the user selects Biodiesel as the auxiliary engine fuel, Section 3 will show energy and emissions output for the vessel running on each of the six alternative main engine fuels and Biodiesel as the auxiliary fuel. If the user changed the type of auxiliary engine fuel, the user must remember to press F9 to view results based on the change in fuel type. The “Auxiliary Engine Fuel” is listed at the top of each result subsection in Section 3 so the user will know what type of fuel is being simulated. Percentage shares of energy use and emissions for each of the three stages (considering both main and auxiliary engines) are also presented in this section. Table 4 (Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes) presents the percent change in fuel-cycle energy use and emissions for the simulation vessel running on each of the six alternative fuel types. The changes per fuel type are calculated against the simulation vessel fueled with conventional diesel.
80
Section Breakdown
1) Well-to-Pump Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or Grams per mmBtu of Fuel Available at Fuel Station Pumps
• This section presents energy and emission results from wells to refueling station pumps (in mmBtu/trip or grams/mmBtu of fuel available at pumps). These results include the feedstock (i.e. mining) and fuel (i.e. distribution) stages, but not the vessel operation (burning of the fuel) stage.
• This section presents a summary of the energy and emissions calculated on each of the previous sheets. For example, cell C15 summarizes the CO2 emissions released by the use of residual oil during all vessel pre-operation fuel-cycle stages.
• The “Biodiesel CO2 Credit” (cell H24) presents the “negative CO2 emissions” allocated to the growing of soybeans. This cell represents the amount of CO2 that the growing of soybeans consumes or removes from the atmosphere.
Figure 72: Results Section 1
1) Well-to-Pump Energy Consumption and Emissions: Btu or grams per mmBtu of Fuel Available at Fuel Station Pumps
Residual OilConventional Diesel
Low-Sulfur Diesel
Compressed Natural Gas
Liquid Natural Gas Biodiesel FT Diesel
Total Energy 102987.72 209513.30 209536.50 167040.34 186996.98 247724.71 209513.30WTP Efficiency 90.66% 82.68% 82.68% 85.69% 84.25% 80.15% 82.68%Fossil Fuels 100619.40 205747.73 205770.72 157743.72 185862.11 242483.08 205747.73Petroleum 45044.15 96831.88 96850.34 5351.25 11275.16 95059.18 96831.88CO2 8425.58 16161.41 16325.42 12464.03 12629.33 3229.19 16161.41CH4 94.38 100.58 100.58 253.02 174.94 92.92 100.58N2O 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.19 0.26 0.97 0.26GHGs 10451.06 18354.20 18518.26 17836.93 16383.53 5482.40 18354.20VOC 4.16 8.35 8.50 2.39 1.03 8.87 8.35CO 10.36 13.33 13.39 35.04 9.34 24.62 13.33Nox 43.07 50.40 51.01 68.22 31.70 71.28 50.40PM10 10.58 11.84 12.04 1.58 1.08 11.30 11.84Sox 28.75 42.35 43.25 33.02 9.16 42.94 42.35
BD CO2 Credit -15163.54
81
2) Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions: Per Trip
2.1) Auxiliary Engine Energy Consumption and Emissions: Feedstock, Fuel & Operation
• This section presents the total fuel-cycle (well-to-hull) energy consumption and emissions for the auxiliary engines of the simulation vessel (in mmBtu/trip or g/trip). For each fuel alternative, energy use and emissions are presented separately for three stages: feedstock (including recovery, transportation, and storage), fuel (including production, transportation, storage, and distribution), and vessel operation.
• This section is not meant to be interpreted as major results of the simulation. It is simply a grid from which data will be drawn to add to the final results in Section 3 of this sheet.
• The “Biodiesel CO2 Credit” (cell O43) presents the “negative CO2 emissions” released during the growing of soybeans. This cell represents the amount of CO2 that the growing of soybeans removes from the atmosphere.
Figure 73: Results Section 2.1 is located on the next page.
82
Figure 73: Results Section 2.1
(This section is broken
83
into two screenshots for user viewing.)
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
10.0
314
.31
145.
668.
2026
.85
141.
258.
1491
.62
145.
669.
9613
.02
145.
667.
9226
.38
115.
048.
0991
.58
145.
660.
540.
250.
003.
549.
9411
5.04
0.53
1.28
0.00
6847
79.1
411
3097
6.56
8630
157.
57-1
4250
61.6
918
8560
2.59
1139
3498
.61
6526
69.6
728
4705
6.92
1126
8912
.23
3429
5.50
2561
.31
1221
6.84
1073
8.05
2392
.15
570.
6516
107.
9181
.26
588.
4810
.73
17.1
729
1.33
106.
1131
.51
565.
009.
831.
7829
1.33
1408
311.
6411
9008
8.13
8977
022.
99-1
1666
66.9
219
4560
4.72
1158
0632
.24
9939
82.2
728
4931
4.71
1137
1582
.07
137.
1621
0.99
1202
5.44
484.
9977
2.02
1166
1.03
49.3
174
9.12
1202
5.44
1083
.60
4021
.16
1802
5.05
1297
.37
2190
.43
3495
6.55
931.
7543
87.2
036
048.
9421
81.2
577
59.5
632
4813
.92
4655
.53
5505
.31
3149
71.0
717
50.5
934
05.8
232
4813
.92
52.7
517
7.20
78.6
612
79.7
332
5.88
7809
.71
47.0
526
.26
8053
.76
603.
6442
09.9
545
.01
2142
.41
3992
.02
2030
.49
572.
5571
9.30
0.00
BD
CO
2 C
redi
t-2
1418
50.0
9
Nat
ural
Gas
Bio
dies
elFT
Die
sel
2) A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne W
ell-t
o-H
ull E
nerg
y C
onsu
mpt
ion
and
Emis
sion
s: p
er T
rip2.
1) A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne E
nerg
y C
onsu
mpt
ion
and
Emis
sion
s: F
eeds
tock
, Fue
l & O
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Tota
l Ene
rgy
5.92
22.0
313
3.18
6.09
8.20
137.
106.
2823
.37
141.
25Fo
ssil
Fuel
s5.
7021
.74
133.
185.
878.
1013
7.10
6.05
23.0
714
1.25
Pet
role
um1.
9111
.03
133.
181.
964.
3713
7.10
2.02
11.7
014
1.25
CO
254
4708
.57
1611
313.
4410
6231
20.5
256
0651
.92
6085
13.0
011
2552
72.1
257
7721
.22
1732
147.
6311
4039
25.3
0C
H4
1209
4.41
1304
.96
538.
0412
448.
4150
5.23
553.
8712
827.
4013
84.3
257
0.65
N2O
9.68
25.0
126
6.36
9.96
9.64
274.
1910
.27
26.5
328
2.50
GH
Gs
8016
92.2
916
4647
1.99
1071
6990
.10
8251
57.4
362
2112
.69
1135
1902
.56
8502
79.7
217
6944
4.25
5034
83.9
4V
OC
435.
1767
9.81
1099
4.69
447.
9113
5.59
1131
8.06
461.
5474
2.63
1166
1.03
CO
1003
.33
781.
9332
959.
0310
32.6
942
4.22
3392
8.41
1064
.14
836.
8030
965.
24N
Ox
3663
.93
3137
.53
2969
72.7
337
71.1
724
81.8
830
5707
.22
3885
.99
3414
.09
3149
71.0
7P
M10
1276
.02
312.
0373
63.4
413
13.3
715
5.90
7580
.01
1353
.35
358.
8678
09.7
1S
Ox
1942
.38
3755
.15
2343
.94
1999
.23
2162
.43
3554
6.14
2060
.10
4110
.35
107.
26
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Res
idua
l Oil
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
l
11
2.2) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present in the Following Results Grids • This section identifies the auxiliary engine fuel type (as selected on the Inputs
sheet) to use in Section 3 of this sheet to calculate total well-to-hull energy consumption and emissions (auxiliary and main engines).
• This value can be altered in Section 6.1 of the Inputs sheet. • Any main engine fuel and auxiliary engine fuel combination may be used. For
example, if the user selects Biodiesel as the auxiliary engine fuel, Section 3 will show energy and emissions output for the vessel running on each of the six alternative, main engine fuels and Biodiesel as the auxiliary fuel. If the user changed the type of auxiliary engine fuel, press F9 to view results based on the change in fuel type.
Figure 74: Results Section 2.2
2.2) Auxiliary Engine Fuel Type to Present in the Following Results Grids (change on inputs sheet)
1: Conventional Diesel
84
3) Main and Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions: per Trip
• This section represents the main results of the TEAMS simulation. This section presents the total fuel-cycle energy consumption and emissions for the main and auxiliary engines of the simulation vessel (in mmBtu/trip or g/trip). For each fuel alternative, energy use and emissions are presented separately for the feedstock, fuel, and operation stages.
• There are six subsections of this table. Each subsection represents the simulation vessel with one of the six main engine fuels (conventional diesel, residual oil, low-sulfur diesel, natural gas, biodiesel, and Fischer-Tropsch diesel).
• Each of the six subsections will incorporate the auxiliary engine(s) based on the user-choice of auxiliary engine fuel type. For example, if the user selects Biodiesel for the auxiliary engine fuel type, the first subsection will show results with the vessel using conventional diesel as the main fuel and BD as the auxiliary fuel, the second subsection will show results with the vessel using residual oil as the main fuel and biodiesel as the auxiliary fuel, etc.
• Total Energy and Emissions. Column I of each of the six subsections shows the total energy consumed in mmBtu/trip and emissions in grams/trip for the simulation vessel. This includes the total fuel cycle, from well to hull, including all intermediate stages. Additionally, this includes energy and emissions from all onboard engines; auxiliary and main. Column I of each of the subsections should be thought of as the final result of the TEAMS simulation.
• Percentage of Each Stage. Percentage shares of energy use and emissions for each of the three stages (considering both main and auxiliary engines) are also presented in this section. For example, based on preliminary results, a 6500 TEU Container Ship using conventional diesel as its main fuel and Fischer-Tropsch diesel as its auxiliary fuel will consume about 4 percent of total energy consumption during the feedstock stage, about 14 percent of total energy consumption during the fuel stage, and about 82 percent of total energy consumption during vessel operation stage. It is common and expected that a vessel consume the majority of the total fuel cycle energy consumption during the vessel operation stage.
• This information is presented graphically in Section 1 of the Graphs sheet. See Figure 75: Results Section 3 (part 1 of 2) and Figure 76: Results Section 3 (part 2 of 2) located on the next two pages.
85
Figure 75: Results Section 3 (part 1 of 2)
3) Main and Auxiliary Engine Well-to-Hull Energy Consumption and Emissions: per Trip
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: Conventional DieselAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 7219.55 5.91 26852.12 21.99 162622.96 133.18 196855.71 3.67% 13.65% 82.68%Fossil Fuels 6952.94 5.69 26506.36 21.71 162622.96 133.18 196242.84 3.55% 13.52% 82.94%Petroleum 2321.23 1.90 13425.86 10.99 162622.96 133.18 178516.12 1.30% 7.53% 91.17%CO2 664418888.71 544119.65 1963796810.10 1608233.07 12971782886.63 10623120.52 15612774058.67 4.26% 12.59% 83.15%CH4 14767646.41 12093.83 1589415.77 1301.64 656996.75 538.04 17027992.44 86.80% 9.34% 3.86%N2O 11804.61 9.67 30456.33 24.94 325245.92 266.36 367807.82 3.21% 8.29% 88.50%GHGs 978198891.50 801086.85 2006616003.08 1643299.45 13086406052.52 10716990.10 16084382323.49 6.09% 12.49% 81.43%VOC 530704.50 434.62 826535.13 676.88 13425500.94 10994.69 14794846.75 3.59% 5.59% 90.82%CO 1223297.43 1001.81 944996.84 773.90 40245929.70 32959.03 42448958.70 2.88% 2.23% 94.89%NOx 4456652.07 3649.73 3739517.62 3062.44 362630332.60 296972.73 371130187.20 1.20% 1.01% 97.79%PM10 1547728.27 1267.50 378261.28 309.77 8991423.36 7363.44 10926353.62 14.18% 3.46% 82.36%SOx 2360569.13 1933.17 4526458.83 3706.90 2862164.06 2343.94 9757176.03 24.21% 46.43% 29.36%
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: Residual OilAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 7430.87 5.91 9809.89 21.99 167405.99 133.18 184807.83 4.02% 5.32% 90.66%Fossil Fuels 7156.45 5.69 9687.84 21.71 167405.99 133.18 184410.86 3.88% 5.27% 90.85%Petroleum 2389.17 1.90 5151.49 10.99 167405.99 133.18 175092.72 1.37% 2.95% 95.69%CO2 683866098.93 544119.65 726626112.67 1608233.07 13743696673.04 10623120.52 15166964357.88 4.51% 4.80% 90.69%CH4 15199888.08 12093.83 599192.73 1301.64 676320.19 538.04 16489334.49 92.25% 3.64% 4.10%N2O 12150.12 9.67 11391.34 24.94 334811.97 266.36 358654.40 3.39% 3.18% 93.43%GHGs 1006830286.25 801086.85 742740474.87 1643299.45 13861691108.51 10716990.10 15624423246.02 6.45% 4.76% 88.79%VOC 546237.96 434.62 149729.20 676.88 13820368.61 10994.69 14528441.96 3.76% 1.04% 95.20%CO 1259102.74 1001.81 474438.89 773.90 41429633.52 32959.03 43197909.88 2.92% 1.10% 95.98%NOx 4587096.06 3649.73 2623686.21 3062.44 373295930.62 296972.73 380810397.79 1.21% 0.69% 98.10%PM10 1593029.50 1267.50 178483.90 309.77 9255876.99 7363.44 11036331.10 14.45% 1.62% 83.93%SOx 2429661.81 1933.17 2383113.43 3706.90 43405024.16 2343.94 48225783.42 5.04% 4.95% 90.01%
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur DieselAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 7657.10 5.91 28483.52 21.99 172478.90 133.18 208780.60 3.67% 13.65% 82.68%Fossil Fuels 7374.33 5.69 28116.77 21.71 172478.90 133.18 208130.58 3.55% 13.52% 82.93%Petroleum 2461.91 1.90 14242.73 10.99 172478.90 133.18 189329.61 1.30% 7.53% 91.17%CO2 704686710.91 544119.65 2111103458.66 1608233.07 13925215542.13 10623120.52 16753781184.94 4.21% 12.61% 83.18%CH4 15662655.53 12093.83 1686065.39 1301.64 696814.74 538.04 18059469.16 86.80% 9.34% 3.86%N2O 12520.04 9.67 32307.56 24.94 344957.79 266.36 390086.35 3.21% 8.29% 88.50%GHGs 1037483688.65 801086.85 2156526174.95 1643299.45 14046785566.55 10716990.10 17253956806.56 6.02% 12.51% 81.47%VOC 562868.42 434.62 903024.49 676.88 14239167.66 10994.69 15717166.76 3.58% 5.75% 90.67%CO 1297436.69 1001.81 1011362.94 773.90 37811340.82 32959.03 40154875.18 3.23% 2.52% 94.25%NOx 4726752.27 3649.73 4071293.96 3062.44 384607928.52 296972.73 393709659.65 1.20% 1.03% 97.76%PM10 1641530.01 1267.50 435269.31 309.77 9536358.11 7363.44 11622098.13 14.14% 3.75% 82.12%SOx 2503633.96 1933.17 4956381.81 3706.90 130976.16 2343.94 7598975.95 32.97% 65.27% 1.75%
EngineOperation
mmBtu/trip or grams/trip Percentage of each stage
Feedstock Fuel Operation EngineOperation
Feedstock Fuel Operation
mmBtu/trip or grams/trip
Percentage of each stagemmBtu/trip or grams/trip
Feedstock Fuel Operation
Percentage of each stage
EngineOperation
86
Figure 76: Results Section 3 (part 2 of 2)
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: Natural GasAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 12243.53 5.91 17467.75 21.99 177868.86 133.18 207741.22 5.90% 8.42% 85.68%Fossil Fuels 12159.88 5.69 15897.82 21.71 177868.86 133.18 206087.14 5.90% 7.72% 86.37%Petroleum 652.93 1.90 298.89 10.99 0.00 133.18 1097.89 59.64% 28.23% 12.13%CO2 836176744.55 544119.65 1380785778.59 1608233.07 10538196382.21 10623120.52 12767934378.59 6.55% 10.83% 82.62%CH4 41877880.75 12093.83 3127343.70 1301.64 14917861.34 538.04 59937019.29 69.89% 5.22% 24.89%N2O 13104.33 9.67 20965.79 24.94 355737.72 266.36 390108.81 3.36% 5.38% 91.26%GHGs 1719674582.88 801086.85 1452959391.23 1643299.45 10961750163.82 10716990.10 14147545514.32 12.16% 10.28% 77.56%VOC 167455.05 434.62 257521.81 676.88 14684141.65 10994.69 15121224.70 1.11% 1.71% 97.18%CO 1323094.99 1001.81 4909877.68 773.90 22010204.28 32959.03 28277911.68 4.68% 17.37% 77.95%NOx 2662818.98 3649.73 9472113.28 3062.44 396626926.28 296972.73 409065543.45 0.65% 2.32% 97.03%PM10 64350.28 1267.50 216269.86 309.77 96049.18 7363.44 385610.04 17.02% 56.17% 26.82%SOx 736584.12 1933.17 5137056.52 3706.90 54961.48 2343.94 5936586.14 12.44% 86.59% 0.97%
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: BiodieselAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 9999.58 5.91 32727.70 21.99 172478.90 133.18 215367.26 4.65% 15.21% 80.15%Fossil Fuels 9663.94 5.69 32159.28 21.71 140477.83 133.18 182461.62 5.30% 17.64% 77.06%Petroleum 4310.74 1.90 12084.96 10.99 140477.83 133.18 157019.60 2.75% 7.70% 89.55%CO2 -1741181812.76 544119.65 2298148705.82 1608233.07 13912483620.19 10623120.52 14482225986.50 -12.02% 15.88% 96.14%CH4 13111057.66 12093.83 2916375.61 1301.64 696814.74 538.04 16738181.51 78.40% 17.43% 4.17%N2O 129551.18 9.67 38369.74 24.94 689915.58 266.36 858137.47 15.10% 4.47% 80.43%GHGs -1425688735.35 801086.85 2371287214.08 1643299.45 14140990559.57 10716990.10 15099750414.70 -9.44% 15.72% 93.72%VOC 591395.59 434.62 939099.79 676.88 14239167.66 10994.69 15781769.22 3.75% 5.95% 90.30%CO 1581976.85 1001.81 2664730.88 773.90 42685076.96 32959.03 46966519.42 3.37% 5.68% 90.95%NOx 5663899.77 3649.73 6630424.21 3062.44 384607928.52 296972.73 397205937.40 1.43% 1.67% 96.90%PM10 1553348.25 1267.50 395107.30 309.77 9536358.11 7363.44 11493754.37 13.53% 3.44% 83.03%SOx 2599615.32 1933.17 4806553.32 3706.90 2479406.32 2343.94 9893558.97 26.30% 48.62% 25.08%
BD CO2 Credit -2615391046.25 0.00
Vessel: Cont. Ship 6000 Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch DieselAuxiliary Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel
Item Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Main Auxiliary Total Feedstock FuelTotal Energy 9941.15 5.91 111623.56 21.99 177868.86 133.18 299594.65 3.32% 37.27% 59.41%Fossil Fuels 9880.10 5.69 111579.90 21.71 177868.86 133.18 299489.43 3.30% 37.26% 59.44%Petroleum 645.48 1.90 1321.92 10.99 0.00 133.18 2113.48 30.63% 63.07% 6.30%CO2 796936759.37 544119.65 3455779419.70 1608233.07 13760352474.61 10623120.52 18025844126.92 4.42% 19.18% 76.40%CH4 19669197.11 12093.83 77322.64 1301.64 718590.20 538.04 20479043.45 96.10% 0.38% 3.51%N2O 11999.74 9.67 1684.79 24.94 355737.72 266.36 369723.22 3.25% 0.46% 96.29%GHGs 1213709818.58 801086.85 3457925479.98 1643299.45 13885721562.29 10716990.10 18570518237.25 6.54% 18.63% 74.83%VOC 60181.79 434.62 904781.10 676.88 14684141.65 10994.69 15661210.74 0.39% 5.78% 93.83%CO 1137684.52 1001.81 5328809.25 773.90 44018985.61 32959.03 50520214.11 2.25% 10.55% 87.20%NOx 2136966.39 3649.73 3917364.24 3062.44 396626926.28 296972.73 402984941.81 0.53% 0.97% 98.50%PM10 57400.48 1267.50 23849.33 309.77 9834369.30 7363.44 9924559.82 0.59% 0.24% 99.17%SOx 698645.81 1933.17 553370.88 3706.90 0.00 2343.94 1260000.70 55.60% 44.21% 0.19%
Percentage of each stage
Feedstock Fuel Operation EngineOperation
Percentage of each stage
Feedstock Fuel Operation EngineOperation
Percentage of each stage
Feedstock Fuel Operation EngineOperation
mmBtu/trip or grams/trip
mmBtu/trip or grams/trip
mmBtu/trip or grams/trip
87
4) Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes • This section presents the percent change in total fuel-cycle energy use and
emissions for the simulation vessel running on each of the six alternative fuel types with respect to conventional diesel.
• This section includes energy and emissions from both main and auxiliary engines. However, energy and emissions from the auxiliary engines is constant regardless of main engine fuel type.
• This information is presented graphically in Section 2 of the Graphs sheet. Figure 77: Results Section 4
4) Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes (%, relative to vessel with main engines using Conventional Diesel)
Residual OilLow-Sulfur
Diesel Natural Gas BiodieselFischer-Tropsch
DieselTotal Energy -6.04% 6.06% 5.50% 9.40% 52.25%Fossil Fuels -5.95% 6.06% 4.99% -7.01% 52.67%Petroleum -1.84% 6.06% -99.46% -12.04% -98.76%CO2 -2.77% 7.31% -18.24% -7.23% 15.55%CH4 -3.08% 6.06% 251.85% -1.69% 20.36%N2O -2.41% 6.06% 6.03% 133.29% 0.62%GHGs -2.78% 7.27% -12.06% -6.11% 15.55%VOC: Total -1.72% 6.23% 2.18% 6.67% 5.89%CO: Total 1.84% -5.40% -33.40% 10.64% 19.05%NOx: Total 2.69% 6.08% 10.19% 7.03% 8.62%PM10: Total 1.09% 6.37% -96.48% 5.18% -9.20%SOx: Total 393.74% -21.93% -39.58% 1.54% -83.92%
88
Sheet 14: “Graphs” Overview This sheet graphically presents shares of energy use and emissions by feedstock, fuel, and vessel operation for the simulation vessel using each of the six alternative fuel types and a selected auxiliary engine fuel type. Furthermore, the sheet shows changes in energy use and emissions for the simulation vessel using each alternative fuel type relative to the vessel powered by conventional diesel. Section Breakdown
1) Contribution of Each Stage to Total Fuel-Cycle Energy Consumption and Emissions
• There are six graphs in this section. Each graph visually presents the results calculated in the sections entitled “Percentage of Each Stage” in each of the six subsections of Section 3 of the Results sheet.
• Figure 77 on the next page provides an example. This graph represents the simulation vessel “Container Ship – 6500 TEU” utilizing Fischer-Tropsch Diesel as a main engine fuel and Biodiesel as an auxiliary engine fuel. As explained in the previous section, the percentage of each stage is calculated considering the total energy consumed and emissions emitted (including the total fuel-cycle for both main and auxiliary engines).
• In the graph, each bar is broken into three sections: feedstock (yellow), fuel (green), and engine operation (tan) and represents the percent of energy consumed or emissions produced during each stage of the fuel cycle.
• In these preliminary results, we see that the majority of energy consumption and emissions are emitted during the vessel operation stage. However, this is not always the case. For example, as one can see in the graph, almost all CH4 emissions are produced during the feedstock phase of the fuel cycle. Additionally, the SOx emissions are divided almost evenly between the feedstock and fuel stages with essentially no SOx during the engine operation stage. Results are obviously a function of fuel type.
See Figure 78: Graphs Section 1 – Example Graphical Results located on the next page.
89
Figure 78: Graphs Section 1 – Example Graphical Results
1) Contribution of Each Stage to Total Fuel-Cycle Energy Consumption and Emissions
Scroll horizontal for comparisons.
Vessel: Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch DieselContainer Ship - 6500 TEU Auxiliary Engine Fuel: Biodiesel
Your Vessel using Fisher-Tropsch DieselContribution of Each Stage
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Total E
nergy
Fossil
Fuels
Petrole
um CO2CH4
N2OGHGs
VOC CONOx
PM10 SOx
Feedstock Fuel Engine Operation
90
2) Reductions in Energy Use and Emissions by Fuel Type • There are twelve graphs in this section. Each graph visually presents the results
calculated in Section 4 of the Results sheet. • Figure 78 below provides an example. In the graph, we see the percent change in
total fuel-cycle CO2 emissions for the simulation vessel running its main engines on five alternative fuels compared to running its main engines on conventional diesel (the baseline fuel). In these preliminary results, we see that when considering total fuel-cycles, running the vessel on Fischer-Tropsch diesel or low-sulfur diesel would produce considerably greater amounts of CO2 emissions in comparison to running on conventional diesel. This is partly due to the extensive refining processes undergone to produce FTD and low sulfur diesel which, in turn produce higher quantities of CO2. However, running the vessel on BD, NG, or residual oil would produce considerably smaller amounts of CO2 emissions in comparison to running on conventional diesel. This is partly due to the biodiesel CO2 credit, the cleanliness of burning natural gas, and the limited refining processes associated with residual oil.
Figure 79: Graphs Section 2 – Example Graphical Results
2) Reductions in Energy Use and Emissions by Fuel Type (% Relative to Vessel Fueled with Conventional Diesel)Scroll vertical for comparisons…
Percent Change in CO2 Emissions
-20.00% -15.00% -10.00% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
91
9. EXAMPLE RESULTS The TEAMS development team is currently conducting research and undergoing case-study analysis using the TEAMS model to obtain technical information for further TEAMS model development. Please refer to Appendix A for a discussion relating to the results of the case-study analyses. The case-study analysis demonstrates more accurate default assumptions and results for particular cases. On the basis of default assumptions in TEAMS version 1.3, the development team has calculated energy use and emissions of a simulation vessel using six main engine fuel types: conventional diesel, residual oil, low-sulfur diesel, natural gas, biodiesel, and Fischer-Tropsch diesel. For the purpose of this simulation, we assume the vessel’s auxiliary engines use conventional diesel. The following is a summary of key assumptions for the example simulation vessel and the resulting charts and graphs from the Results and Graphs sheets of the TEAMS model: Vessel Type ID Cont. Ship 6000 Number of Engines 1 Single Engine HP 82272 HP Total Onboard HP 82272 HP Total Trip Distance 4000.00 miles Total Trip Time 308.55 hours Percent of Trip in Mode Idle 1.00% Maneuvering 4.00% Precautionary 5.00% Slow Cruise 10.00% Full Cruise 80.00% HP Load Factor Idle 12.50% Maneuvering 25.00% Precautionary 50.00% Slow Cruise 85.00% Full Cruise 95.00% Engine Efficiency Conventional Diesel 35% Residual Oil 34% Low-Sulfur Diesel 33% Natural Gas 32% Biodiesel 33% FT Diesel 32% No. of Onboard Auxiliary Engines 2 No. of Auxiliary Engines in Use 1 Auxiliary Engine HP 125 HP Total Onboard Aux. HP (Engines In Use) 125 HP Percent of trip Aux. Active 95.00% Aux. Load Factor 50.00% Aux. Engine Efficiency 35%
92
Figure 80: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Ve
ssel
: C
ont.
Ship
600
0M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 72
19.5
55.
9126
852.
1221
.99
1626
22.9
613
3.18
1968
55.7
13.
67%
13.6
5%82
.68%
Foss
il Fu
els
6952
.94
5.69
2650
6.36
21.7
116
2622
.96
133.
1819
6242
.84
3.55
%13
.52%
82.9
4%P
etro
leum
2321
.23
1.90
1342
5.86
10.9
916
2622
.96
133.
1817
8516
.12
1.30
%7.
53%
91.1
7%C
O2
6644
1888
8.71
5441
19.6
519
6379
6810
.10
1608
233.
0712
9717
8288
6.63
1062
3120
.52
1561
2774
058.
674.
26%
12.5
9%83
.15%
CH
414
7676
46.4
112
093.
8315
8941
5.77
1301
.64
6569
96.7
553
8.04
1702
7992
.44
86.8
0%9.
34%
3.86
%N
2O11
804.
619.
6730
456.
3324
.94
3252
45.9
226
6.36
3678
07.8
23.
21%
8.29
%88
.50%
GH
Gs
9781
9889
1.50
8010
86.8
520
0661
6003
.08
1643
299.
4513
0864
0605
2.52
1071
6990
.10
1608
4382
323.
496.
09%
12.4
9%81
.43%
VO
C53
0704
.50
434.
6282
6535
.13
676.
8813
4255
00.9
410
994.
6914
7948
46.7
53.
59%
5.59
%90
.82%
CO
1223
297.
4310
01.8
194
4996
.84
773.
9040
2459
29.7
032
959.
0342
4489
58.7
02.
88%
2.23
%94
.89%
NO
x44
5665
2.07
3649
.73
3739
517.
6230
62.4
436
2630
332.
6029
6972
.73
3711
3018
7.20
1.20
%1.
01%
97.7
9%P
M10
1547
728.
2712
67.5
037
8261
.28
309.
7789
9142
3.36
7363
.44
1092
6353
.62
14.1
8%3.
46%
82.3
6%S
Ox
2360
569.
1319
33.1
745
2645
8.83
3706
.90
2862
164.
0623
43.9
497
5717
6.03
24.2
1%46
.43%
29.3
6%
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ip
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Figure 81: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 650
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
93
Figure 82: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Figure 83: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Vess
el:
Con
t. Sh
ip 6
000
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 74
30.8
75.
9198
09.8
921
.99
1674
05.9
913
3.18
1848
07.8
34.
02%
5.32
%90
.66%
Foss
il Fu
els
7156
.45
5.69
9687
.84
21.7
116
7405
.99
133.
1818
4410
.86
3.88
%5.
27%
90.8
5%P
etro
leum
2389
.17
1.90
5151
.49
10.9
916
7405
.99
133.
1817
5092
.72
1.37
%2.
95%
95.6
9%C
O2
6838
6609
8.93
5441
19.6
572
6626
112.
6716
0823
3.07
1374
3696
673.
0410
6231
20.5
215
1669
6435
7.88
4.51
%4.
80%
90.6
9%C
H4
1519
9888
.08
1209
3.83
5991
92.7
313
01.6
467
6320
.19
538.
0416
4893
34.4
992
.25%
3.64
%4.
10%
N2O
1215
0.12
9.67
1139
1.34
24.9
433
4811
.97
266.
3635
8654
.40
3.39
%3.
18%
93.4
3%G
HG
s10
0683
0286
.25
8010
86.8
574
2740
474.
8716
4329
9.45
1386
1691
108.
5110
7169
90.1
015
6244
2324
6.02
6.45
%4.
76%
88.7
9%V
OC
5462
37.9
643
4.62
1497
29.2
067
6.88
1382
0368
.61
1099
4.69
1452
8441
.96
3.76
%1.
04%
95.2
0%C
O12
5910
2.74
1001
.81
4744
38.8
977
3.90
4142
9633
.52
3295
9.03
4319
7909
.88
2.92
%1.
10%
95.9
8%N
Ox
4587
096.
0636
49.7
326
2368
6.21
3062
.44
3732
9593
0.62
2969
72.7
338
0810
397.
791.
21%
0.69
%98
.10%
PM
1015
9302
9.50
1267
.50
1784
83.9
030
9.77
9255
876.
9973
63.4
411
0363
31.1
014
.45%
1.62
%83
.93%
SO
x24
2966
1.81
1933
.17
2383
113.
4337
06.9
043
4050
24.1
623
43.9
448
2257
83.4
25.
04%
4.95
%90
.01%
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 650
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
94
Figure 84: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Figure 85: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Vess
el:
Con
t. Sh
ip 6
000
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 76
57.1
05.
9128
483.
5221
.99
1724
78.9
013
3.18
2087
80.6
03.
67%
13.6
5%82
.68%
Foss
il Fu
els
7374
.33
5.69
2811
6.77
21.7
117
2478
.90
133.
1820
8130
.58
3.55
%13
.52%
82.9
3%P
etro
leum
2461
.91
1.90
1424
2.73
10.9
917
2478
.90
133.
1818
9329
.61
1.30
%7.
53%
91.1
7%C
O2
7046
8671
0.91
5441
19.6
521
1110
3458
.66
1608
233.
0713
9252
1554
2.13
1062
3120
.52
1675
3781
184.
944.
21%
12.6
1%83
.18%
CH
415
6626
55.5
312
093.
8316
8606
5.39
1301
.64
6968
14.7
453
8.04
1805
9469
.16
86.8
0%9.
34%
3.86
%N
2O12
520.
049.
6732
307.
5624
.94
3449
57.7
926
6.36
3900
86.3
53.
21%
8.29
%88
.50%
GH
Gs
1037
4836
88.6
580
1086
.85
2156
5261
74.9
516
4329
9.45
1404
6785
566.
5510
7169
90.1
017
2539
5680
6.56
6.02
%12
.51%
81.4
7%V
OC
5628
68.4
243
4.62
9030
24.4
967
6.88
1423
9167
.66
1099
4.69
1571
7166
.76
3.58
%5.
75%
90.6
7%C
O12
9743
6.69
1001
.81
1011
362.
9477
3.90
3781
1340
.82
3295
9.03
4015
4875
.18
3.23
%2.
52%
94.2
5%N
Ox
4726
752.
2736
49.7
340
7129
3.96
3062
.44
3846
0792
8.52
2969
72.7
339
3709
659.
651.
20%
1.03
%97
.76%
PM
1016
4153
0.01
1267
.50
4352
69.3
130
9.77
9536
358.
1173
63.4
411
6220
98.1
314
.14%
3.75
%82
.12%
SO
x25
0363
3.96
1933
.17
4956
381.
8137
06.9
013
0976
.16
2343
.94
7598
975.
9532
.97%
65.2
7%1.
75%
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ipPe
rcen
tage
of e
ach
stag
e
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
onta
iner
Shi
p - 6
500
TEU
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
95
Figure 86: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Figure 87: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Vess
el:
Con
t. Sh
ip 6
000
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 12
243.
535.
9117
467.
7521
.99
1778
68.8
613
3.18
2077
41.2
25.
90%
8.42
%85
.68%
Foss
il Fu
els
1215
9.88
5.69
1589
7.82
21.7
117
7868
.86
133.
1820
6087
.14
5.90
%7.
72%
86.3
7%P
etro
leum
652.
931.
9029
8.89
10.9
90.
0013
3.18
1097
.89
59.6
4%28
.23%
12.1
3%C
O2
8361
7674
4.55
5441
19.6
513
8078
5778
.59
1608
233.
0710
5381
9638
2.21
1062
3120
.52
1276
7934
378.
596.
55%
10.8
3%82
.62%
CH
441
8778
80.7
512
093.
8331
2734
3.70
1301
.64
1491
7861
.34
538.
0459
9370
19.2
969
.89%
5.22
%24
.89%
N2O
1310
4.33
9.67
2096
5.79
24.9
435
5737
.72
266.
3639
0108
.81
3.36
%5.
38%
91.2
6%G
HG
s17
1967
4582
.88
8010
86.8
514
5295
9391
.23
1643
299.
4510
9617
5016
3.82
1071
6990
.10
1414
7545
514.
3212
.16%
10.2
8%77
.56%
VO
C16
7455
.05
434.
6225
7521
.81
676.
8814
6841
41.6
510
994.
6915
1212
24.7
01.
11%
1.71
%97
.18%
CO
1323
094.
9910
01.8
149
0987
7.68
773.
9022
0102
04.2
832
959.
0328
2779
11.6
84.
68%
17.3
7%77
.95%
NO
x26
6281
8.98
3649
.73
9472
113.
2830
62.4
439
6626
926.
2829
6972
.73
4090
6554
3.45
0.65
%2.
32%
97.0
3%P
M10
6435
0.28
1267
.50
2162
69.8
630
9.77
9604
9.18
7363
.44
3856
10.0
417
.02%
56.1
7%26
.82%
SO
x73
6584
.12
1933
.17
5137
056.
5237
06.9
054
961.
4823
43.9
459
3658
6.14
12.4
4%86
.59%
0.97
%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 650
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
96
Figure 88: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Vess
el:
Con
t. Sh
ip 6
000
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Bio
dies
elA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 99
99.5
85.
9132
727.
7021
.99
1724
78.9
013
3.18
2153
67.2
64.
65%
15.2
1%80
.15%
Foss
il Fu
els
9663
.94
5.69
3215
9.28
21.7
114
0477
.83
133.
1818
2461
.62
5.30
%17
.64%
77.0
6%P
etro
leum
4310
.74
1.90
1208
4.96
10.9
914
0477
.83
133.
1815
7019
.60
2.75
%7.
70%
89.5
5%C
O2
-174
1181
812.
7654
4119
.65
2298
1487
05.8
216
0823
3.07
1391
2483
620.
1910
6231
20.5
214
4822
2598
6.50
-12.
02%
15.8
8%96
.14%
CH
413
1110
57.6
612
093.
8329
1637
5.61
1301
.64
6968
14.7
453
8.04
1673
8181
.51
78.4
0%17
.43%
4.17
%N
2O12
9551
.18
9.67
3836
9.74
24.9
468
9915
.58
266.
3685
8137
.47
15.1
0%4.
47%
80.4
3%G
HG
s-1
4256
8873
5.35
8010
86.8
523
7128
7214
.08
1643
299.
4514
1409
9055
9.57
1071
6990
.10
1509
9750
414.
70-9
.44%
15.7
2%93
.72%
VO
C59
1395
.59
434.
6293
9099
.79
676.
8814
2391
67.6
610
994.
6915
7817
69.2
23.
75%
5.95
%90
.30%
CO
1581
976.
8510
01.8
126
6473
0.88
773.
9042
6850
76.9
632
959.
0346
9665
19.4
23.
37%
5.68
%90
.95%
NO
x56
6389
9.77
3649
.73
6630
424.
2130
62.4
438
4607
928.
5229
6972
.73
3972
0593
7.40
1.43
%1.
67%
96.9
0%P
M10
1553
348.
2512
67.5
039
5107
.30
309.
7795
3635
8.11
7363
.44
1149
3754
.37
13.5
3%3.
44%
83.0
3%S
Ox
2599
615.
3219
33.1
748
0655
3.32
3706
.90
2479
406.
3223
43.9
498
9355
8.97
26.3
0%48
.62%
25.0
8%
BD
CO
2 C
redi
t-2
6153
9104
6.25
0.00
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ip
Figure 89: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Ves
sel:
M
ain
Eng
ine
Fuel
: B
iodi
esel
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 650
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Eng
ine
Fuel
: C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
You
r V
esse
l usi
ng B
iodi
esel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h S
tage
-20%0%20
%
40%
60%
80%
100% To
tal E
nergy
Fossil
Fuels
Petrole
um
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
97
Figure 90: Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Figure 91: Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Vess
el:
Con
t. Sh
ip 6
000
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 99
41.1
55.
9111
1623
.56
21.9
917
7868
.86
133.
1829
9594
.65
3.32
%37
.27%
59.4
1%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s98
80.1
05.
6911
1579
.90
21.7
117
7868
.86
133.
1829
9489
.43
3.30
%37
.26%
59.4
4%P
etro
leum
645.
481.
9013
21.9
210
.99
0.00
133.
1821
13.4
830
.63%
63.0
7%6.
30%
CO
279
6936
759.
3754
4119
.65
3455
7794
19.7
016
0823
3.07
1376
0352
474.
6110
6231
20.5
218
0258
4412
6.92
4.42
%19
.18%
76.4
0%C
H4
1966
9197
.11
1209
3.83
7732
2.64
1301
.64
7185
90.2
053
8.04
2047
9043
.45
96.1
0%0.
38%
3.51
%N
2O11
999.
749.
6716
84.7
924
.94
3557
37.7
226
6.36
3697
23.2
23.
25%
0.46
%96
.29%
GH
Gs
1213
7098
18.5
880
1086
.85
3457
9254
79.9
816
4329
9.45
1388
5721
562.
2910
7169
90.1
018
5705
1823
7.25
6.54
%18
.63%
74.8
3%V
OC
6018
1.79
434.
6290
4781
.10
676.
8814
6841
41.6
510
994.
6915
6612
10.7
40.
39%
5.78
%93
.83%
CO
1137
684.
5210
01.8
153
2880
9.25
773.
9044
0189
85.6
132
959.
0350
5202
14.1
12.
25%
10.5
5%87
.20%
NO
x21
3696
6.39
3649
.73
3917
364.
2430
62.4
439
6626
926.
2829
6972
.73
4029
8494
1.81
0.53
%0.
97%
98.5
0%P
M10
5740
0.48
1267
.50
2384
9.33
309.
7798
3436
9.30
7363
.44
9924
559.
820.
59%
0.24
%99
.17%
SO
x69
8645
.81
1933
.17
5533
70.8
837
06.9
00.
0023
43.9
412
6000
0.70
55.6
0%44
.21%
0.19
%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
mm
Btu
/trip
or g
ram
s/tr
ip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 650
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Fis
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
98
Figure 92: Tabular Results - Percent Changes Energy Consumption and Emissions Relative to Conventional Diesel
Residual OilLow-Sulfur
Diesel Natural Gas BiodieselFischer-Tropsch
DieselTotal Energy -6.04% 6.06% 5.50% 9.40% 52.28%Fossil Fuels -5.95% 6.06% 4.99% -7.02% 52.70%Petroleum -1.84% 6.06% -99.38% -12.03% -98.68%CO2 -2.77% 7.31% -18.24% -7.23% 15.56%CH4 -3.08% 6.06% 251.89% -1.69% 20.36%N2O -2.41% 6.06% 6.03% 133.29% 0.62%GHGs -2.78% 7.27% -12.07% -6.11% 15.56%VOC: Total -1.72% 6.23% 2.18% 6.67% 5.89%CO: Total 1.84% -5.40% -33.40% 10.64% 19.05%NOx: Total 2.69% 6.08% 10.19% 7.03% 8.62%PM10: Total 1.09% 6.37% -96.47% 5.18% -9.20%SOx: Total 393.47% -21.92% -39.55% 1.54% -83.87%
Figure 93: Graphical Results – Percent Change in Total Energy Consumption
Percent Change in Total Energy Consumption
-10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 94: Graphical Results – Percent Change in Fossil Fuel Consumption
Percent Change in Fossil Fuel Consumption
-20.00% -10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
99
Figure 95: Graphical Results – Percent Change in Petroleum Consumption
Percent Change in Petroleum Consumption
-120.00% -100.00% -80.00% -60.00% -40.00% -20.00% 0.00% 20.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 96: Graphical Results – Percent Change in CO2 Emissions
Percent Change in CO2 Emissions
-20.00% -15.00% -10.00% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 97: Graphical Results – Percent Change in CH4 Emissions
Percent Change in CH4 Emissions
-50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 100.00% 150.00% 200.00% 250.00% 300.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
100
Figure 98: Graphical Results – Percent Change in N2O Emissions
Percent Change in N2O Emissions
-20.00% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% 140.00% 160.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 99: Graphical Results – Percent Change in Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Percent Change in Greenhouse Gas Emissions
-15.00% -10.00% -5.00% 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 100: Graphical Results – Percent Change in VOC Emissions
Percent Change in VOC Emissions
-3.00% -2.00% -1.00% 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
101
Figure 101: Graphical Results – Percent Change in CO Emissions
Percent Change in CO Emissions
-40.00% -30.00% -20.00% -10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 102: Graphical Results – Percent Change in NOx Emissions
Percent Change in NOx Emissions
0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
Figure 103: Graphical Results – Percent Change in PM10 Emissions
Percent Change in PM10 Emissions
-120.00% -100.00% -80.00% -60.00% -40.00% -20.00% 0.00% 20.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
102
Figure 104: Graphical Results – Percent Change in SOx Emissions
Percent Change in SOx Emissions
-200.00% -100.00% 0.00% 100.00% 200.00% 300.00% 400.00% 500.00%
Residual Oil
Low -Sulfur Diesel
Natural Gas
Biodiesel
Fischer-Tropsch Diesel
103
APPENDIX A. CASE STUDIES
A.1 Case Study 1: Ferry Vessel Vessel description: Fast ferry typical for U.S. routes, particularly in New York/New Jersey transit. This ferry would be representative of a larger privately operated passenger ferry, with passenger capacity of 400 persons, operating on an 18 nautical mile route (Winebrake et al. 2005).7 Vessel characteristics: This vessel has 4 main engines, rated at 1950 Hp each, with total main propulsion power of about 7800 Hp. The vessel has 2 auxiliary engines, each rated at 127 Hp, for a total installed auxiliary power of about 255 Hp. The engines operate on conventional diesel fuel, most often meeting on-road heavy duty diesel specifications. Trip characterization: Total one-way trip distance is 18 nautical miles, with a peak (full cruise) speed of 38 knots (nautical miles per hour). Based on published schedules, the trip takes 55 minutes. Previous analyses determined the main engine duty cycle on the route, which was applied to the engine characterization by mode in TEAMS (Winebrake et al. 2005). Auxiliary engine operation assumes that both AEs operate at all times, at an average load of approximately 75% of full load, consistent with previous analyses (Winebrake et al. 2005). Inputs: This case only discusses those elements specific to the case study; default parameters in TEAMS are discussed in Section 8 and 9 of this document. Inputs Section 1. Conventional diesel characteristics followed current non-road diesel specifications, although actual fuel sulfur content may be lower. Figure 105: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 1.2
1.2) Petroleum-Based Efficiency Options
7
P
Sulfur LevelRefining Efficiency
Conventional Diesel 350 87.5%Low-Sulfur Diesel 15 87.5%Crude Oil 16,000Residual Oil (Marine Bunkers) 24,000 95.5%
Information for this case study was obtained from an FTA-funded project, An Evaluation of Public-rivate Incentives to Reduce Emissions from Regional Ferries, FTA Project ID: NJ-42-0002-00.
104
Inputs Section 2: Department of Energy data show that significant residual fuel is transported from refineries in the Gulf Coast to the Northeast region, including to New York. Therefore, the navigable distance of 2000 miles from Houston to New York was used for this case study. Other distances use default distances by mode obtained from the 2002 Commodity Flow Survey, updating the 1998 CFS data used in recent GREET model defaults. Figure 106: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 2.4
2.4) Distance from Feedstock Recovery Site to Fuel Stations for Different Fuels: miles (One-Way Distance)
PADD 3 to PADD 1 movement of residual fuel - same for ferry and tankerPetroleum Based → Crude Oil Residual Oil US Diesel US LS Diesel
Ocean Tanker 500 2000 1,450 1,450Barge 500 50 520 520
Pipeline 750 400 400Rail 800 800 800 800
Truck for Distribution 170 170
Inputs Section 5: Key input parameters for simulating main engine operations were obtained from data used in previous vessel analyses of ferries in New York/New Jersey. Figure 107: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.1
F
5) Key Input Parameters for Simulating Main Engine Operations5.1) Main Engine Variables
Vessel Type IDNumber of Engines
Single Engine HPTotal Onboard HP
4Ferry - New York/New Jersey
78001950
igure 108: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.2
5.2) Trip Distance and Time
Total Trip Distance (miles) 20.00
Trip TimeHours 0.00
Minutes 55.00
Total Trip Time (hours) 0.92
105
Figure 109: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.3
5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode
Idle Maneuvering Precautionary Slow Cruise Full Cruisepercent of trip in mode based on time 32.00% 32.00% 18.00% 10.00% 8.00%
time per mode (hours) 0.29 0.29 0.17 0.09 0.07
HP load factor (single engine) 13.00% 25.00% 49.00% 85.00% 100.00%HP per engine 254 488 956 1,658 1,950 Total
Energy Consumption (kWh) (all engines) 221.80 426.54 470.26 453.20 426.54 1998.34 kWh out
Engine Mode
Inputs Section 6: Key input parameters for simulating auxiliary engine operations were obtained from data used in previous vessel analyses of ferries in New York/New Jersey. Figure 110: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.2
6.2) Auxiliary Engine Variables
F
Caff
Number of Auxiliary Engines 2Auxiliary Engine HP 127
Total Onboard Auxiliary HP 254
igure 111: FERRY CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.3
6.3) Auxiliary Engine Characterization (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
percent of trip Auxiliary engine(s) active; based on time 100.00%time active (hours) 0.92
HP load factor (single engine) 75.00%HP per Auxiliary engine 95
Total Auxiliary Energy Consumption (kWh) 130.22
ase Validation: TEAMS results for total energy usage agreed very well with previous nalyses (97% of earlier estimates for total energy use). Expected differences include the act that TEAMS estimates one trip, while the earlier work estimated weekly and annual uel usage.
106
Case Results: Figure 112: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 0.
600.
042.
630.
1915
.15
1.11
19.7
33.
24%
14.3
1%82
.44%
Foss
il Fu
els
0.57
0.04
2.60
0.19
15.1
51.
1119
.66
3.12
%14
.18%
82.7
0%P
etro
leum
0.14
0.01
1.37
0.10
15.1
51.
1117
.88
0.86
%8.
20%
90.9
3%C
O2
5560
7.09
4076
.46
1936
83.8
014
198.
6412
0903
8.08
8863
2.56
1565
236.
633.
81%
13.2
8%82
.91%
CH
413
69.1
110
0.37
159.
3911
.68
61.2
94.
4917
06.3
386
.12%
10.0
3%3.
86%
N2O
0.95
0.07
3.11
0.23
0.00
0.00
4.36
23.4
5%76
.55%
0.00
%G
HG
s84
653.
4662
05.8
019
7994
.60
1451
4.65
1210
325.
2388
726.
9216
0242
0.67
5.67
%13
.26%
81.0
7%V
OC
43.3
33.
1881
.05
5.94
1300
.91
95.3
715
29.7
83.
04%
5.69
%91
.27%
CO
97.1
17.
1210
4.79
7.68
3464
.71
253.
9939
35.4
12.
65%
2.86
%94
.49%
NO
x25
8.14
18.9
241
6.35
30.5
233
448.
4524
52.0
536
624.
440.
76%
1.22
%98
.02%
PM
1040
.81
2.99
38.1
02.
7960
6.88
44.4
973
6.07
5.95
%5.
56%
88.4
9%S
Ox
116.
038.
5141
8.02
30.6
426
7.43
19.6
086
0.24
14.4
8%52
.16%
33.3
7%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Figure 113: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
107
Figure 114: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Figure 115: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 0.
600.
040.
820.
1915
.15
1.11
17.9
23.
57%
5.66
%90
.77%
Foss
il Fu
els
0.57
0.04
0.81
0.19
15.1
51.
1117
.88
3.43
%5.
60%
90.9
7%P
etro
leum
0.14
0.01
0.41
0.10
15.1
51.
1116
.93
0.91
%3.
03%
96.0
5%C
O2
5559
9.40
4076
.46
6188
7.71
1419
8.64
1243
941.
4888
632.
5614
6833
6.26
4.06
%5.
18%
90.7
5%C
H4
1368
.92
100.
3749
.01
11.6
861
.29
4.49
1595
.76
92.0
7%3.
80%
4.12
%N
2O0.
950.
070.
950.
2330
.30
0.00
32.5
03.
14%
3.63
%93
.23%
GH
Gs
8464
1.76
6205
.80
6321
1.78
1451
4.65
1254
622.
8088
726.
9215
1192
3.71
6.01
%5.
14%
88.8
5%V
OC
43.3
23.
189.
825.
9412
50.8
895
.37
1408
.51
3.30
%1.
12%
95.5
8%C
O97
.10
7.12
30.6
67.
6833
31.4
625
3.99
3728
.01
2.80
%1.
03%
96.1
8%N
Ox
258.
1018
.92
146.
9830
.52
3378
6.31
2452
.05
3669
2.89
0.75
%0.
48%
98.7
6%P
M10
40.8
12.
9916
.61
2.79
3034
.40
44.4
931
42.0
91.
39%
0.62
%97
.99%
SO
x11
6.02
8.51
157.
6530
.64
1799
3.28
19.6
018
325.
700.
68%
1.03
%98
.29%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
108
Figure 116: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Figure 117: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 0.
670.
042.
960.
1917
.05
1.11
22.0
23.
24%
14.3
2%82
.44%
Foss
il Fu
els
0.64
0.04
2.92
0.19
17.0
51.
1121
.96
3.12
%14
.18%
82.7
0%P
etro
leum
0.16
0.01
1.54
0.10
17.0
51.
1119
.97
0.86
%8.
21%
90.9
3%C
O2
6255
7.97
4076
.46
2207
37.2
814
198.
6413
7620
9.92
8863
2.56
1766
412.
843.
77%
13.3
0%82
.93%
CH
415
40.2
410
0.37
179.
3911
.68
68.9
54.
4919
05.1
386
.12%
10.0
3%3.
86%
N2O
1.07
0.07
3.50
0.23
0.00
0.00
4.87
23.4
4%76
.56%
0.00
%G
HG
s95
235.
1462
05.8
022
5589
.18
1451
4.65
1377
657.
9788
726.
9218
0792
9.67
5.61
%13
.28%
81.1
1%V
OC
48.7
43.
1893
.81
5.94
1463
.53
95.3
717
10.5
73.
04%
5.83
%91
.13%
CO
109.
257.
1211
8.86
7.68
3897
.80
253.
9943
94.7
12.
65%
2.88
%94
.47%
NO
x29
0.41
18.9
247
9.09
30.5
237
629.
5124
52.0
540
900.
500.
76%
1.25
%98
.00%
PM
1045
.92
2.99
46.2
42.
7968
2.74
44.4
982
5.17
5.93
%5.
94%
88.1
3%S
Ox
130.
548.
5148
5.66
30.6
412
.94
19.6
068
7.90
20.2
1%75
.06%
4.73
%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lFe
rry
- New
Yor
k/N
ew J
erse
yA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
109
Figure 118: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Figure 119: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 1.
340.
041.
910.
1919
.48
1.11
24.0
85.
75%
8.74
%85
.51%
Foss
il Fu
els
1.33
0.04
1.74
0.19
19.4
81.
1123
.90
5.75
%8.
08%
86.1
7%P
etro
leum
0.07
0.01
0.03
0.10
0.00
1.11
1.33
6.20
%10
.02%
83.7
8%C
O2
9158
1.74
4076
.46
1512
21.7
314
198.
6411
5691
5.47
8863
2.56
1506
626.
606.
35%
10.9
8%82
.67%
CH
445
86.6
510
0.37
342.
5111
.68
1576
.11
4.49
6621
.81
70.7
8%5.
35%
23.8
7%N
2O1.
440.
072.
300.
230.
000.
004.
0337
.36%
62.6
4%0.
00%
GH
Gs
1883
46.4
062
05.8
015
9126
.23
1451
4.65
1190
013.
7088
726.
9216
4693
3.70
11.8
1%10
.54%
77.6
4%V
OC
18.3
33.
1828
.19
5.94
936.
6695
.37
1087
.66
1.98
%3.
14%
94.8
8%C
O14
4.89
7.12
537.
727.
6822
27.3
225
3.99
3178
.72
4.78
%17
.16%
78.0
6%N
Ox
291.
1518
.92
1037
.07
30.5
225
803.
0924
52.0
529
632.
811.
05%
3.60
%95
.35%
PM
106.
612.
9923
.54
2.79
7.80
44.4
988
.23
10.8
9%29
.84%
59.2
7%S
Ox
79.4
08.
5156
1.04
30.6
46.
0219
.60
705.
2212
.47%
83.9
0%3.
63%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
110
Figure 120: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Figure 121: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Bio
dies
elA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 0.
920.
043.
350.
1917
.05
1.11
22.6
64.
25%
15.6
4%80
.11%
Foss
il Fu
els
0.89
0.04
3.30
0.19
13.8
81.
1119
.41
4.78
%17
.96%
77.2
6%P
etro
leum
0.36
0.01
1.30
0.10
13.8
81.
1116
.77
2.21
%8.
36%
89.4
3%C
O2
-177
702.
5640
76.4
623
6940
.80
1419
8.64
1374
951.
6588
632.
5615
4109
7.54
-11.
27%
16.3
0%94
.97%
CH
412
89.6
510
0.37
298.
5711
.68
68.9
54.
4917
73.7
278
.37%
17.4
9%4.
14%
N2O
12.6
70.
074.
040.
230.
000.
0017
.01
74.9
1%25
.09%
0.00
%G
HG
s-1
4669
1.67
6205
.80
2444
63.3
714
514.
6513
7639
9.69
8872
6.92
1583
618.
77-8
.87%
16.3
5%92
.52%
VO
C52
.84
3.18
96.5
15.
9414
63.5
395
.37
1717
.37
3.26
%5.
97%
90.7
7%C
O14
1.02
7.12
278.
687.
6838
97.8
025
3.99
4586
.30
3.23
%6.
24%
90.5
3%N
Ox
415.
0518
.92
717.
3530
.52
3762
9.51
2452
.05
4126
3.41
1.05
%1.
81%
97.1
4%P
M10
57.4
42.
9941
.69
2.79
682.
7444
.49
832.
147.
26%
5.35
%87
.39%
SO
x15
8.83
8.51
470.
9530
.64
245.
0419
.60
933.
5717
.92%
53.7
3%28
.35%
BD
CO
2 C
redi
t-2
5847
5.55
0.00
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Bio
dies
elFe
rry
- New
Yor
k/N
ew J
erse
yA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Bio
dies
elC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
-20%0%20
%
40%
60%
80%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
111
Figure 122: FERRY CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Figure 123: FERRY CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Vess
el:
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kTo
tal E
nerg
y 0.
950.
0410
.70
0.19
17.0
51.
1130
.04
3.32
%25
%60
.44%
Foss
il Fu
els
0.95
0.04
10.6
90.
1917
.05
1.11
30.0
33.
29%
36.2
4%60
.46%
Pet
role
um0.
060.
010.
130.
100.
001.
111.
415.
14%
16.0
7%78
.79%
CO
276
381.
8440
76.4
633
1161
.31
1419
8.64
1318
707.
1388
632.
5618
3315
7.93
4.39
%18
.84%
76.7
7%C
H4
1884
.97
100.
377.
3911
.68
68.9
54.
4920
77.8
695
.55%
0.92
%3.
53%
N2O
1.15
0.07
0.16
0.23
0.00
0.00
1.61
75.8
3%24
.17%
0.00
%G
HG
s11
6322
.88
6205
.80
3313
66.3
514
514.
6513
2015
5.17
8872
6.92
1877
291.
796.
53%
18.4
2%75
.05%
VO
C5.
763.
1886
.68
5.94
1522
.07
95.3
717
18.9
90.
52%
5.39
%94
.09%
CO
109.
017.
1251
0.61
7.68
4053
.71
253.
9949
42.1
32.
35%
10.4
9%87
.16%
NO
x20
4.37
18.9
237
4.72
30.5
237
253.
2124
52.0
540
333.
800.
55%
1.00
%98
.44%
PM
105.
122.
994.
852.
7913
6.55
44.4
919
6.80
4.12
%3.
88%
91.9
9%S
Ox
65.8
68.
5146
.88
30.6
40.
0019
.60
171.
5043
.36%
45.2
1%11
.43%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
geag
e
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
F36
.
of e
a uel
ch s
t
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Ferr
y - N
ew Y
ork/
New
Jer
sey
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Fis
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
112
Figure 124: FERRY CASE STUDY Results W2H Energy & Emission % Changes
4) Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes (%, relative to vessel with main engines using Conventional Diesel)
Residual OilLow-Sulfur
Diesel Natural Gas BiodieselFischer-Tropsch
DieselTotal Energy -9.17% 11.65% 22.09% 14.90% 52.30%Fossil Fuels -9.08% 11.65% 21.53% -1.30% 52.71%Petroleum -5.33% 11.65% -92.59% -6.26% -92.12%CO2 -6.19% 12.85% -3.74% -1.54% 17.12%CH4 -6.48% 11.65% 288.07% 3.95% 21.77%N2O 645.79% 11.69% -7.55% 290.28% -63.08%GHGs -5.65% 12.82% 2.78% -1.17% 17.15%VOC -7.93% 11.82% -28.90% 12.26% 12.37%CO -5.27% 11.67% -19.23% 16.54% 25.58%Nox 0.19% 11.68% -19.09% 12.67% 10.13%PM10 326.88% 12.11% -88.01% 13.05% -73.26%Sox 2030.31% -20.03% -18.02% 8.52% -80.06%
113
A.2 Case Study 2: Tanker Vessel Vessel description: Crude oil tanker with specifications similar to the tanker chosen for case study in the IMO Study of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships (Skyølsvik et al. 2000), described in that IMO report and appendices. Vessel characteristics: We assume this vessel has one main engine, a slow-speed diesel rated at 23,800 kW, and operates at a rated speed of 14 knots. It has capacity to carry an estimated average of 220,000 tons cargo. This case study will assume that the tanker is fully loaded, although the IMO study suggests that the average capacity factor is lower, due to return voyages that are typically empty (under ballast). According to a recent study (California Air Resources Board 2005), AE installed power as a percent of main engine installed power for tankers is about 21%. We assume that the vessel has 4 auxiliary engines of equal size, and that under steady-state conditions at sea only 2 are operating. Trip characterization: The trip will assume crude oil is transported from Houston to New York. At 14 knots, the trip requires 5 days, 2 hours per www.distances.com; we use the 36 hour turnaround time in the IMO study for in-port operations (Skyølsvik et al. 2000). We estimate the main engine duty cycle on the route includes a majority of time (77%) at full cruise speed, and allocate the remaining time among speeds corresponding to slow cruise operations, precautionary zone operations, near-dock maneuvering, and idling. Auxiliary engine operation assumes that 2 of the 4 AEs operate at sea, at an average load of approximately 80% of full load. Inputs: This case only discusses those elements specific to the case study; default parameters in TEAMS are discussed in Section 8 and 9 of this document.
114
Inputs Section 1: The world average fuel sulfur content for residual fuels typically used by a tanker of this type is 2.7%, but this varies regionally. Actual data on regional fuel sulfur suggest that the number may be lower in parts of the United States, including the Gulf Coast and East Coast8. For the Gulf coast, the volume-weighted average residual fuel-sulfur content for imports is approximately 2.49%; for the East Coast, the value is 2.53%. Figure 125: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 1.2
1.2) Petroleum-Based Efficiency Options
Sulfur LevelRefining Efficiency
Conventional Diesel 350 87.5%Low-Sulfur Diesel 15 87.5%Crude Oil 16,000Residual Oil (Marine Bunkers) 24,900 95.5%
Inputs Section 2: Significant residual fuel is imported from Venezuelan refineries to the United States. For this case study, we use the navigable distance of 2000 miles from Venezuela to Texas. Other distances use default distances by mode obtained from the 2002 Commodity Flow Survey, updating the 1998 CFS data used in recent GREET model defaults. Figure 126: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 2.4
2.4) Distance from Feedstock Recovery Site to Fuel Stations for Different Fuels: miles (One-Way Distance)
8
Residual Oil imported from Venezuela to TexasPetroleum Based ? Crude Oil Residual Oil US Diesel US LS Diesel
Ocean Tanker 500 2000 1,450 1,450Barge 500 50 520 520
Pipeline 750 400 400Rail 800 800 800 800
Truck for Distribution 170 170
see http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/cli.html
115
Inputs Section 5: Key input parameters for simulating main engine operations were obtained from data used in the IMO study. Figure 127: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.1
5.1) Main Engine VariablesFrom IMO cases (220,000 tons cargo)Vessel Type ID
Number of EnginesSingle Engine HPTotal Onboard HP
1Tanker Ship - 275,000 DWT
2380023800
Figure 128: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.2
5.2) Trip Distance and Time
Total Trip Distance (miles) 2190
Trip TimeHours 158.00
Minutes 0.00
Total Trip Time (hours) 158.00
Figure 129: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.3
5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode 29.47 23%
36 in port hours
Idle Maneuvering Precautionary Slow Cruise Full Cruise 122 at sea hourspercent of trip in mode based on time 4.90% 1.75% 5.00% 7.00% 81.35% similar to underway time for container
time per mode (hours) 7.74 2.77 7.90 11.06 128.53
HP load factor (single engine) 2.00% 8.00% 12.00% 50.00% 80.00% estimate from speed installed, with maHP per engine 476 1,904 2,856 11,900 19,040 Total
Energy Consumption (kWh) (all engines) 2748.05 3925.78 16824.78 98144.56 1824927.99 1946571.16 kWh out
Engine Mode
116
Inputs Section 6: Key input parameters for simulating auxiliary engine operations were obtained from data derived from the ARB survey of vessels, corresponding to the IMO tanker data for main engines. Figure 130: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.2
6.2) Auxiliary Engine Variables
Number of Auxiliary Engines 4Auxiliary Engine HP 1250
Total Onboard Auxiliary HP 5000
Figure 131: TANKER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.3
6.3) Auxiliary Engine Characterization (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
percent of trip Auxiliary engine(s) active; based on time 50.00%time active (hours) 79.00
HP load factor (single engine) 80.00%HP per Auxiliary engine 1,000
Total Auxiliary Energy Consumption (kWh) 235641.20
Case Validation: We estimated the energy intensity for this tanker and obtained about 40 Btu/ton-mile, assuming a full cargo load. This agrees well with the average energy intensities estimated in other work, perhaps representing a bit lower energy intensity than the IMO study. However, when we adjust for the cargo capacity factor described in the IMO work, the value increases to be very similar to the IMO study results (about 60 Btu/ton-mile).
117
Case Results: Figure 132: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 58
0.80
70.3
025
62.1
796
.90
1475
9.34
1786
.68
1985
6.18
3.28
%13
.39%
83.3
3%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s55
6.76
67.3
925
30.3
995
.67
1475
9.34
1786
.68
1979
6.24
3.15
%13
.27%
83.5
8%P
etro
leum
140.
1516
.96
1331
.75
48.7
714
759.
3417
86.6
818
083.
650.
87%
7.63
%91
.50%
CO
254
1664
86.6
265
5619
0.83
1886
6607
8.19
7297
697.
7811
7771
5786
.79
1466
8354
9.16
1581
0857
89.3
63.
84%
12.3
9%83
.77%
CH
413
3363
6.89
1614
20.4
415
5257
.09
5778
.79
5970
5.11
7227
.57
1723
025.
8986
.77%
9.35
%3.
88%
N2O
927.
4111
2.25
3028
.13
112.
180.
0035
73.3
777
53.3
413
.41%
40.5
0%46
.09%
GH
Gs
8246
0358
.99
9980
818.
0919
2865
196.
8474
5382
9.47
1178
9695
94.0
814
7943
072.
2216
1967
2869
.68
5.71
%12
.37%
81.9
2%V
OC
4220
5.83
5108
.50
7895
3.65
1158
.53
1267
210.
4714
7501
.47
1542
138.
453.
07%
5.19
%91
.74%
CO
9459
8.50
1144
9.99
1020
70.4
236
15.1
233
7495
3.92
3928
39.7
739
7952
7.71
2.66
%2.
66%
94.6
8%N
Ox
2514
50.5
830
435.
0240
5567
.55
1733
1.18
3258
1908
.65
3984
026.
9637
2707
19.9
30.
76%
1.13
%98
.11%
PM
1040
912.
0449
51.9
037
128.
4019
58.8
659
1158
.44
3578
11.9
510
3392
1.58
4.44
%3.
78%
91.7
8%S
Ox
1143
26.6
013
837.
8440
9690
.49
1876
0.06
2604
99.3
921
2173
8.23
2938
852.
604.
36%
14.5
8%81
.06%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Engi
neO
pera
tion Figure 133: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results
(Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
118
Figure 134: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Figure 135: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
ilA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 58
0.72
70.3
080
0.49
96.9
014
759.
3417
86.6
818
094.
423.
60%
4.96
%91
.44%
Foss
il Fu
els
556.
6867
.39
790.
3495
.67
1475
9.34
1786
.68
1805
6.10
3.46
%4.
91%
91.6
4%P
etro
leum
140.
1316
.96
402.
8648
.77
1475
9.34
1786
.68
1715
4.74
0.92
%2.
63%
96.4
5%C
O2
5415
9000
.93
6556
190.
8360
2843
98.5
272
9769
7.78
1211
7149
55.2
414
6683
549.
1614
8669
5792
.45
4.08
%4.
55%
91.3
7%C
H4
1333
452.
5816
1420
.44
4773
7.12
5778
.79
5970
5.11
7227
.57
1615
321.
6192
.54%
3.31
%4.
14%
N2O
927.
2811
2.25
926.
7211
2.18
2951
8.67
3573
.37
3517
0.48
2.96
%2.
95%
94.0
9%G
HG
s82
4489
63.1
699
8081
8.09
6157
4162
.13
7453
829.
4712
2211
9550
.28
1479
4307
2.22
1531
5203
95.3
46.
04%
4.51
%89
.46%
VO
C42
200.
0051
08.5
095
70.3
211
58.5
312
1847
1.60
1475
01.4
714
2401
0.43
3.32
%0.
75%
95.9
2%C
O94
585.
4211
449.
9929
863.
5536
15.1
232
4514
8.00
3928
39.7
737
7750
1.85
2.81
%0.
89%
96.3
1%N
Ox
2514
15.8
330
435.
0214
3168
.44
1733
1.18
3291
1018
.84
3984
026.
9637
3373
96.2
70.
75%
0.43
%98
.82%
PM
1040
906.
3949
51.9
016
181.
6419
58.8
629
5579
2.18
3578
11.9
533
7760
2.91
1.36
%0.
54%
98.1
1%S
Ox
1143
10.8
013
837.
8415
4972
.04
1876
0.06
1752
7132
.11
2121
738.
2319
9507
51.0
80.
64%
0.87
%98
.49%
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
119
Figure 136: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Figure 137: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w-S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 65
3.40
70.3
028
83.4
096
.90
1660
4.25
1786
.68
2209
4.93
3.28
%13
.49%
83.2
4%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s62
6.36
67.3
928
47.6
595
.67
1660
4.25
1786
.68
2202
8.00
3.15
%13
.36%
83.4
9%P
etro
leum
157.
6716
.96
1499
.04
48.7
716
604.
2517
86.6
820
113.
380.
87%
7.70
%91
.44%
CO
260
9372
98.3
865
5619
0.83
2150
1868
9.33
7297
697.
7813
4055
6746
.08
1466
8354
9.16
1777
0501
71.5
43.
80%
12.5
1%83
.69%
CH
415
0034
1.52
1614
20.4
417
4743
.75
5778
.79
6716
8.25
7227
.57
1916
680.
3386
.70%
9.42
%3.
88%
N2O
1043
.34
112.
2534
08.3
311
2.18
0.00
3573
.37
8249
.47
14.0
1%42
.68%
43.3
2%G
HG
s92
7679
05.2
899
8081
8.09
2197
4488
9.70
7453
829.
4713
4196
7279
.27
1479
4307
2.22
1819
8577
94.0
25.
65%
12.4
8%81
.87%
VO
C47
481.
5651
08.5
091
381.
4911
58.5
314
2561
1.78
1475
01.4
717
1824
3.33
3.06
%5.
39%
91.5
5%C
O10
6423
.31
1144
9.99
1157
76.8
636
15.1
237
9682
3.16
3928
39.7
744
2692
8.21
2.66
%2.
70%
94.6
4%N
Ox
2828
81.9
030
435.
0246
6680
.82
1733
1.18
3665
4647
.23
3984
026.
9641
4360
03.1
10.
76%
1.17
%98
.08%
PM
1046
026.
0549
51.9
045
064.
9219
58.8
666
5053
.24
3578
11.9
511
2086
6.92
4.55
%4.
20%
91.2
6%S
Ox
1286
17.4
213
837.
8447
5894
.63
1876
0.06
1260
8.85
2121
738.
2327
7145
7.04
5.14
%17
.85%
77.0
1%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lTa
nker
Shi
p - 2
75,0
00 D
WT
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
120
Figure 138: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Figure 139: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
N
atur
al G
asA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 13
06.3
270
.30
1863
.47
96.9
018
976.
2917
86.6
824
099.
965.
71%
8.13
%86
.15%
Foss
il Fu
els
1297
.40
67.3
916
95.9
895
.67
1897
6.29
1786
.68
2391
9.41
5.71
%7.
49%
86.8
0%P
etro
leum
69.7
416
.96
31.7
948
.77
0.00
1786
.68
1953
.94
4.44
%4.
12%
91.4
4%C
O2
8920
9154
.71
6556
190.
8314
7304
060.
5372
9769
7.78
1126
9435
08.5
014
6683
549.
1615
2399
4161
.50
6.28
%10
.14%
83.5
7%C
H4
4467
823.
7816
1420
.44
3336
36.3
957
78.7
915
3527
4.22
7227
.57
6511
161.
1971
.10%
5.21
%23
.69%
N2O
1398
.36
112.
2522
36.6
311
2.18
0.00
3573
.37
7432
.79
20.3
2%31
.60%
48.0
8%G
HG
s18
3466
945.
1499
8081
8.09
1550
0377
9.42
7453
829.
4711
5918
4267
.15
1479
4307
2.22
1663
0327
11.4
811
.63%
9.77
%78
.60%
VO
C17
851.
6251
08.5
027
462.
2711
58.5
391
2391
.54
1475
01.4
711
1147
3.93
2.07
%2.
58%
95.3
6%C
O14
1138
.09
1144
9.99
5237
87.2
736
15.1
221
6961
3.23
3928
39.7
732
4244
3.47
4.71
%16
.27%
79.0
3%N
Ox
2836
11.3
730
435.
0210
1019
8.26
1733
1.18
2513
4615
.24
3984
026.
9630
4602
18.0
31.
03%
3.37
%95
.60%
PM
1064
47.2
249
51.9
022
929.
6219
58.8
676
00.6
135
7811
.95
4017
00.1
52.
84%
6.20
%90
.97%
SO
x77
587.
9713
837.
8454
6903
.40
1876
0.06
5868
.74
2121
738.
2327
8469
6.25
3.28
%20
.31%
76.4
0%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
121
Figure 140: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Figure 141: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
B
iodi
esel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 89
4.93
70.3
032
65.2
796
.90
1660
4.25
1786
.68
2271
8.34
4.25
%14
.80%
80.9
5%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s86
2.77
67.3
932
10.1
995
.67
1352
3.56
1786
.68
1954
6.27
4.76
%16
.91%
78.3
3%P
etro
leum
350.
7816
.96
1267
.14
48.7
713
523.
5617
86.6
816
993.
902.
16%
7.74
%90
.09%
CO
2-1
7309
8859
.73
6556
190.
8323
0802
424.
9572
9769
7.78
1339
3310
65.4
514
6683
549.
1615
5757
2068
.44
-10.
69%
15.2
9%95
.41%
CH
412
5623
7.53
1614
20.4
429
0838
.67
5778
.79
6716
8.25
7227
.57
1788
671.
2579
.26%
16.5
8%4.
16%
N2O
1234
3.58
112.
2539
35.7
211
2.18
0.00
3573
.37
2007
7.11
62.0
4%20
.16%
17.8
0%G
HG
s-1
4289
1360
.88
9980
818.
0923
8130
110.
5174
5382
9.47
1340
7415
98.6
414
7943
072.
2216
0135
8068
.04
-8.3
0%15
.34%
92.9
6%V
OC
5147
3.12
5108
.50
9400
9.72
1158
.53
1425
611.
7814
7501
.47
1724
863.
113.
28%
5.52
%91
.20%
CO
1373
66.9
911
449.
9927
1459
.49
3615
.12
3796
823.
1639
2839
.77
4613
554.
523.
23%
5.96
%90
.81%
NO
x40
4299
.80
3043
5.02
6987
67.9
117
331.
1836
6546
47.2
339
8402
6.96
4178
9508
.09
1.04
%1.
71%
97.2
5%P
M10
5702
3.82
4951
.90
4062
3.88
1958
.86
6650
53.2
435
7811
.95
1127
423.
665.
50%
3.78
%90
.73%
SO
x15
6360
.23
1383
7.84
4611
88.3
218
760.
0623
8688
.26
2121
738.
2330
1057
2.94
5.65
%15
.94%
78.4
0%
BD
CO
2 C
redi
t-2
5177
9279
.56
0.00
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Bio
dies
elTa
nker
Shi
p - 2
75,0
00 D
WT
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Bio
dies
elC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
-20%0%20
%
40%
60%
80%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
122
Figure 142: TANKER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Figure 143: TANKER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Vess
el:
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T M
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
Fi
sche
r-Tr
opsc
h D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 92
8.10
70.3
010
419.
8596
.90
1660
4.25
1786
.68
2990
6.09
3.34
%35
.17%
61.5
0%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s92
2.40
67.3
910
415.
7895
.67
1660
4.25
1786
.68
2989
2.18
3.31
%35
.16%
61.5
2%P
etro
leum
60.3
216
.96
123.
1148
.77
0.00
1786
.68
2035
.85
3.80
%8.
44%
87.7
6%C
O2
7440
3029
.09
6556
190.
8332
2581
980.
9272
9769
7.78
1284
5436
60.1
014
6683
549.
1618
4206
6107
.88
4.40
%17
.91%
77.7
0%C
H4
1836
140.
9816
1420
.44
7195
.25
5778
.79
6716
8.25
7227
.57
2084
931.
2895
.81%
0.62
%3.
57%
N2O
1120
.45
112.
2515
6.89
112.
180.
0035
73.3
750
75.1
424
.29%
5.30
%70
.41%
GH
Gs
1133
0932
8.57
9980
818.
0932
2781
716.
8774
5382
9.47
1285
9541
93.2
914
7943
072.
2218
8742
2958
.50
6.53
%17
.50%
75.9
7%V
OC
5606
.25
5108
.50
8443
6.98
1158
.53
1482
636.
2514
7501
.47
1726
447.
980.
62%
4.96
%94
.42%
CO
1061
87.8
711
449.
9949
7382
.12
3615
.12
3948
696.
0939
2839
.77
4960
170.
952.
37%
10.1
0%87
.53%
NO
x19
9076
.21
3043
5.02
3650
10.6
917
331.
1836
2881
00.7
639
8402
6.96
4088
3980
.82
0.56
%0.
94%
98.5
0%P
M10
4996
.18
4951
.90
4729
.08
1958
.86
1330
10.6
535
7811
.95
5074
58.6
21.
96%
1.32
%96
.72%
SO
x64
360.
9913
837.
8447
325.
3218
760.
060.
0021
2173
8.23
2266
022.
443.
45%
2.92
%93
.63%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neer
atio
n
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Op
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Tank
er S
hip
- 275
,000
DW
T A
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
il
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Fis
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
123
Figure 144: TANKER CASE STUDY Results W2H Energy & Emission % Changes
4) Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes (%, relative to vessel with main engines using Conventional Diesel)
Residual OilLow-Sulfur
Diesel Natural Gas BiodieselFischer-Tropsch
DieselTotal Energy -8.87% 11.27% 21.37% 14.41% 50.61%Fossil Fuels -8.79% 11.27% 20.83% -1.26% 51.00%Petroleum -5.14% 11.22% -89.20% -6.03% -88.74%CO2 -5.97% 12.39% -3.61% -1.49% 16.51%CH4 -6.25% 11.24% 277.89% 3.81% 21.00%N2O 353.62% 6.40% -4.13% 158.95% -34.54%GHGs -5.44% 12.36% 2.68% -1.13% 16.53%VOC -7.66% 11.42% -27.93% 11.85% 11.95%CO -5.08% 11.24% -18.52% 15.93% 24.64%Nox 0.18% 11.18% -18.27% 12.12% 9.69%PM10 226.68% 8.41% -61.15% 9.04% -50.92%Sox 578.86% -5.70% -5.25% 2.44% -22.89%
124
A.3 Case Study 3: Container Vessel Vessel description: For this case study, we considered the distribution of container ships calling on ports in Southern California. The ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are the two busiest container ports in the United States, together handling more than twice the containerized ship cargo of the third-ranked U.S. container port (Corbett 2003). We identified the typical main engine power range of large modern container ships that call on them, and selected for our case study a large, 6000-TEU container vessel with the characteristics shown in Table YY. Alternatively, the case study could have selected the average or modal container ship characteristics. Vessel characteristics: This vessel has one main engine, rated at ~75000 Hp. We specify four auxiliary engines, each rated at 1400 Hp, for a total installed auxiliary power of about 5600 Hp. The engines operate on the same residual marine fuel as the main engines, typical for most modern larger cargo ships. Trip characterization: For voyage distance, it is important to consider whether the calculation should apply to one leg of a voyage (intermediate stop 1 to intermediate stop 2), one section of a voyage (origin A to destination B), or to an entire round trip (origin A to destination B and return). To clearly illustrate the differences in terms of ship operations, we consider an actual route for a group of container ships operated by Maersk-Sealand.9 This route has the characteristics shown in Figure 145: Figure 145: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Route Characteristics for Typical Container Service
(Maersk-Sealand)
Voyage Node Port Name Typical port dates
Days in port
Days at sea to next port
Distance (nautical miles)
Port 1 Hong Kong 27-27 Jul 1 1 543 Port 2 Yantian 28-28 Jul 1 1 543 Port 3 Xiamen 29-29 Jul 1 1 543 Port 4 Kaohsiung 30-30 Jul 1 11 5,975 Port 5 Los Angeles 10-12 Aug 3 3 1,630 Port 6 Tacoma 15-17 Aug 3 14 7,061 Port 1 Hong Kong 31-31 Aug - - -
Total voyage 10 32 16,838
9 See http://www.maersksealand.com/HomePage/appmanager/?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=page_schedules_routemaps, then transpacific route TP9 or http://www.maersksealand.com/HomePage/frameset.jsp?app=schedules.vessels
125
The simplest application would evaluate a single leg of the voyage; primarily at-sea conditions would be needed or the port activity of the two ports involved in the voyage leg. One could use the model to calculate each voyage leg separately, for example, from Port 4 in Kaohsiung to Port 5 in Los Angeles; this would be a distance of ~6870 miles (5975 nautical miles). In applying the model to multiport vessel activity, the user would need to consider how in-port activity in each of the ports modifies the overall load profile; this activity could be similar for short port calls (e.g., Ports 1 through 4, which may each be primarily loading ports), but may vary for longer port calls (e.g., Ports 5 and 6, which are likely discharge ports). Alternatively, one could model the entire round trip voyage, with a total distance of nearly 20,000 miles (16,838 nautical miles). We consider a typical “westbound voyage,” representing the movement of cargo from Origin A in Los Angeles to Destination B in Hong Kong. This covers a distance of ~10,600 miles (9234 nautical miles) in approximately 480 hours (17 days at sea and 3 days in port). We include additional detail and analysis for a more complicated voyage to demonstrate the potential to apply the TEAMS model to more realistic and complicated route patterns describing ship activity. Inputs: This case only discusses those elements specific to the case study; default parameters in TEAMS are discussed in Section 8 and 9 of this document. Inputs Section 1: The world average fuel sulfur content for residual fuels typically used by a tanker of this type is 2.7%, but this varies regionally. Actual data on regional fuel sulfur suggest that the number may be lower in parts of the United States, including the Gulf Coast and East Coast10. For the Gulf coast, the volume-weighted average residual fuel-sulfur content for imports is approximately 2.49%; for the East Coast, the value is 2.53%. Figure 146: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 1.2
1.2) Petroleum-Based Efficiency Options
1
Sulfur LevelRefining Efficiency
Conventional Diesel 350 87.5%Low-Sulfur Diesel 15 87.5%Crude Oil 16,000Residual Oil (Marine Bunkers) 22,900 95.5%
0 See http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/cli.html
126
Inputs Section 2: Significant residual fuel is imported from Venezuelan refineries to the United States. For this case study, we use the navigable distance of 6675 miles from Venezuela to Texas. Other distances use default distances by mode obtained from the 2002 Commodity Flow Survey, updating the 1998 CFS data used in recent GREET model defaults. Figure 147: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 2.4
2.4) Distance from Feedstock Recovery Site to Fuel Stations for Different Fuels: miles (One-Way Distance)
Venezuelan residual imported to California for marine bunkersPetroleum Based ? Crude Oil Residual Oil US Diesel US LS Diesel
Ocean Tanker 500 6675 1,450 1,450Barge 500 50 520 520
Pipeline 750 400 400Rail 800 800 800 800
Truck for Distribution 170 170
127
Inputs Section 5: Key input parameters for simulating main engine operations were developed using information about vessel activity developed by a series of studies that directly considered West Coast ports, including Los Angeles and Long Beach (Chen et al. 2005, Corbett 2004, Starcrest Consulting Group LLC et al. 2004). Figure 148: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.1
5.1) Main Engine Variables
Vessel Type IDNumber of Engines
Single Engine HPTotal Onboard HP
1Container Ship - 6000 TEU
7509775097
Figure 149: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.2
5.2) Trip Distance and Time
Total Trip Distance (miles) 10600.00
Trip TimeHours 480.00
Minutes 0.00
Total Trip Time (hours) 480.00
Figure 150: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 5.3
5.3) Engine Characterization per Mode
Idle Maneuvering Precautionary Slow Cruise Full Cruisepercent of trip in mode based on time 1.25% 1.75% 5.00% 7.00% 85.00%
time per mode (hours) 6.00 8.40 24.00 33.60 408.00
HP load factor (single engine) 2.00% 8.00% 12.00% 50.00% 80.00%HP per engine 1,502 6,008 9,012 37,549 60,078 Total
Energy Consumption (kWh) (all engines) 6719.98 37631.89 161279.52 940797.19 18278345.46 19424774.04 kW
Engine Mode
128
Inputs Section 6: Key input parameters for simulating auxiliary engine operations were obtained from data derived from the ARB survey of vessels, corresponding to the IMO containership data for main engines. Figure 151: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.2
6.2) Auxiliary Engine Variables
F
CadaeLc
Number of Auxiliary Engines 4Auxiliary Engine HP 1400
Total Onboard Auxiliary HP 5600
igure 152: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Inputs Section 6.3
6.3) Auxiliary Engine Characterization (Conventional Diesel as Baseline Fuel)
percent of trip Auxiliary engine(s) active; based on time 50.00%time active (hours) 240.00
HP load factor (single engine) 80.00%HP per Auxiliary engine 1,120
Total Auxiliary Energy Consumption (kWh) 801776.64
ase Validation: We compared the energy intensity for this container ship with other nalyses, and obtained a range between 200 Btu/ton-mile and 400 Btu/ton-mile, epending on assumptions about the average weight of cargo in each container. This grees well with the average energy intensities estimated in other work, where our lower stimate is in very close agreement with the energy intensity estimated in the IMO study. ighter containers would correspond to the higher energy intensities, due to fewer tons argo being moved by a full (i.e., volume-limited) container ship.
129
Case Results: Figure 153: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
C
onve
ntio
nal D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 57
97.1
126
9.19
2557
0.38
1187
.77
1472
82.9
568
39.1
518
6946
.56
3.24
%14
.31%
82.4
4%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s55
57.2
425
8.05
2525
3.31
1173
.04
1472
82.9
568
39.1
518
6363
.76
3.12
%14
.18%
82.7
0%P
etro
leum
1399
.84
65.0
013
291.
9161
7.56
1472
82.9
568
39.1
516
9496
.42
0.86
%8.
21%
90.9
3%C
O2
5405
9322
9.86
2510
2706
.88
1882
8831
01.2
088
5732
62.9
611
7523
8981
0.05
5521
6429
1.20
1484
1706
402.
133.
81%
13.2
8%82
.91%
CH
413
3083
79.3
161
7981
.00
1549
507.
7471
984.
9059
5795
.45
2766
6.05
1617
1314
.45
86.1
2%10
.03%
3.86
%N
2O92
56.1
942
9.82
3022
2.03
1404
.07
0.00
0.00
4131
2.10
23.4
5%76
.55%
0.00
%G
HG
s82
2938
613.
7238
2135
50.7
019
2479
1593
.76
9052
0207
.01
1176
4901
514.
5555
2745
278.
2115
1941
1075
7.95
5.67
%13
.26%
81.0
7%V
OC
4212
35.2
819
560.
2678
8057
.94
3764
7.74
1264
5454
.50
5871
97.7
614
4991
53.4
93.
04%
5.69
%91
.26%
CO
9441
74.1
243
843.
1810
1906
0.65
4771
0.92
3367
8561
.92
1563
880.
2137
2972
31.0
02.
65%
2.86
%94
.49%
NO
x25
1087
9.16
1165
93.8
840
5182
5.28
1924
39.4
632
5133
869.
7015
0977
47.5
334
7103
355.
010.
76%
1.22
%98
.02%
PM
1038
3392
.01
1780
2.99
3705
55.4
418
564.
2758
9915
1.94
2739
29.9
669
6339
6.60
5.76
%5.
59%
88.6
5%S
Ox
1112
897.
8951
677.
9540
3542
5.82
1935
58.7
325
9951
5.47
5193
.48
7998
269.
3514
.56%
52.8
7%32
.57%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Figure 154: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Conventional Diesel)
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Con
vent
iona
l Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
130
Figure 155: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Figure 156: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Residual Oil)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
R
esid
ual O
ilA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 57
96.3
026
9.19
8374
.41
1187
.77
1472
82.9
568
39.1
516
9749
.78
3.57
%5.
63%
90.7
9%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s55
56.4
825
8.05
8272
.33
1173
.04
1472
82.9
568
39.1
516
9382
.01
3.43
%5.
58%
90.9
9%P
etro
leum
1399
.65
65.0
043
86.4
361
7.56
1472
82.9
568
39.1
516
0590
.74
0.91
%3.
12%
95.9
7%C
O2
5405
1852
1.11
2510
2706
.88
6335
4340
7.34
8857
3262
.96
1209
1666
471.
9255
2164
291.
2013
9315
6866
1.41
4.06
%5.
18%
90.7
6%C
H4
1330
6540
.12
6179
81.0
051
0882
.39
7198
4.90
5957
95.4
527
666.
0515
1308
49.9
192
.03%
3.85
%4.
12%
N2O
9254
.91
429.
8299
98.7
214
04.0
729
4565
.91
0.00
3156
53.4
23.
07%
3.61
%93
.32%
GH
Gs
8228
2488
5.48
3821
3550
.70
6473
7153
9.68
9052
0207
.01
1219
5493
607.
5155
2745
278.
2114
3471
6906
8.60
6.00
%5.
14%
88.8
6%V
OC
4211
77.0
719
560.
2612
6411
.25
3764
7.74
1215
9090
.87
5871
97.7
613
3510
84.9
53.
30%
1.23
%95
.47%
CO
9440
43.6
443
843.
1838
3256
.62
4771
0.92
3238
3232
.61
1563
880.
2135
3659
67.1
82.
79%
1.22
%95
.99%
NO
x25
1053
2.16
1165
93.8
822
2162
8.45
1924
39.4
632
8418
050.
2115
0977
47.5
334
8556
991.
700.
75%
0.69
%98
.55%
PM
1038
3339
.02
1780
2.99
2382
75.7
818
564.
2729
4957
59.7
027
3929
.96
3042
7671
.72
1.32
%0.
84%
97.8
4%S
Ox
1112
744.
0951
677.
9519
4114
1.01
1935
58.7
317
4902
715.
2151
93.4
817
8207
030.
480.
65%
1.20
%98
.15%
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Res
idua
l Oil
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elEn
gine
Ope
ratio
n
131
Figure 157: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Figure 158: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Low-Sulfur Diesel)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w-S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
Sul
fur D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 65
21.7
426
9.19
2877
6.27
1187
.77
1656
93.3
268
39.1
520
9287
.45
3.24
%14
.32%
82.4
4%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s62
51.9
025
8.05
2841
9.52
1173
.04
1656
93.3
268
39.1
520
8634
.99
3.12
%14
.18%
82.7
0%P
etro
leum
1574
.82
65.0
014
961.
6761
7.56
1656
93.3
268
39.1
518
9751
.53
0.86
%8.
21%
90.9
3%C
O2
6081
6739
2.88
2510
2706
.88
2145
8789
55.3
788
5732
62.9
613
3773
7476
1.41
5521
6429
1.20
1679
7261
370.
703.
77%
13.3
0%82
.93%
CH
414
9719
26.9
561
7981
.00
1743
990.
0271
984.
9067
0269
.88
2766
6.05
1810
3818
.80
86.1
1%10
.03%
3.86
%N
2O10
413.
2142
9.82
3401
6.59
1404
.07
0.00
0.00
4626
3.68
23.4
4%76
.56%
0.00
%G
HG
s92
5805
954.
5838
2135
50.7
021
9304
7888
.05
9052
0207
.01
1339
1450
428.
9755
2745
278.
2117
1917
8330
7.52
5.61
%13
.28%
81.1
1%V
OC
4738
89.7
019
560.
2691
2097
.89
3764
7.74
1422
6136
.31
5871
97.7
616
2565
29.6
63.
04%
5.84
%91
.12%
CO
1062
195.
9043
843.
1811
5590
0.18
4771
0.92
3788
8382
.16
1563
880.
2141
7619
12.5
52.
65%
2.88
%94
.47%
NO
x28
2473
9.09
1165
93.8
846
6226
2.41
1924
39.4
636
5775
603.
4215
0977
47.5
338
8669
385.
800.
76%
1.25
%97
.99%
PM
1043
1316
.01
1780
2.99
4497
59.5
518
564.
2766
3654
5.93
2739
29.9
678
2791
8.71
5.74
%5.
98%
88.2
8%S
Ox
1252
010.
1451
677.
9546
8937
9.19
1935
58.7
312
5823
.37
5193
.48
6317
642.
8720
.64%
77.2
9%2.
07%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
onta
iner
Shi
p - 6
000
TEU
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
Sul
fur D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Low
-Sul
fur D
iese
lC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
132
Figure 159: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Figure 160: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Natural Gas)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
N
atur
al G
asA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 13
036.
0026
9.19
1859
5.92
1187
.77
1893
63.8
068
39.1
522
9291
.83
5.80
%8.
63%
85.5
7%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s12
946.
9425
8.05
1692
4.54
1173
.04
1893
63.8
068
39.1
522
7505
.53
5.80
%7.
95%
86.2
4%P
etro
leum
696.
1565
.00
317.
6161
7.56
0.00
6839
.15
8535
.47
8.92
%10
.96%
80.1
3%C
O2
8902
1542
5.92
2510
2706
.88
1469
9802
16.4
488
5732
62.9
611
2457
3479
8.05
5521
6429
1.20
1427
1770
701.
446.
41%
10.9
2%82
.67%
CH
444
5842
76.7
761
7981
.00
3329
385.
7571
984.
9015
3204
54.4
927
666.
0563
9517
48.9
770
.68%
5.32
%24
.00%
N2O
1395
4.69
429.
8222
320.
1114
04.0
70.
000.
0038
108.
6837
.75%
62.2
5%0.
00%
GH
Gs
1830
8111
92.8
338
2135
50.7
015
4681
6550
.70
9052
0207
.01
1156
7464
342.
3655
2745
278.
2115
6265
7112
1.81
11.9
6%10
.48%
77.5
6%V
OC
1781
61.8
419
560.
2627
4079
.79
3764
7.74
9104
727.
2458
7197
.76
1020
1374
.63
1.94
%3.
06%
95.0
1%C
O14
0847
1.22
4384
3.18
5226
955.
6947
710.
9221
6505
04.0
915
6388
0.21
2994
1365
.30
4.85
%17
.62%
77.5
3%N
Ox
2830
691.
7411
6593
.88
1008
1654
.23
1924
39.4
625
0817
556.
6315
0977
47.5
327
9136
683.
471.
06%
3.68
%95
.26%
PM
1064
279.
4317
802.
9922
8856
.07
1856
4.27
7584
6.24
2739
29.9
667
9278
.96
12.0
8%36
.42%
51.4
9%S
Ox
7692
05.9
251
677.
9554
4917
2.61
1935
58.7
358
564.
0251
93.4
865
2737
2.72
12.5
8%86
.45%
0.98
%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Nat
ural
Gas
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
133
Figure 161: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Figure 162: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Biodiesel)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
B
iodi
esel
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
Sul
fur D
iese
l
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kFu
elTo
tal E
nerg
y 89
32.2
026
9.19
3258
6.64
1187
.77
1656
93.3
268
39.1
521
5508
.28
4.27
%15
.67%
80.0
6%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s86
11.2
125
8.05
3203
6.98
1173
.04
1349
51.2
268
39.1
518
3869
.66
4.82
%18
.06%
77.1
1%P
etro
leum
3502
.06
65.0
012
647.
2161
7.56
1349
51.2
268
39.1
515
8622
.22
2.25
%8.
36%
89.3
9%C
O2
-172
7246
408.
8525
1027
06.8
823
0335
4880
.50
8857
3262
.96
1336
5143
731.
9455
2164
291.
2014
6070
9246
4.62
-11.
65%
16.3
8%95
.28%
CH
412
5360
50.8
061
7981
.00
2902
465.
3671
984.
9067
0269
.88
2766
6.05
1682
6418
.00
78.1
7%17
.68%
4.15
%N
2O12
3178
.60
429.
8239
278.
7414
04.0
70.
000.
0016
4291
.23
75.2
4%24
.76%
0.00
%G
HG
s-1
4258
0397
5.44
3821
3550
.70
2376
4830
63.3
790
5202
07.0
113
3792
1939
9.51
5527
4527
8.21
1501
1377
523.
36-9
.24%
16.4
3%92
.81%
VO
C51
3745
.85
1956
0.26
9382
96.5
137
647.
7414
2261
36.3
158
7197
.76
1632
2584
.42
3.27
%5.
98%
90.7
5%C
O13
7104
9.69
4384
3.18
2709
374.
2747
710.
9237
8883
82.1
615
6388
0.21
4362
4240
.43
3.24
%6.
32%
90.4
4%N
Ox
4036
994.
1711
6593
.88
6977
525.
9719
2439
.46
3657
7560
3.42
1509
7747
.53
3921
9690
4.43
1.06
%1.
83%
97.1
1%P
M10
5459
91.8
717
802.
9940
5422
.90
1856
4.27
6636
545.
9327
3929
.96
7898
257.
927.
14%
5.37
%87
.49%
SO
x15
2515
1.21
5167
7.95
4550
440.
7419
3558
.73
2381
862.
8451
93.4
887
0788
4.96
18.1
1%54
.48%
27.4
1%
BD
CO
2 C
redi
t-2
5124
9772
8.79
0.00
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f eac
h st
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Bio
dies
elC
onta
iner
Shi
p - 6
000
TEU
Aux
iliar
y En
gine
Fue
l:
Low
Sul
fur D
iese
l
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Bio
dies
elC
ontr
ibut
ion
of E
ach
Stag
e
-20%0%20
%
40%
60%
80%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
134
Figure 163: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Tabular Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Figure 164: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Graphical Results (Main Engine Fuel: Fischer-Tropsch Diesel)
Vess
el:
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UM
ain
Engi
ne F
uel:
Fi
sche
r-Tr
opsc
h D
iese
lA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Item
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryM
ain
Auxi
liary
Mai
nAu
xilia
ryTo
tal
Feed
stoc
kF
Tota
l Ene
rgy
9261
.72
269.
1910
3980
.81
1187
.77
1656
93.3
268
39.1
528
7231
.97
3.32
%36
.61%
60.0
7%Fo
ssil
Fuel
s92
04.8
525
8.05
1039
40.1
511
73.0
416
5693
.32
6839
.15
2871
08.5
73.
30%
36.6
1%60
.09%
Pet
role
um60
2.20
65.0
012
29.8
661
7.56
0.00
6839
.15
9353
.77
7.13
%19
.75%
73.1
2%C
O2
7424
8454
0.65
2510
2706
.88
3219
1131
81.9
688
5732
62.9
612
8184
2188
9.89
5521
6429
1.20
1744
5859
873.
544.
40%
18.9
6%76
.64%
CH
418
3227
94.6
861
7981
.00
7188
4.12
7198
4.90
6702
69.8
827
666.
0519
7825
80.6
495
.74%
0.73
%3.
53%
N2O
1118
1.36
429.
8215
67.4
014
04.0
70.
000.
0014
582.
6479
.62%
20.3
8%0.
00%
GH
Gs
1130
7294
50.0
538
2135
50.7
032
2110
8643
.03
9052
0207
.01
1283
2497
557.
4655
2745
278.
2117
8658
1468
6.47
6.54
%18
.54%
74.9
2%V
OC
5596
2.70
1956
0.26
8426
68.3
737
647.
7414
7951
81.7
758
7197
.76
1633
8218
.60
0.46
%5.
39%
94.1
5%C
O10
5969
5.75
4384
3.18
4963
566.
0847
710.
9239
4039
17.4
415
6388
0.21
4708
2613
.58
2.34
%10
.64%
87.0
1%N
Ox
1987
041.
4811
6593
.88
3644
338.
0819
2439
.46
3621
1784
7.38
1509
7747
.53
3831
5600
7.83
0.55
%1.
00%
98.4
5%P
M10
4980
6.88
1780
2.99
4728
6.12
1856
4.27
1327
309.
1927
3929
.96
1734
699.
413.
90%
3.80
%92
.31%
SO
x63
7924
.58
5167
7.95
4365
25.0
319
3558
.73
0.00
5193
.48
1324
879.
7852
.05%
47.5
6%0.
39%
mB
tu/tr
ip o
r gra
ms/
trip
Perc
enta
ge o
f ea
age
Feed
stoc
kFu
elO
pera
tion
Engi
neO
pera
tion
uel
ch s
t
Vess
el:
Mai
n En
gine
Fue
l:
Fisc
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
tain
er S
hip
- 600
0 TE
UA
uxili
ary
Engi
ne F
uel:
Lo
w S
ulfu
r Die
sel
Your
Ves
sel u
sing
Fis
her-
Trop
sch
Die
sel
Con
trib
utio
n of
Eac
h St
age
0%10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% Tota
l Ene
rgy Fos
sil Fue
lsPetr
oleum
CO2
CH4
N2O
GHGs
VOC
CO
NOx
PM10
SOx
Feed
stoc
kFu
elE
ngin
e O
pera
tion
135
Figure 165: CONTAINER CASE STUDY Results W2H Energy & Emission % Changes
4) Well-to-Hull Energy and Emission Changes (%, relative to vessel with main engines using Convention
Residual OilLow-Sulfur
Diesel Natural Gas BiodieselFischer-Tropsch
DieselTotal Energy -9.20% 11.95% 22.65% 15.28% 53.64%Fossil Fuels -9.11% 11.95% 22.08% -1.34% 54.06%Petroleum -5.25% 11.95% -94.96% -6.42% -94.48%CO2 -6.13% 13.18% -3.84% -1.58% 17.55%CH4 -6.43% 11.95% 295.46% 4.05% 22.33%N2O 664.07% 11.99% -7.75% 297.68% -64.70%GHGs -5.57% 13.15% 2.85% -1.20% 17.58%VOC -7.92% 12.12% -29.64% 12.58% 12.68%CO -5.18% 11.97% -19.72% 16.96% 26.24%Nox 0.42% 11.98% -19.58% 12.99% 10.39%PM10 336.97% 12.42% -90.25% 13.43% -75.09%Sox 2128.07% -21.01% -18.39% 8.87% -83.44%
136
137
REFERENCES Bay Area Council, Bay Area Water Transit Initiative: Charting the Course. 1999: San Francisco. California Air Resources Board, Emissions Estimation Methodology for Ocean-Going Vessels, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, 2005. p. 54. Chan, L.Y., C.Y. Chan, and Y. Qin, The effect of commuting microenvironment on commuter exposures to vehicular emission in Hong Kong. Atmospheric Environment, 1999. 33(11): p. 1777-1787. Chen, G., L.G. Huey, M. Trainer, D. Nicks, J. Corbett, T. Ryerson, D. Parrish, J.A. Neuman, J. Nowak, D. Tanner, J. Holloway, C. Brock, J. Crawford, J.R. Olson, A. Sullivan, R. Weber, S. Schauffler, S. Donnelly, E. Atlas, J. Roberts, F. Flocke, G. Hübler, and F. Fehsenfeld, An Investigation of the Chemistry of Ship Emission Plumes during ITCT 2002, Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres, 110 (D10), 2005. Corbett, J.J., The Marine Transportation System, in Transportation Engineer's Handbook, edited by M. Kutz, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2003. Corbett, J.J., Verification of Ship Emission Estimates with Monitoring Measurements to Improve Inventory and Modeling, pp. 47, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, 2004. Corbett, J.J. and A. Farrell, Mitigating Air Pollution Impacts of Passenger Ferries. Transportation Research D - Environment, 2002. 7: p. 197-211. Corbett, J.J. and P.S. Fischbeck, Emissions from Waterborne Commerce Vessels in United States Continental and Inland Waterways. Environmental Science & Technology, 2000. 34(15): p. 3254-3260. Corbett, J.J. and P.S. Fishbeck, Emissions from Ships. Science, 1997. 278(5339): p. 823-824. Dunlap, D.W., Launching a Flotilla of Ferry Terminals, in The New York Times. 2002: New York. p. 11. Delucchi, M., A Revised Model of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from the Use of Transportation Fuels and Electricity. 1997. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, Calif., Nov. Delucchi, M., Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Lifecycle Analysis of Transportation Fuels. Institute of Transportation Studies. Davis, University of California: 25, 2004.
138
Delucchi, M., Emissions of Criteria Pollutants, Toxic Air Pollutants, and Greenhouse Gases, From the Use of Alternative Transportation Modes and Fuels. 1996. Davis, CA., University of California. Delucchi, M., Overview of the Lifecycle Emissions Model (LEM). 2002: Davis, CA., University of California. [EPA] Environmental Protection Agency. AP 42, Fifth Edition, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources. 1995. E-version available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html Farrell, A.E., et al., Comparing Air Pollution from Ferry and Landside Commuting. Transportation Research D - Environment, 2003. 8(5): p. 343-360. Farrell, A.E., J.J. Corbett, and J.J. Winebrake, Controlling Air Pollution from Passenger Ferries: Cost Effectiveness of Seven Technological Options. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association, 2002. 52(December): p. 1399-1410. [FHA] Federal Highway Administration, National Ferry Database. 2000, U.S. Department of Transportation Volpe Center. Gupta, A.K., R.S. Patil, and S.K. Gupta, Emissions of gaseous and particulate pollutants in a port and harbour region in India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2002. 80(2): p. 187-205. [IMO] International maritime Organization and marine Environment Protection Committee, Assembly Resolution A.963(23): IMO Policies and Practices Related to the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Ships. 2004, International Maritime Organization: London, UK. p. 3. Isakson, J., T.A. Persson, and E.S. Lindgren, Identification and assessment of ship emissions and their effects in the harbour of G(o)over-circleteborg, Sweden. Atmospheric Environment, 2001. 35(21): p. 3659-3666. Jacobs, A., A Ferry Loop Plan To Connect the Dots For New York Bay, in The New York Times. 2001: New York. p. A.1. Kim, S., and B. Dale, Life Cycle Assessment of Various Cropping Systems Utilized for Producing Biofuels: Bioethanol and Biodiesel. Biomass & Bioenergy, 2005, 29(6): 426-439. Skjølsvik, K.O., A.B. Andersen, J.J. Corbett, and J.M. Skjelvik, Study of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships (MEPC 45/8 Report to International Maritime Organization on the outcome of the IMO Study on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships), MARINTEK
139
Sintef Group, Carnegie Mellon University, Center for Economic Analysis, and Det Norske Veritas, Trondheim, Norway, 2000. Starcrest Consulting Group LLC, G. Aldrete, B. Anderson, J. Ray, and S. Wells, The Port of Los Angeles, Final Draft, Port-wide Baseline Air Emissions Inventory, edited by C. Patton, and T.L. Garrett, pp. 218, Starcrest Consulting Group LLC, Los Angeles, CA, 2004. Wang, M., GREET 1.0 -- Transportation Fuel Cycles Model: Methodology and Use. 1996, Argonne National Laboratory, Center for Transportation Research: Argonne, IL. p. 78. Wang, M.Q., Contribution Feedstock and Fuel Transportation to Total Fuel-Cycle Energy Use and Emissions. 2000, Argonne National Laboratory, Center for Transportation Research; Argonne, IL. Wang, M.Q., GREET 1.5 -- Transportation Fuel-Cycle Model, Volume 1. 1999, Argonne National Laboratory, Center for Transportation Research: Argonne, IL. p. 3. Wang, M.Q., GREET 1.5 -- Transportation Fuel-Cycle Model, Volume 1. 1999, Argonne National Lab: Argonne, IL. Wang, M.Q., GREET 1.6 - The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation Model. Version 1.6. 2001, Argonne National Laboratory, Center for Transportation Research; Argonne, IL. Wang, M., Development and Use of GREET 1.6 Fuel-Cycle Model for Transportation Fuels and Vehicle Technologies. 2001, Argonne National Lab: Argonne, IL. Winebrake, J.J., J.J. Corbett, C. Wang, A.E. Farrell, and P. Woods, Optimal Fleetwide Emissions Reductions for Passenger Ferries: An Application of a Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Programming Model for the New York-New Jersey Harbor, Journal of Air and Waste Management, 2005. p. 55 (4), 458–466. Winebrake, J.J., M.Q. Wang, and D. He, Toxic Emissions from Mobile Sources: A Total Fuel Cycle Analysis of Conventional and Alternative Fuel Vehicles. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2001. 51(7): p. 1073-1086.
140
141