Electrification of Inland Waterway Ships Considering Power System Lifetime Emissions and Costs
<p>Procedure for the selection of alternative power systems configuration for inland waterway vessels.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The life-cycle of the diesel engine-powered ship configuration.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>The life-cycle of the battery-powered ship configuration.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>The life-cycle of the PV cell battery-powered ship configuration.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Total costs of a ship power system configuration.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Carbon allowance scenarios.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Inland waterway network of Croatia [<a href="#B62-energies-14-07046" class="html-bibr">62</a>].</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Procedure for the definition of the ship power system of the Croatian inland waterway fleet.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Selected ships in operation: (<b>a</b>) cargo ship “Opatovac” [<a href="#B65-energies-14-07046" class="html-bibr">65</a>], (<b>b</b>) passenger ship “Trošenj” [<a href="#B66-energies-14-07046" class="html-bibr">66</a>], and (<b>c</b>) dredger “Papuk” [<a href="#B67-energies-14-07046" class="html-bibr">67</a>].</p> "> Figure 10
<p>The Croatian electricity mix.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Lifetime emissions of the considered ships with different power system configurations.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>LCCA comparison of different power system configurations for the retrofit of the selected ships.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodology
2.1. Calculation of Ship Energy Needs
2.1.1. Energy Needs of River Vessels
2.1.2. Energy Demands of Stationary Units
2.2. LCA
2.2.1. General
- Raw material recovery;
- Production or manufacturing;
- Use of the product;
- End of life treatment; and
- Recycling and final disposal.
2.2.2. LCA of Diesel Engine-Powered Ships
2.2.3. LCA of Battery-Powered Ships
2.2.4. LCA of PV Cells Battery-Powered Ships
2.3. LCCA
2.3.1. General
- NT scenario: carbon credit is not implemented;
- CP scenario: which considers the current policies that are implemented in the energy sector;
- NP scenario: which includes the current policies and incorporates the ambitions of the policy makers in the energy sector; and
- SD scenario: which follows the 2030 agenda of the United Nations for Sustainable Development.
2.3.2. LCCA of Diesel Engine-Powered Ships
2.3.3. LCCA of Battery-Powered Ships
2.3.4. LCCA of PV Cell Battery-Powered Ships
3. Case Study—The Croatian Inland Waterway Vessels
3.1. LCA of the Croatian Waterway Fleet
3.1.1. LCA of Diesel Engine-Powered Ships
3.1.2. LCA of Battery-Powered Ships
3.1.3. LCA of PV Cell Battery-Powered Ships
3.2. LCCA of the Croatian Waterway Fleet
3.2.1. LCCA of Diesel Engine-Powered Ships
3.2.2. LCCA of Battery-Powered Ships
3.2.3. LCCA of PV Cell Battery-Powered Ships
4. Results
4.1. LCA Comparison
4.2. LCCA Comparison
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
- The most environmentally friendly solution is the PV cell battery-powered ship for each considered ship;
- Electrification of inland vessels results in a GHG reduction of up to 64% and NOX emission reduction of up to 99%;
- The diesel engine option is still by far the most economical solution both for the cargo ship and the dredger;
- For the passenger ship, the PV cell battery option seems to be the most cost-effective solution;
- Currently, in Croatia, given that diesel fuel for inland waterways shipping is free of excise duty and there are no incentives to introduce green technologies, the national policy actually encourages shipowners to use diesel engines.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- European Court of Auditors (ECA). Inland Waterway-Transport in Europe: No Significant Improvements in Modal Share and Navigability Conditions Since 2001. Available online: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR15_01/SR15_01_EN.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Wiegmans, B.; Witte, P.; Spit, T. Inland port performance: A statistical analysis of Dutch inland ports. Transp. Res. Procedia 2015, 8, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Christodoulou, A.; Christidis, P.; Bisselink, B. Forecasting the impacts of climate change on inland waterways. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 82, 102159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xing, S.; Xinping, Y.; Bing, W.; Xin, S. Analysis of the operational energy efficiency for inland river ships. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2013, 22, 34–39. [Google Scholar]
- Ančić, I.; Perčić, M.; Vladimir, N. Alternative power options to reduce carbon footprint of ro-ro passenger fleet: A case study of Croatia. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 271, 122638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindstad, H.; Jullumstrø, E.; Sandaas, I. Reductions in cost and greenhouse gas emissions with new bulk ship designs enabled by the Panama Canal expansion. Energy Policy 2013, 59, 341–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Miola, A.; Ciuffo, B. Estimating air emissions from ships: Meta-analysis of modelling approaches and available data sources. Atmos. Environ. 2011, 45, 2242–2251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ammar, N.R.; Seddiek, I.S. Eco-environmental analysis of ship emission control methods: Case study RO-RO cargo vessel. Ocean. Eng. 2017, 137, 166–1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Fei, Y.; Wan, Z. The relationship between the development of global maritime fleets and GHG emission from shipping. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 242, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keuken, M.P.; Moerman, M.; Jonkers, J.; Hulskotte, J.; Denier van der Gon, H.A.C.; Hoek, G.; Sokhi, R.S. Impact of inland shipping emissions on elemental carbon concentrations near waterways in The Netherlands. Atmos. Environ. 2014, 95, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ya-li, C.; Xia, W.; Cheng-qi, Y.; Wen-wen, X.; Wen, S.; Guang-ren, Q.; Zhi-meng, X. Inland Vessels Emission Inventory and the emission characteristics of the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal in Jiangsu province. Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018, 113, 498–506. [Google Scholar]
- International Maritime Organization. Resolution MEPC.176(58), London, UK. 2008. Available online: https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/MEPCDocuments/MEPC.176(58).pdf (accessed on 17 September 2021).
- Chen, L.; Yip, T.L.; Mou, J. Provision of Emission Control Area and the impact on shipping route choice and ship emissions. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 58, 280–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emission Standards: IMO Marine Engine Regulations. Available online: https://dieselnet.com/standards/inter/imo.php#s (accessed on 5 October 2021).
- Sofiev, M.; Winebrake, J.J.; Johansson, L.; Carr, E.W.; Prank, M.; Soares, J.; Vira, J.; Kouznetsov, R.; Jalkanen, J.-P.; Corbett, J.J. Cleaner fuels for ships provide public health benefits with climate tradeoffs. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gobbi, G.P.; Di Liberto, L.; Barnaba, F. Impact of port emissions on EU-regulated and non-regulated air quality indicators: The case of Civitavecchia (Italy). Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 719, 134984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rehmatulla, N.; Calleya, J.; Smith, T. The implementation of technical energy efficiency and CO2 emission reduction measures in shipping. Ocean. Eng. 2017, 139, 184–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouman, E.A.; Lindstad, E.; Rialland, A.I.; Strømman, A.H. State-of-the-art technologies, measures, and potential for reducing GHG emissions from shipping—A review. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2017, 52, 408–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbett, J.J.; Wang, H.; Winebrake, J.J. The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2009, 14, 593–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindstad, H.; Asbjørnslett, B.E.; Strømman, A.H. Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and cost by shipping at lower speeds. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 3456–3464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perčić, M.; Vladimir, N.; Fan, A. Life-cycle cost assessment of alternative marine fuels to reduce the carbon footprint in short-sea shipping: A case study of Croatia. Appl. Energy 2020, 279, 115848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ančić, I.; Vladimir, N.; Runko Luttenberger, L. Energy efficiency of ro-ro passenger ships with integrated power system. Ocean Eng. 2018, 16, 350–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Psaraftis, H.N.; Zis, T.; Lagouvardou, S. A comparative evaluation of market based measures for shipping decarbonization. Marit. Transp. Res. 2021, 2, 100019. [Google Scholar]
- Gagatsi, E.; Estrup, T.; Halatsis, A. Exploring the potentials of electrical waterborne transport in Europe: The E-ferry concept. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 1571–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Perčić, M.; Ančić, I.; Vladimir, N. Life-cycle cost assessments of different power system configurations to reduce the carbon footprint in the Croatian short-sea shipping sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 131, 110028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuchturee, C.; Li, T.; Xia, H. Energy efficiency of integrated electric propulsion for ships—A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 134, 110145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geertsma, R.D.; Negenborn, R.R.; Visser, K.; Hopman, J.J. Design and control of hybrid power and propulsion systems for smart ships: A review of developments. Appl. Energy 2017, 194, 30–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lan, H.; Wen, S.; Hong, Y.Y.; Yu, D.C.; Zhang, L. Optimal sizing of hybrid PV/diesel/battery in ship power system. Appl. Energy 2015, 158, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ghenai, C.; Bettayeb, M.; Brdjanin, B.; Hamid, A.K. Hybrid solar PV/PEM fuel Cell/Diesel Generator power system for cruise ship: A case study in Stockholm, Sweden. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2019, 14, 100497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ritari, A.; Huotari, J.; Halme, J.; Tammi, K. Hybrid electric topology for short sea ships with high auxiliary power availability requirement. Energy 2020, 190, 116359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, Y.; Wang, J.; Yan, X.; Li, Q.; Long, T. A design and experimental investigation of a large-scale solar energy/diesel generator powered hybrid ship. Energy 2018, 165, 965–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, P.; Partridge, J.; Bucknall, R. Cost-effective reinforcement learning energy management for plug-in hybrid fuel cell and battery ships. Appl. Energy 2020, 275, 115258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haseltalab, A.; Negenborn, R.R. Model predictive maneuvering control and energy management for all-electric autonomous ships. Appl. Energy 2019, 251, 113308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diaz-de-Baldasano, M.C.; Mateos, F.J.; Núñez-Rivas, L.R.; Leo, T.J. Conceptual design of offshore platform supply vessel based on hybrid diesel generator-fuel cell power plant. Appl. Energy 2014, 116, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ling-Chin, J.; Roskilly, A.P. Investigating the implications of a new-build hybrid power system forRoll-on/Roll-off cargo ships from a sustainability perspective—A lifecycle assessment case study. Appl. Energy 2016, 181, 416–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lindstad, H.E.; Eskeland, G.S.; Rialland, A. Batteries in offshore support vessels—Pollution, climate impact and economics. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2017, 50, 409–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Oguz, E.; Jeong, B.; Zhou, P. Life cycle and economic assessment of a solar panel array applied to a short route ferry. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 219, 471–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tang, R.; An, Q.; Xu, F.; Zhang, X.; Li, X.; Lai, J.; Dong, Z. Optimal operation of hybrid energy system for intelligent ship: An ultrahigh-dimensional model and control method. Energy 2020, 211, 119077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.H.; Shin, D.; Yoo, D.W.; Choi, H.K.; Kim, H.J. Hybrid photovoltaic/diesel green ship operating in standalone and grid-connected mode—Experimental investigation. Energy 2013, 49, 475–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, B.; Oguz, E.; Wang, H.; Zhou, P. Multi-criteria decision-making for marine propulsion: Hybrid, diesel electric and diesel mechanical systems from cost-environment-risk perspectives. Appl. Energy 2018, 230, 1065–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ling-Chin, J.; Heindrich, O.; Roskilly, A.P. Life cycle assessment (LCA)-from analysing methodology development to introducing an LCA framework for marine photovoltaic (PV) systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 59, 352–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ančić, I.; Vladimir, N.; Cho, D.S. Determining environmental pollution from ships using Index of Energy Efficiency and Environmental Eligibility (I4E). Mar. Policy 2018, 95, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Organization for Standardization. (ISO 14040). Life Cycle Assessment. Available online: https://web.stanford.edu/class/cee214/Readings/ISOLCA.pdf (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- GREET 2020. LCA software. Available online: https://greet.es.anl.gov (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Anderson, R.; Keshwani, D.; Guru, A.; Yang, H.; Irmak, S.; Subbiah, J. An integrated modeling framework for crop and biofuel systems using the DSSAT and GREET models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2018, 108, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obnamia, J.A.; Dias, G.M.; MacLean, H.L.; Saville, B.A. Comparison of U.S. Midwest corn stover ethanol greenhouse gas emissions from GREET and GHGenius. Appl. Energy 2019, 235, 591–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, L.G.; Cavalett, O.; Bonomi, A.; Zhang, Y.; Warner, E.; Chum, H.L. Comparison of biofuel life-cycle GHG emissions assessment tools: The case studies of ethanol produced from sugarcane, corn, and wheat. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 110, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.I.; Shahrestani, M.; Hayat, T.; Shakoor, A.; Vahdati, M. Life cycle (well-to-wheel) energy and environmental assessment of natural gas as transportation fuel in Pakistan. Appl. Energy 2019, 242, 1738–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Maritime Organization (IMO). Third IMO Greenhouse Gas Study; London, UK, 2014. Available online: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Greenhouse-Gas-Studies-2014.aspx (accessed on 17 September 2020).
- Environmental Protection Agency. Understanding the Global Warming Potentials. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials (accessed on 14 September 2020).
- Zubi, G.; Dufo-López, R.; Carvalho, M.; Pasaoglu, G. The lithium-ion battery: State of the art and future perspectives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 89, 292–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manthiram, A. An Outlook of Lithium Ion Battery Technology. ACS Cent. Sci. 2017, 3, 1063–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Energy Market Authority and Building and Construction Authority. Handbook for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Systems. Available online: http://www.bca.gov.sg/publications/others/handbook_for_solar_pv_systems.pdf (accessed on 1 September 2021).
- Liu, H.; Zhang, Q.; Qi, X.; Han, Y.; Lu, F. Estimation of PV output power in moving and rocking hybrid energy marine ships. Appl. Energy 2017, 204, 362–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stiglitz, J.E.; Stern, N.; Duan, M.; Edenhofer, O.; Giraud, G.; Heal, G.; Lèbre la Rovere, E.; Morris, A.; Moyer, E.; Pangestu, M.; et al. Report of the High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Tvinnereim, E.; Mehling, M. Carbon pricing and deep decarbonisation. Energy Policy 2018, 121, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EU Emissions Trading System. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets_en (accessed on 1 September 2021).
- Trivyza, N.L.; Rentizelas, A.; Theotokatos, G. Impact of carbon pricing on the cruise ship energy systems optimal configuration. Energy 2019, 175, 952–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook. 2018. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/world-energy-outlook_20725302 (accessed on 1 September 2021).
- Christos, B. Techno-Economical Feasibility Study on the Retrofit of Double-Ended Ro/Pax Ferries Into Battery-Powered Ones. Master’s Thesis, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Tsiropoulos, I.; Tarvydas, D.; Lebedeva, N. Li-ion Batteries for Mobility and Stationary Storage Applications, JCR Science for Policy Report, European Commissio. Available online: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC113360/kjna29440enn.pdf (accessed on 19 May 2021).
- Ministry of the Sea, Transport and Infrastructure of the Republic of Croatia. Inland Navigation. Available online: https://mmpi.gov.hr/more-86/unutarnja-plovidba-110/110 (accessed on 17 February 2020).
- Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Croatia. Available online: https://www.dzs.hr/Hrv_Eng/ljetopis/2018/sljh2018.pdf (accessed on 11 April 2020).
- Croatian Register of Shipping. Register of Inland Waterway Vessels. Available online: http://www.crs.hr/Portals/0/CRS%20Knjiga%20Registra%202017.pdf?ver=2018-07-04-155704-933 (accessed on 7 May 2020).
- Cargo Vessel “Opatovac”. Available online: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:209454/mmsi:238401840/imo:0/vessel:OPATOVAC (accessed on 7 May 2020).
- National Park Krka (NP Krka). Passenger ship “Trošenj”. Available online: http://www.npkrka.hr/stranice/izleti-brodom/33.html (accessed on 14 May 2020).
- Dredger “Papuk”. Available online: http://www.hidrogradnja.hr/gallery/papuk/ (accessed on 14 May 2020).
- van Essen, H.P.; Faber, J.; Wit, R.C.N. Charges for Barges? Preliminary Study of Economic Incentives to Reduce Engine Emissions from Inland Shipping in Europe; CE Transform: Delft, The Netherlands, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service. Hydrology Sector. Available online: https://hidro.dhz.hr/ (accessed on 17 January 2021).
- MAN. Marine High Speed Propulsion Engines. Available online: https://www.engines.man.eu/man/media/content_medien/doc/global_engines/marine/Marine_Commercial_180613_web.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2020).
- Jeong, B.; Wang, H.; Oguz, E.; Zhou, P. An effective framework for life cycle and cost assessment for marine vessels aiming to select optimal propulsion systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 187, 111–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- INA. Motor Fuels. Available online: https://www.ina.hr/customers/products-and-services/motor-fuels-9883/9883 (accessed on 21 September 2020).
- Croatian Energy Regulatory Agency. Annual Report. Available online: https://www.hera.hr/en/docs/HERA_Annual_Report_2016.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2020).
- HEP. Resources for Croatian Electricity Generation. Available online: http://www.hep.hr/elektra/trziste-elektricne-energije/izvori-elektricne-energije/1553# (accessed on 14 September 2020).
- Kobougias, I.; Tatakis, E.; Prousalidis, J. PV Systems Installed in Marine Vessels: Technologies and Specifications. Adv. Power Electron. Available online: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ape/2013/831560/ (accessed on 14 July 2020).
- Istrian Regional Energy Agency. Photovoltaic Systems. Available online: http://www.irena-istra.hr/uploads/media/Photovoltaic_systems.pdf (accessed on 17 September 2020).
- International Renewable Energy Agency. End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels. Available online: https://www.irena.org/documentdownloads/publications/irena_ieapvps_end-of-life_solar_pv_panels_2016.pdf (accessed on 14 July 2020).
- Prefersolar. Crystalline PV Panel. Available online: http://www.llslight.com/images/Alpsx_SolarPanels_240_255.pdf (accessed on 21 September 2020).
- Zaninović, K.; Gajić-Čapka, M.; Perčec Tadić, M. Climate Atlas of Croatia 1961–1990, 1971–2000; Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service: Zagreb, Croatia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Energy Prices and Costs in Europe, Annex 3. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/annex_3_-_country_sheets_-part_4_of_4_post_isc-v2.pdf (accessed on 7 November 2019).
- Astaneh, M.; Dufo-López, R.; Roshandel, R.; Bernal-Agustin, J.L. A novel lifetime prediction method for lithium-ion batteries in the case of stand-alone renewable energy systems. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2018, 103, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jianyun, Z.; Li, C.; Lijuan, X.; Bin, W. Bi-objective optimal design of plug-in hybrid electric propulsion system for ships. Energy 2019, 177, 247–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ship Type | Number of Ships | Exploitation Characteristics |
---|---|---|
Dredger | 19 | Power, operating time |
Tugboat | 8 | Power, operating time |
Passenger ship | 8 | Speed, number of passengers, route |
Cargo ship | 3 | Speed, capacity, route |
Cargo Ship | Passenger Ship | Dredger | |
---|---|---|---|
Length overall (m) | 75.9 | 13.2 | 68.94 |
Breadth (m) | 9.0 | 4.12 | 9.30 |
Deadweight (t) | 967 | 15.72 | 484.6 |
Main engine(s) maximum continuous rating (kW) | 855 | 236 | 804 |
Auxiliary engine(s) maximum continuous rating (kW) | 100 | - | 476 |
Total power installed (kW) | 955 | 236 | 1280 |
Ship | Opatovac | Trošenj | Papuk |
---|---|---|---|
Ship type | Tanker | Passenger | Dredger |
Selected engine model | MAN D2862 LE444 | MAN D2676 LE461 | MAN D2676 LE421 |
Engine power, kW | 735 | 147 | 382 |
Engine weight, kg | 2270 | 1215 | 1215 |
Engine cost, € | 159,000 | 69,000 | 77,000 |
Number of engines | 1 | 2 | 3 |
C | P | D | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Length of a round trip, LRT (km) | 446 | 10 | N/A | |
Annual number of round trips, NRT | 20 | 2190 | N/A | |
Average ship speed, v (km/h) | 14.4 | 15 | N/A | |
Average total power, Pave (kW) | 691 | 165 | 640 | |
Annual operating time, tA (h) | 660 | 1460 | 387 | |
Energy consumption, EC | Upstream (kWh/km) | 63.4 | N/A | N/A |
Downstream (kWh/km) | 38.8 | N/A | N/A | |
Average (kWh/km) | 51.1 | 11 | N/A | |
Annual (kWh) | 455,812 | 240,900 | 247,680 | |
Density of diesel, ρ (kg/L) | 0.845 | |||
Fuel oil consumption, FOC | Upstream (kg/km) | 13.6 | N/A | N/A |
Downstream (kg/km) | 8.3 | N/A | N/A | |
Average (kg/km) | 11.0 | 2.4 | N/A | |
Annual (L) | 116,118 | 62,201 | 63,023 |
Emission | GWP | Emission Factor (g Emission/kg Diesel) | Tailpipe Emissions | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cargo Ship (g/km) | Passenger Ship (g/km) | Dredger (g/h) | ||||
Upstream | Downstream | |||||
CO2 | 1 | 3206 | 43,602 | 26,610 | 7694 | 441,172 |
CH4 | 25 | 0.06 | 0.816 | 0.498 | 0.14 | 8.26 |
N2O | 298 | 0.15 | 2.04 | 1.245 | 0.36 | 20.64 |
NOX | N/A | 61.21 | 832.46 | 508.04 | 146.90 | 8423.01 |
SOX | N/A | 2.64 | 35.90 | 21.91 | 6.34 | 363.29 |
PM10 | N/A | 1.02 | 13.87 | 8.45 | 2.45 | 140.36 |
C | P | D | |
---|---|---|---|
Average battery power output, PBAT,ave (kW) | 760 | 182 | 704 |
Energy consumption, ECBAT (kWh/km) | 69.7 | 12.1 | N/A |
Annual energy consumption, ECBAT,A (kWh) | 621,724 | 264,990 | 272,448 |
Battery capacity, BC (MWh) | 19.42 | 0.15 | 7.04 |
Battery weight (t) | 77.7 | 0.6 | 28.2 |
C | P | D | |
---|---|---|---|
Average annual solar irradiance, Erad (kJ/m2) | 4,499,000 | 5,190,000 | 4,544,000 |
Installation area for PV cells, APV (m2) | 360 | 12 | 330 |
PV cells efficiency, ηPV | 0.155 | ||
Annual electric energy produced by PV cells, EPV,A (GJ) | 251.0 | 9.6 | 232.4 |
Energy consumption of PV cells battery-powered ships, ECPV-BAT (kWh/year) | 551,989 | 262,309 | 207,885 |
PV system weight (t) | 4.3 | 0.16 | 3.9 |
NT | CP | NP | SD | |
---|---|---|---|---|
C | 0 | 163,312 | 185,210 | 422,754 |
P | 0 | 87,455 | 99,182 | 226,389 |
D | 0 | 88,609 | 100,4910 | 229,377 |
Power System Configuration | Investment Cost (€) | Power Source Cost, (€) | Maintenance Cost (€) | Carbon Credit Cost (SD) (€) | Total Costs, (€) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C | DE | 222,600 | 2,727,900 | 333,900 | 422,700 | 3,707,100 |
BAT | 5,181,000 | 969,900 | 3,283,500 | 0 | 9,434,400 | |
PV-BAT | 5,216,700 | 861,100 | 3,342,900 | 0 | 9,420,700 | |
P | DE | 193,200 | 1,467,900 | 289,800 | 226,400 | 2,177,370 |
BAT | 40,300 | 413,400 | 25,500 | 0 | 479,200 | |
PV-BAT | 41,500 | 409,200 | 27,500 | 0 | 478,200 | |
D | DE | 323,400 | 1,487,300 | 485,100 | 229,400 | 2,525,200 |
BAT | 1,877,300 | 425,000 | 1,189,800 | 0 | 3,492,100 | |
PV-BAT | 1,910,000 | 324,300 | 1,244,200 | 0 | 3,478,500 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Perčić, M.; Vladimir, N.; Koričan, M. Electrification of Inland Waterway Ships Considering Power System Lifetime Emissions and Costs. Energies 2021, 14, 7046. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217046
Perčić M, Vladimir N, Koričan M. Electrification of Inland Waterway Ships Considering Power System Lifetime Emissions and Costs. Energies. 2021; 14(21):7046. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217046
Chicago/Turabian StylePerčić, Maja, Nikola Vladimir, and Marija Koričan. 2021. "Electrification of Inland Waterway Ships Considering Power System Lifetime Emissions and Costs" Energies 14, no. 21: 7046. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217046