Particle emissions from ships at berth using heavy fuel oil

Particle emissions from ships at berth using heavy fuel oil  
Thuy Van Chu1, 2, 3, a, Thomas Rainey1, 2, b, Zoran Ristovski1, 2, c, Ali Mohammad Pourkhesalian1,  
2, d, Vikram Garaniya4, e, Rouzbeh Abbassi4, f, Liping Yang1, 2, 5, g, Richard J. Brown1, 2, h  
1Biofuel Engine Research Facility, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), QLD, Australia  
2ILAQH, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), QLD, Australia  
3Vietnam Maritime University (VMU), Haiphong, Vietnam  
4Australian Maritime College (AMC), TAS, Australia  
5Institute of Power and Energy Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, China  
Abstract In this study, the composition of exhaust from a marine diesel auxiliary engine running on  
Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) on-board a large cargo vessel was investigated. Measurements of particle  
number and size distributions in the range 5-1000 nm and gaseous emissions of O2, CO, CO2, SO2 and  
NOx were undertaken. The measurements were performed on two large cargo ships at berth and during  
travel. Measurements were also carried out on auxiliary engines of two ships when they were at berth.  
Data on engine power, engine revolution, fuel oil consumption, intercooled air temperature, scavenging  
air pressure, cooling fresh water and exhaust gas temperature were measured using instrumentation of  
the ship. Results showed that emission factors (g/kWh) are higher than that of previous studies for SO2.  
This may be due to the high sulphur content of fuel. Particle number size distribution was observed to  
be the highest around 35 – 45 nm in diameter, and the particle number remarkably decreased during  
higher engine load conditions.  
Key words: On-board ship emission measurement, heavy fuel oil, fuel sulphur content, particle number  
emission factor, particulate matter emission factor, HFO composition.  
1. Introduction  
Exhaust emissions from ships have negative effects on both the environment and public health [1-6].  
Based on sufficient evidence in 2012, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which  
is part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified diesel engine exhaust as carcinogenic to  
human health (Group 1, same as asbestos). According to Viana et al. [7], shipping-related emissions are  
one of the major contributors to global air pollution, especially in coastal areas. This is obvious because  
over 70% of ship emissions may spread up to 400 km inland and significantly contribute to air pollution  
in the vicinity of harbors [8]. They may cause an increase in the levels and composition of both  
particulate and gaseous pollutants and the formation of new particles in densely-populated regions [7,  
9]. Corbett et al. [6] estimated that shipping-related PM2.5 emissions are the causes of approximately  
60,000 deaths globally associated with cardiopulmonary and lung problems yearly. Continued  
implementation of the amendments to the Maritime Pollution Convention (MARPOL) Annex VI  
regulations is a good way to reduce ship emissions, however, further regulation should be implemented  
because a fuel shift to low sulphur alone seems to be not enough to reduce fine and nano-particle  
emissions [10]. Quantitative and qualitative estimation of pollutant emissions from ships and their  
dispersion thus are becoming more important [4]. However, a very limited number of on-board  
measurement studies are found in the literature [4, 11].  
Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), which contains many impurities including sulphur, ash, vanadium, and nickel,  
is the main fuel for up to 95% of 2-stroke low-speed main engines and around 70% of 4-stroke medium-  
speed auxiliary engines [12] owing to its economic benefit [2]. Different compounds like sulphate,  
organic carbon (OC), black carbon (BC), ash and heavy metals in emitted particles are associated with  
235  
HFO combustion [13, 14]. In practice, while gaseous emissions have been extensively studied over  
several decades, diesel engine fine and nano-particles have recently emerged as a major health concern  
and received more attention from researchers and port managers.  
The aim of this study is to investigate the particle emissions with respect to number concentration and  
size distribution, from an auxiliary marine engine using HFO (3.13 wt% S) when the ship is at berth.  
The auxiliary engine operates at a constant speed, with different engine load conditions.  
2. Ship Emission On-board Measurement Campaign  
The measurements were performed in October and November 2015 on two large cargo ships of CSL  
shipping company at Ports of Brisbane, Gladstone, and Sydney. The work was a collaboration of the  
Australian Maritime College (AMC), Queensland University of Technology (QUT), and Maine  
Maritime Academy (MMA). The first on-board measurement was performed on Vessel I from 26th to  
31st of October, 2015 when she was running from Port of Brisbane to Port of Gladstone. The second  
measurement was conducted on Vessel II from 03th to 06th of November, 2015 in her voyage from  
Gladstone to Newcastle. All measurements have been carried out on both main and auxiliary engines  
of two ships for different operating ship conditions, such as at berth, manoeuvring, and at sea.  
The on-board measurement presented in this paper was performed on the auxiliary engine of Vessel II.  
Instruments were arranged on a deck high up in the machinery room and the exhaust gas was sampled,  
and measured continuously from a hole cut in the exhaust pipe after turbocharger of auxiliary engine  
No.1. The details of the measured engine can be seen in Table 1. At the sample point, one hole was  
created for the present measurements using a Testo 350XL and a DMS 500. The Testo 350XL was  
calibrated on 10th, August 2015 by the Techrentals Company and was used to measure gaseous  
emissions. Particle number size distributions in the size range 5 nm – 1.0 µm in the hot exhaust gas  
were analysed with a time resolution of 10 Hz (0.1 s) using a DMS 500 MKII – Fast Particulate  
Spectrometer with heated sample line, and build in dilution system (Cambustion). The schematic  
diagram of exhaust gas sampling setup is presented in Figure 1.  
Table 1 Technical parameters of Main Generator (Auxiliary Engine)  
MAIN DIESEL GENERATOR  
AUXILIARY DIESEL ENGINE  
Four-stroke, trunk piston Type  
GENERATOR  
Protected drip proof type  
Type  
type marine diesel engine  
with exhaust gas turbo  
charger and air cooler  
425 kW  
(FE 41A-8)  
Output  
Output  
531.25 kVA x 450V x 60  
Hz x 3Φ  
Revolution  
900 RPM  
Revolution  
900 RPM  
Max Combustion Press 165 bar  
Mean Effective Press  
No. Cylinder  
16.7 bar  
4
Cylinder Bore x Stroke 200 x 280 mm  
Maker Wartsila Diesel Mfg Co.,  
Ltd  
Maker  
Taiyo Electric Co., Ltd  
Data on engine power, engine revolution, fuel oil consumption, and exhaust gas temperature were  
measured by the ship’s instrumentation. The measurement procedure is in line with the ISO 8178  
standard [15, 16]. The specifications of the fuel used are presented in Table 2. All auxiliary engines  
used on board cargo ships work at load characteristic, which means that a marine diesel engine  
is working at a constant speed while the torque load is varied. Engine load depends on demand  
236  
of electric equipment of the ship. In this study, investigation was carried out at different engine  
loads, including 0, 24, 35, 55, 70, 83, and 95% of the maximum continuous rating (MCR) by  
means of alternating the load between two auxiliary engines. It is shown in Figure 2c.  
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of exhaust gas sampling setup  
Table 2 Fuel characteristics of HFO (from Bunker Delivery Receipt 28th, September 2015)  
Parameter  
Density at 150 C  
Viscosity at 500 C  
Flash point  
Water  
Sulphur  
Ash  
Carbon residue  
Total sediment  
Calorific value  
Asphaltenes  
Units  
kg/m3  
mm2/s  
0C  
% Vol  
% mass  
% mass  
% mass ISO 10370  
% mass ISO 10307  
MJ/kg  
Method  
ISO 3675  
ISO 3140  
ISO 2719  
ISO 3733  
ISO 2719  
ISO 6245  
Result Parameter  
986.2 Silicon  
Units  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
mg/kg  
Method  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
IP 501  
ASTM  
D5185  
Result  
9
377  
Aluminium  
6
118.5 Vanadium  
141  
41  
14  
0
34  
10  
1
0.2  
3.13  
Sodium  
Iron  
0.064 Lead  
14.65 Nickel  
0.03  
40.22 Zinc  
7.42 Potassium  
Calcium  
IP 501  
IP 143  
% mass  
0.8  
237  
Figure 2 Auxiliary engine at berth: (a) Gas concentrations measured NOx, CO, SO2, O2 and  
CO2; (b) Particle number and mass concentrations; (c) The relationship between engine speed,  
engine power with period of measurement time.  
238  
Emission factors for emitted gas-phase species and number/mass of particles were calculated following  
ISO 8178 [15, 16], using specific fuel consumption and formed CO2 to obtain the exhasut gas flow rate  
(equation (1)). These calculations assume that all carbon in the fuel is converted completely into CO2.  
(
)
×
% × (  
)
ℎ
=
[
]
(1)  
× (  
)
,
,
×
=
[
]
(2)  
(3)  
×
#
=
[
]
where CCO2, exh and CCO2, air are the CO2 concentration in v/v % in the exhaust gas and in the air,  
respectively. Data on fuel consumption and engine power were obtained from the ship’s instrument.  
The emission factors of both gases and particulate matter are presented as mass or number per kWh of  
engine work (g/kWh, #/kWh), and normalised to standard conditions regarding temperature of 273.15  
K and pressure of 101.325 kPa.  
O2/100  
CO  
CO2/100  
SO2  
NOx  
PM1.0  
20  
15  
10  
5
0
20  
40  
60  
80  
100  
Power (%)  
Figure 3 Specific emissions against engine load. (A 95% CI for each mean value is shown as the  
mean ± X)  
3. Results and Discussion  
The major gaseous emissions of interest in the engine exhaust were NOx, CO, SO2, O2, and CO2. The  
real-time on-board measurement of these gases can be seen in Figure 2a. Figure 2 demonstates the  
relationship between the changes of emisions with time and engine power output while engine speed is  
kept at a constant value. The results of gas-phase emision factors for O2, CO, CO2, SO2, and NOx in  
terms of g/kWh are presented in Figure 3. There was an initial peak in CO concentration at start-up in  
cold start period - this can be seen in Figure 2a and 3. This is due to the cold start of the engine and the  
low engine load condition, which leads to incomplete combustion and aids carbon monoxide to gain  
239  
the highest level. The CO concentration then significantly decreased and remained at a stable value at  
high engine load condition.  
Table 3 Comparison of gaseous emissions between this study and previous studies.  
Study  
Engine Type  
Fuel  
(% S)  
Engine  
Load  
(%)  
O2  
CO  
CO2  
SO2  
NOx  
(g/kWh) (g/kWh) (g/kWh) (g/kWh) (g/kWh)  
Moldanová 4-stroke,  
et al. [17] medium speed,  
HFO  
(1.0)  
30  
1127  
1054  
1.82  
1.17  
617  
678  
3.24  
3.65  
9.6  
9.6  
main engine,  
4440 kW  
80  
Khan et al. 2-stroke, low  
HFO  
(3.14)  
29  
52  
73  
81  
50  
70  
90  
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.57  
0.41  
0.36  
0.35  
1.05  
0.74  
0.3  
577  
555  
561  
576  
620  
603  
607  
11.4  
10.9  
11.0  
11.3  
4.62  
4.62  
4.57  
19.5  
18.5  
19.5  
19.1  
7.49  
8.49  
10.71  
[18]  
speed, main  
engine, 36740  
kW  
Winnes  
4-stroke,  
HFO  
(1.6)  
and Fridell medium speed,  
[10]  
main engine,  
4500 kW  
Agrawal et 2-stroke, low  
HFO  
(2.85)  
13  
25  
50  
75  
85  
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.5  
1.5  
1.0  
0.8  
0.5  
~1200  
640  
620  
670  
680  
13  
12  
10.5  
10  
10  
2.5-2.7  
22  
17  
18  
al. [19]  
speed, main  
engine, 15750  
kW  
21  
20.5  
13.3 -  
17.5  
Cooper  
[20]  
4-stroke,  
medium speed,  
auxiliary  
HFO  
(0.53)  
47-58  
1.06 -  
1.71  
763-803  
engine, 1270  
kW  
4-stroke,  
medium speed,  
auxiliary  
engine, 2675  
kW  
4-stroke,  
HFO  
(2.2)  
41  
39  
-
-
0.90  
0.77  
691  
697  
9.5  
9.6  
15.2  
12.9  
HFO  
(2.2)  
medium speed,  
auxiliary  
engine, 2005  
kW  
This study 4-stroke,  
medium speed,  
HFO  
(3.13)  
24  
35  
55  
70  
83  
95  
1338  
1208  
1150  
1104  
969  
2.81  
1.66  
1.14  
1.16  
0.88  
0.87  
850  
850  
849  
849  
849  
849  
22.20  
22.49  
22.30  
21.24  
21.17  
21.11  
4.40  
5.17  
6.40  
6.30  
6.91  
7.14  
auxiliary  
engine, 425 kW  
992  
A significantly decreasing trend of O2 emissions with power was observed as shown in Figure 2a and  
3. This may be due to the engine revolution being constant, which makes the amount of air stable while  
the engine load is increased. Thus, more fuel is required and a rich fuel-air mixture combustion  
condition is reached. The fuel-dependent specific emissions of SO2 and CO2 is given in Figure 2a are  
generally proportional to the fuel carbon and sulphur content, and therefore these emission factors of  
SO2 and CO2 seem to be constant as was expected. Of most interest in this study is that the emission  
factor of SO2 was much higher than that of compared studies (Table 3), which is the result of higher  
sulphur content fuel used in this research. The theoretical value of SO2 emission factor calculated in  
this study was around 16.6 g/kWh, which was significantly less than measured cases. The emission of  
NOx depends on the engine temperature, and thus the emission of NOx presented in Figure 2a and 3  
shows a dependence on engine load in which high engine load produces the highest emission. Shown  
240  
in Table 3, the value of NOx emission in the present research was much lower than that of previous  
studies, this may be due to difference engine types and working conditions.  
For particle emissions presented in Figure 2b, a general pattern in the emitted nanoparticles is that there  
was an initial peak both in mass and number concentration at engine start-up in cold start period before  
reaching the constant value or significantly decreasing to low level at higher engine load working  
condition. This can be seen clearly in PN case, a significant difference in particle number concentrations  
observed between low and medium engine load of 0, 24, 35 and 55% with 70, 83 and 95% of engine  
load working conditions, which illustrated in Figure 2b and 4. This may be due to low temperature  
inside engine combustion chamber at low loads, which caused more particles can be created [3]. Figure  
4 indicated that the number size distributions were dominant by nano-particles and only one modal with  
the peak at around 35 – 45 nm for all engine load working conditions. Particle mass emission factor  
(PM) was calculated from the number concentrations measured with the DMS 500 (5.0 – 1000 nm)  
assuming spherical particles with unit densities for nucleation and accommodation mode. A 95%  
confidence interval (CI) to each mean value in Table 4 was calculated.  
1.80E+009  
0%  
24%  
1.50E+009  
1.20E+009  
9.00E+008  
6.00E+008  
3.00E+008  
0.00E+000  
35%  
55%  
70%  
83%  
95%  
1
10  
100  
1000  
Particle Diameter (nm)  
Figure 4 Number size distributions of measured particles (5-1000 nm) for idle, 24%, 35%, 55%,  
70%, 83%, and 95% load.  
In comparison with the literature that can be seen in Table 4, there is a large variation of particle number  
emission factor, which may be due to limited available data on PN and a difference in fuel used, engine  
models, working conditions, and instruments used for PN measurement [21]. A decreasing trend of both  
PN and PM emission factors was observed clearly as engine output power increased in this study. This  
trend was also observed in the study of Anderson et al. [3], but particle number emissions at 10 and  
25% load in this study (HFO, 0.12 wt% S) were much higher than that of present study (HFO, 3.13 wt%  
S). This shows that a fuel shift to low sulphur content fuel may only have limited effect on small size  
particle number concentrations. It can be supported by studies of Winnes and Kasper [10, 22].  
Magnitude of PM emission factor in this study was rather similar to that of previous studies.  
241  
Table 4 Comparison of PM and PN between this study and previous studies. (A 95% CI for  
each mean value is shown as the mean ± X)  
Study  
Engine Type  
Fuel  
Engine  
PN  
PM (g/kWh)  
(% S) Load (%) (1016 #/kWh)  
PM10  
PM2.5  
PM1.0  
Moldanová 4-stroke,  
et al. [17] medium speed,  
main engine,  
4440 kW  
Khan et al. 2-stroke, low  
HFO (1.0)  
30  
80  
-
0.35  
-
0.27  
0.41  
-
0.41  
-
HFO  
(3.14)  
29  
52  
73  
81  
75  
-
1.19  
1.44  
2.14  
2.19  
[18]  
speed, main  
engine, 36740  
kW  
Hallquist  
et al. [21]  
4-stroke,  
HFO  
(0.49)  
2.05 ± 0.27  
-
-
0.13 ± 0.02  
medium speed,  
SCR-equipped  
main engine,  
12600 kW  
Anderson  
et al. [3]  
Test-bed engine,  
4-stroke, 5-  
cylinder, high  
speed, 81 kW  
HFO  
(0.12)  
10  
25  
35  
12 ± 0.04  
17 ± 0.059  
0.17 ± 0.003  
-
-
-
-
0.45±0.025  
0.71±0.11  
0.65±0.03  
This study 4-stroke,  
medium speed,  
HFO  
(3.13)  
24  
35  
55  
70  
83  
95  
0.468 ± 0.013  
0.450 ± 0.009  
0.501 ± 0.025  
0.310 ± 0.013  
0.290 ± 0.011  
0.281 ± 0.012  
1.221 ± 0.198  
0.585 ± 0.064  
0.423 ± 0.009  
0.473 ± 0.020  
0.424 ± 0.013  
0.421 ± 0.011  
auxiliary engine,  
425 kW  
4. Conclusion  
Although in-port auxiliary engine emissions account for a relatively small proportion of the total  
emissions from shipping compared to main engine emissions, they have some of the most significant  
health effects on the surrounding population [20]. To improve the limited knowledge regarding marine  
engine emissions [21], especially on particle number size distribution, a measurement campaign on two  
commercial ships plying the east coast of Australia was conducted as described in this study. Engine  
performance and emissions of an auxiliary engine while in berth, were measured on-board the ship  
during actual harbour stopovers. The focus was directed toward characteristics of particle emissions.  
Gaseous and particle emission factors were presented in g/kWh or #/kWh, and investigated at different  
engine loads while engine speed is kept at constant value. The particle number size distribution was  
peaked at around 35 – 45 nm and dominant by nano-particles, which have negative impact on human  
health and climate.  
5. Acknowledgement  
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Port of Brisbane Corporation for their ongoing support in the  
project, Maritime Safety Queensland and stevedore operators (AAT, Patricks and DP World). The  
authors would like to acknowledge the outstanding support received from all employees and crew of  
CSL Group Inc. in coordinating this project. In addition, the materials and data in this publication have  
been obtained through the support of the International Association of Maritime Universities (IAMU)  
and the Nippon Foundation in Japan.  
242  
References  
[1] Reda, A.A., et al., "Gas phase carbonyl compounds in ship emissions: Differences between diesel  
fuel and heavy fuel oil operation", Atmospheric Environment, 112, (2015), p. 370-380.  
[2] Mueller, L., et al., "Characteristics and temporal evolution of particulate emissions from a ship  
diesel engine", Applied Energy, 155, (2015), p. 204-217.  
[3] Anderson, M., et al., "Characterization of particles from a marine engine operating at low loads",  
Atmospheric Environment, 101, (2015), p. 65-71.  
[4] Blasco, J., et al., "Towards an integrated environmental risk assessment of emissions from ships'  
propulsion systems", Environment International, 66, (2014),p. 44-7.  
[5] Ristovski, Z.D., et al., "Respiratory health effects of diesel particulate matter", Respirology, 17, 2,  
(2012), p. 201-212.  
[6] Corbett, J.J., et al., "Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global Assessment", Environmental  
Scinece & Technology, 41, 24, (2007), p. 8512–8518.  
[7] Viana, M., et al., "Impact of maritime transport emissions on coastal air quality in Europe",  
Atmospheric Environment, 90, (2014), p. 96-105.  
[8] Eyring, V., et al., "Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Shipping", Atmospheric  
Environment, 44, 37, (2010), p. 4735-4771.  
[9] González, Y., et al., "Ultrafine particles pollution in urban coastal air due to ship emissions",  
Atmospheric Environment, 45, 28, (2011), p. 4907-4914.  
[10] Winnes, H. and E. Fridell, "Particle Emissions from Ships: Dependence on Fuel Type", Journal of  
the Air & Waste Management Association, 59, 12, (2012), p. 1391-1398.  
[11] Agrawal, H., et al., "In-use gaseous and particulate matter emissions from a modern ocean going  
container vessel", Atmospheric Environment, 42, 21, (2008), p. 5504-5510.  
[12] Corbett, J.J., "Updated emissions from ocean shipping", Journal of Geophysical Research, 108,  
D20, (2003).  
[13] Anderson, M., et al., "Characterization of particles from a marine engine operating at low loads",  
Atmospheric Environment, 101, (2015), p. 65-71.  
[14] Moldanová, J., et al., "Characterisation of particulate matter and gaseous emissions from a large  
ship diesel engine", Atmospheric Environment, 43, 16, (2009), p. 2632-2641.  
[15] ISO 8178-2:2008, "Reciprocating internal combustion engines - Exhaust emission measurement -  
Part 2: Measurement of gaseous and particulate exhaust emissions under field conditions", the  
International  
Organization  
for  
standard,  
[16] ISO 8178-1:2006, "Reciprocating internal combustion engines - Exhaust emission measurement -  
Part 1: Test-bed measurement of gaseous and particulate exhaust emissions", the International  
Organization  
for  
standard,  
[17] Moldanová, J., et al., "Physical and chemical characterisation of PM emissions from two ships  
operating in European emission control areas", Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 6, 12,  
(2013), p. 3577-3596.  
[18] Khan, M.Y., et al., "Measuring in-use ship emissions with international and U.S. federal methods",  
Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, 63, 3, (2013), p. 284-291.  
[19] Agrawal, H., et al., "Emission measurements from a crude oil tanker at sea", Environmental  
Science and Technology, 42, 19, (2008), p. 7098-7103.  
[20] Cooper, D.A., "Exhaust emissions from ships at berth", Atmospheric Environment, 37, 27, (2003),  
p. 3817-3830.  
[21] Hallquist, Å.M., et al., "Onboard Measurements of Nanoparticles from a SCR-Equipped Marine  
Diesel Engine", Enironmental Science & Technology, 47, 2, (2013), p. 773-780.  
[22] Kasper, A., et al., "Particulate Emissions from a Low-Speed Marine Diesel Engine", Aerosol  
Science and Technology, 41, 1, (2007), p. 24-32.  
243  
pdf 9 trang yennguyen 19460 Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Particle emissions from ships at berth using heavy fuel oil", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên

File đính kèm:

  • pdfparticle_emissions_from_ships_at_berth_using_heavy_fuel_oil.pdf