View non-flash version
October 2011 www.sname.org/sname/mt truck carries about 55 m 3, only a few truck loads would be required to bunker the vessel for a round trip. Barges are also possible for fueling, either car- rying tank trucks on deck or tted with permanently mounted deck tanks. When a port handles a sucient number of LNG fueled vessels, permanent, peak shaving? type LNG storage can be set up in the port. In the case of a RO/ RO, one could also consider LNG tanker trucks stay- ing onboard, in the cargo area, and not installing fuel tanks in the vessel. e logistics of LNG fueling and the nal cost of the LNG delivered to the vessel have been the major fac- tors that have killed a number of proposed European LNG-fueled vessel studies. It is thus suggested that the logistics and cost of LNG be determined before substantial engineering is started. Peak shaving plants Many gas distribution utilities rely on peak shaving LNG plants to supplement pipeline gas supplies dur- ing periods of peak demand during winter cold snaps. e LNG is stored in large refrigerated tanks inte- grated with the local gas pipeline network. e largest facilities usually liquefy natural gas drawn directly from the interstate pipeline grid, although many smaller facilities without such liquefaction capabili- ties receive LNG by truck. LNG peak shaving plants are often located near the populations they serve, although many are in remote areas away from people. According to the Energy Information Administration, there are 96 active LNG storage facili- ties in the U.S., distributed among approximately 55 utilities. Of these facilities, 32 are in the Northeast where pipeline capacity and underground gas stor- age have historically been constrained. Cost of LNG as a fuel There are more projections of the relative cost of LNG and ULSD than there are LNG facilities in the U.S. and, as the numbers change daily, there is no set formula that will provide a potential owner with the projected cost of LNG as a fuel. Table 2 shows one projection for ULSD and LNG in 5-year increments. It FIGURE . MARPOL LIMITS ON FUEL SULPHUR CONTENT 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 % sulphur content in fuel Global limit ECA limit FUELING with LNG