Journals / Journal of Eta Maritime Science / 2018 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3

Assessment of Alternative Fuels from the Aspect of Shipboard Safety

Alternatif Yakıtların Gemi Emniyeti Açısından Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
199–214
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Liquefied natural gasand methanol, as trend alternative fuels with liquefied natural gas for shipping industry, got 0,084 and0,053, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Global regulations about shipboard emissions become stricter day by day.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the final safety assessment results, liquefied petroleum gas had the highest weighingof 0,130.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Liquefied natural gasand methanol, as trend alternative fuels with liquefied natural gas for shipping industry, got 0,084 and0,053, respectively.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Global regulations about shipboard emissions become stricter day by day. There are various ways toreduce shipboard emissions, and using alternative fuels on main engine and auxiliary engines is one ofthese ways. The alternative fuels can have different physicochemical properties than conventional fuels,which needs special procedures and safety precautions while using onboard. Safety is important termfor sustainable shipping. This study aimed to determine the safety ranking of the trend alternative fuelsand possible ones in the future. A safety evaluation method was formed to assess fourteen alternativefuels by considering handling, storage and crew health. Flashpoint, auto-ignition, explosion limits, flamespeed, density, and exposure limit are criteria for the safety evaluation. Analytic Hierarchy Process wasused while finding the weighing of the alternative fuels at these criteria. Scale of relative importancewas used to find the pair-wise comparison of the fuels. The criteria weighing were determined by takingexpert opinions. Seven experts gave points to the criteria at the asked questionnaire. The questionairrewas about; which fuel property is more important at the storage, handling, and operation with thefuels. According to the final safety assessment results, liquefied petroleum gas had the highest weighingof 0,130. Ethanol and ammonia followed it with 0,120 and 0,116, respectively. Liquefied natural gasand methanol, as trend alternative fuels with liquefied natural gas for shipping industry, got 0,084 and0,053, respectively.

Özet

Gemi kaynaklı emisyonları ilgilendiren uluslar arası denizcilik sözleşmeleri gün geçtikçe katılaşmaktadır. Gemi kaynaklı emisyonları azaltmaya yönelik çeşitli yöntemler bulunmaktadır ve alternatif yakıt kullanımı da bunlardan biridir. Alternatif yakıtların, gemilerde kullanılan konvansiyonel yakıtlardan farklı fiziko-kimyasal özellikleri olabilir. Bu farklı özellikler, gemi üzerinde özel prosedürler ve emniyet tedbirleri alınmasını gerektirebilir. Emniyet, sürdürülebilir deniz ticareti için önemli bir kavramdır. Bu çalışma günümüzde revaçta olan alternatif yakıtların ve ileride kullanılabilecek olanların emniyet puanını belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Emniyet değerlendirme yöntemi oluşturularak, seçilen 14 alternatif yakıt, depolama, elleçleme ve mürettebat sağlığı temel alınarak değerlendirilmiştir. Emniyet değerlendirmesinde kullanılan değerlendirme kriterleri, parlama noktası, kendiliğinden tutuşma sıcaklığı, patlama limitleri, alev hızı, yoğunluk ve etkileme derecesidir. Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi kullanılarak bu değerlendirme yapılmıştır. Nispi önem derecesi puanları kullanılarak yakıtların çiftsel karşılaştırması yapılmıştır. Kriterlerin ağırlıkları da yedi ekspere sorulan anket sonucunda görüşleri alınarak belirlenmiştir. Anket, hangi yakıt özelliğinin, yakıtların depolanması, elleçlenmesi ve operasyonunda daha önemli olduğunu sormaktadır. Çalışma sonuçlarına göre sıvılaştırılmış petrol gazı 0,130 ile en yüksek emniyet puanını almıştır. Etanol ve amonyak, 0,120 ve 0,116 ile takip etmiştir. Günümüzün revaçta alternatif yakılarından sıvılaştırılmış doğalgaz ve metanol, 0,084 ve 0,053 emniyet puanı almıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZİNCİR, B., DENİZ, C. (2022). Assessment of Alternative Fuels from the Aspect of Shipboard Safety. Journal of Eta Maritime Science, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 3, 199–214. https://ajindex.com/articles/652397

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. DNV GL: The Future of Shipping, Høvik, 04.2014
  2. International Maritime Organization, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea. Access Date: 18 September 2017. http://www. imo.org/en/About/conventions/ l i s t o f c o n v e n t i o n s / p a g e s / international-convention-for-thesafety- of-life-at-sea-(solas),-1974. aspx
  3. International Maritime Organization, Gas and low-flashpoint fuels code adopted by IMO. Access Date: 18 September 2017. http:// www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/ pressbriefings/pages/26-msc-95- ends.aspx
  4. Deniz, C., Zincir, B. (2016). Environmental and economical assessment of alternative marine fuels. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113(2016)438-449
  5. Gu, Y., Zhang, C. (2014). Alternative energies or fuels for future deep sea container shipping. Master degree thesis, University of Gothenburg, School of Business, Economics and Law
  6. Mansson, S. (2017). Prospects for renewable marine fuels, a multicriteria decision analysis of a alternative fuels for the maritime sector. Master thesis, Industrial Ecology, Chalmers University of Technology
  7. Hossain, A. K., Davies, P. A. (2010). Plant oils as fuels for compression ignition engines: a technical review and life-cycle analysis. Renewable Energy, 35(2010)1-13
  8. Google Scholar, Alternative fuel research number, 17 March 2017
  9. University of Nebraska Lincoln. Safe Operating Procedure. Hazards of Flammable Gases, Liquids & Aerosols & Risk Minimization. Access Date: 8 November 2017. https://ehs.unl. edu/sop/s-hazards_flam_gases_liq_ aeros_risk_min.pdf
  10. Reiter, A. J., Kong, S. (2011). Combustion and emission characteristics of compressionignition engine using dual ammoniadiesel fuel. Fuel 90(2011)87-97
  11. Praxair. Ammonia Material Safety Data Sheet. Access Date: 11 November 2017. http://www.praxair.com/-/ media/documents/sds/ammonianh3- safety-data-sheet-sds-p4562. pdf?la=en
  12. Nozari, H., Karabeyoglu, A. (2014). Chemical kinetics study of combustion characteristics of ammonia-air mixtures under high pressure lean conditions. https://nh3fuel.files. wordpress.com/2014/10/nh3fa- 2014-hadi-nozari-arif-karabeyoglu. pdf
  13. Hossain, A. K., Davies, P. A. (2010). Plant oils as fuels for compression ignition engines: a technical review and lifecycle analysis. Renewable Energy, 35(2010)1-13
  14. Sidibe, S. S., Blin, J., Vaitilingam, G., Azoumah, Y. (2010). Use of crude filtered vegetable oils as a fuel in diesel engines state of the art: literature review.