The World’s First Zero-Emission Tanker Is Coming From Japan

[Pavel + 384]

The electric battery boom has a new target: ships. Four Japanese companies have teamed up to build the world’s first zero-emission tanker by mid-2021 that will be powered by large-capacity batteries and will operate in Tokyo Bay, according to a statement on Tuesday. The new company e5 Lab Inc. is a venture between Asahi Tanker Co., Exeno Yamamizu Corp., Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd. and Mitsubishi Corp. The global maritime industry is facing an onslaught of legislation to improve its environmental performance. From next year, a majority of vessels will have to burn fuel containing less sulfur. A challenge requiring even more innovation, though, is a goal to halve shipping’s carbon emissions by 2050. While fully-electric ships have struggled to penetrate major markets, momentum is gathering. Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc said last year that it had started offering battery-powered ship engines, while Norway’s Kongsberg Gruppen ASA is developing an electric container vessel. Still, there are challenges in making the technology applicable to ships navigating thousands of miles across oceans because of the need to recharge batteries.
 

[joze44 + 39]

Are they re-charged by alternator system thru motion, or solar ??

[damirUSBiH + 327]

Sort of ironic that the first will be a tanker and not dry cargo container.

[BALBOA + 37]

 Super interesting!

[ThunderBlade + 231]

So, when that sinks what’s the potential toxicity of the combined pollution. Got to be a cleaner way to turn a turbine...

[50 shades of black + 254]

5 minutes ago, joze44 said:

Are they re-charged by alternator system thru motion, or solar ??

Seems like there should be a way to make use of the ocean wave action to recharge these batteries in transit.😀

Edited August 6, 2019 by 50 shades of black

[francoba + 93]

Now we just need a way to make “green” batteries...

[Pavel + 384]

It looks promising...

 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

27 minutes ago, francoba said:

Now we just need a way to make “green” batteries...

I don't understand the point of trying to improve battery tech when chemicals like ethyl acetate or methyl alcohol can be made from renewable sources and burned in the efficient engines of large freight ships. The engines on these things reach efficiencies up to 20% higher than standard automobile engine. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

31 minutes ago, 50 shades of black said:

Seems like there should be a way to make use of the ocean wave action to recharge these batteries in transit.😀

Seems to me that any motion powered recharge system would actually counteract the motion of the ship, and then you'd be spending the energy you just made to propel the ship, effectively moving you nowhere. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

4 hours ago, ThunderBlade said:

So, when that sinks what’s the potential toxicity of the combined pollution. Got to be a cleaner way to turn a turbine...

Natural gas is the best answer IMHO. Plenty of ships already use it and it is tried and true.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Zero-emission ships have been around for a long time... they were called sailboats.

Really if the product has a long shelf life and there is no rush to get there we could do some modern shipping with sails. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Enthalpic

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

3 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

Zero-emission ships have been around for a long time... they were called sailboats.

Really if the product has a long shelf life and there is no rush to get there we could do some modern shipping with sails. 

Some companies are experimenting with the idea of sails on the large freight ships. If the maintenance wasn't a real headache, this could be a nice cut to operating costs. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

4 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Some companies are experimenting with the idea of sails on the large freight ships. If the maintenance wasn't a real headache, this could be a nice cut to operating costs. 

If I was a billionaire I could see owning this. Carbon fiber parts with computer control - instead the mess of ropes of old.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Pearl_(yacht)

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

It should be noted that that Japanese prototype ship with batteries will be recharging from some coal or gas shore electric plant, now that Japan has shut down its nuclear capacity.  So all you are doing is displacing the emissions to shore, from the oceans.  It should also be noted that the marine term "tanker" includes ships used to ferry various liquids such as chemicals from one port to another - not just oil products.  Lots and lots of chemicals are shipped that way, and those specialty ships typically have these epoxy-coated tanks and special washing systems to clean between loads. 

Moving on to the discussions about sail, it is not realistic to go to a pure sail ship.  Modern cargo ships have quite a bit of "beam," the width of the ship, to make for larger holds for the cargo.  The old sailing "clipper ships" were narrow, with a long narrow profile to keep the drag to a minimum.  Those ships could easily do 20 knots.  Today's tankers typically move at perhaps 12 knots, with 100,000-hp motors.  They trade off speed for moving volume. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

16 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Some companies are experimenting with the idea of sails on the large freight ships. If the maintenance wasn't a real headache, this could be a nice cut to operating costs. 

 

7 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Moving on to the discussions about sail, it is not realistic to go to a pure sail ship.  Modern cargo ships have quite a bit of "beam," the width of the ship, to make for larger holds for the cargo.  The old sailing "clipper ships" were narrow, with a long narrow profile to keep the drag to a minimum.

My understanding is that what is holding "modern sails" back is how they make them practical i.e. sails would would take up valueable deckspace on a container ship. 

https://theweek.com/articles/825647/why-cargo-ships-might-literally-sail-high-seas-again 

[NickW + 2,714]

17 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Some companies are experimenting with the idea of sails on the large freight ships. If the maintenance wasn't a real headache, this could be a nice cut to operating costs. 

Sky Sails

https://www.skysails.info/index.php?L=1

Not sure how far they got in the shipping market. I think their sails provide up to about an addition 2MW equivalent power.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

3 hours ago, NickW said:

Sky Sails

https://www.skysails.info/index.php?L=1

Not sure how far they got in the shipping market. I think their sails provide up to about an addition 2MW equivalent power.

2 MW.. isn't.. terrible. 2700 horsepower. The thing is though, when your engines put out 30k + horsepower you wonder why you'd bother with sails. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

3 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

 

My understanding is that what is holding "modern sails" back is how they make them practical i.e. sails would would take up valueable deckspace on a container ship. 

https://theweek.com/articles/825647/why-cargo-ships-might-literally-sail-high-seas-again 

Indeed, the cut to operational costs would have to be greater than the value of missing cargo. According to the 2 MW figure given by Nick, this doesn't seem profitable in the least/ 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

2 MW.. isn't.. terrible. 2700 horsepower. The thing is though, when your engines put out 30k + horsepower you wonder why you'd bother with sails. 

Its sold as an auxillary power unit for ships sailing suitable routes. 

[NickW + 2,714]

58 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Indeed, the cut to operational costs would have to be greater than the value of missing cargo. According to the 2 MW figure given by Nick, this doesn't seem profitable in the least/ 

Depends how much it costs. 

2MW is going to be consuming half a tonne of diesel an hour. Similar sums for fuel oil etc. 

I recall they were working on some 5 MW models. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

2 MW.. isn't.. terrible. 2700 horsepower.

In WWII, the US settled on a workhorse cargo ship to haul supplies to England:  the "Liberty Ship."  The power plant was a triple-expansion steam engine that produced 2,500 hp.  The big drawback was that it only made about 6 knots, thus was easy prey for the German submarines!  Kaiser Shipyards was able to crank these out in a 3-day build turnaround; amazing when you think about it. Three days to build a complete ship from scratch.  

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

5 hours ago, NickW said:

Depends how much it costs. 

2MW is going to be consuming half a tonne of diesel an hour. Similar sums for fuel oil etc. 

I recall they were working on some 5 MW models. 

That would be about $380 dollars per hour, assuming diesel is $3.00 per gallon. Maybe it's worth it.

Now, I was pretty sure that fuel oil and diesel were the same thing. Let me know if I'm wrong because I don't want to carry misinformation.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

In WWII, the US settled on a workhorse cargo ship to haul supplies to England:  the "Liberty Ship."  The power plant was a triple-expansion steam engine that produced 2,500 hp.  The big drawback was that it only made about 6 knots, thus was easy prey for the German submarines!  Kaiser Shipyards was able to crank these out in a 3-day build turnaround; amazing when you think about it. Three days to build a complete ship from scratch.  

Those U-boats had some amazing diesel engines in them too. Imagine trying to outrun one of them in an underpowered steamer at 6 knots lol. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

19 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Those U-boats had some amazing diesel engines in them too. Imagine trying to outrun one of them in an underpowered steamer at 6 knots lol. 

The engines had two crankshafts and two pistons per cylinder, known as "opposed piston engines."  One big advantage was it eliminated tappet valves and their maintenance.  Another was that one shaft could be used mainly for driving the accessories, and the other direct-coupled to the generator. (The two shafts were coupled with bull gears at one end, but still split power duties).  This design was also incorporated in the liquid-cooled aircraft engines powering the Messerschmidt aircraft.  It was and is a great design. 

Until the start of the convoy system, the preferred sinking method of steamships was to surface, and hit the boat with deck gun shells.  Torpedoes were originally intended to fend off military ships, far too expensive to use on lone steamers!