Experimenting for an eco investment model

Thanks to great results of an anti-fouling comparison test, ship owner Flinter is applying non-toxic and effective underwater coating to all of their 47 vessels. Fuel saving as a result of smooth hulls can make the difference from losses to profitable operation. Shipping companies, that profit from fuel savings, should contribute to such green investments.

‘‘Ship owners have multiple options to invest in technology that saves on emissions, saves fuel or results in other savings that benefit the marine environment”, says Flinter’s fleet manager Gaby Steentjes. ”The company that benefits from the savings, should be accountable to pay for the investment.”

Following that thought, Flinter has initiated a cooperation with Borchard Lines and PPG Industries (mother company to Sigma Coatings) to allow for a new coat of environmentally friendly and effective anti-fouling. All parties were looking for incentives with the application of a hull coating that would effectively prevent marine fouling on the 809 TEU container ship Rebecca Borchard, owned by Flinter and chartered by Borchard Lines. Flinter wanted to get a good charter fee for the vessel, but at the current rates could not afford to pay for anti-fouling that would cost more than the budget products on the market. Borchard Lines can save on fuel as a result of effective anti-fouling, while the third party in this project, PPG Industries, was looking for clear proof that their product Syladvance really does save on fuel cost. This type of underwater coating for sea-going vessels is a toxic-free, self-polishing coating, effective against marine fouling with the application of silyl acrylate – a non-toxic chemical that makes it hard for marine organisms to bond to the ship’s hull.

Three thirds

”Rebecca Borchard is one of two identical container ships that we had delivered from the yard in 2008”, Steentjes reveals. ”She and her sister ship, now sailing under the name of Anna Borchard, have been laid up for some time following their delivery. It was a time of sudden overcapacity on the market for these vessels, so we were happy to be able to charter the vessels o Borchard Lines. Shortly after the start of operations of the vessels, we were approached by Sigma Coatings they asked if we were interested in applying their sylil acrylate coating. They were convinced that this anti-fouling paint would save so much fuel, the application of the paint would be earned back within half a year. Having Anna and Rebecca chartered out, we considered that savings in fuel would pay out to Borchard Lines. From this merging of interests, the three parties were able to reach an agreement.” Flinter as ship owner paid one third of the anti-fouling cost, as did Borchard – while Sigma Coatings reduced the price by one third for the trial.

Half a million

The results of the experiment exceded expectations. The predicted earn-back time of six months proved to be much shorter: savings on fuel were so high, Rebecca Borchard had saved enough fuel to pay for the paint job within two months. The test was controllable, as the sister ship Anna Borchard was sailing with conventional anti-fouling, maybe worn out to a certain degree by the period of lay-up before her chartering operations. ”Every two years, a 809 TEU container ship, like any comparable vessel, may save € 500,000 on fuel cost thanks to effective anti-fouling”, Steentjes calculates.

Award

These promising results award all three participants in the experiment: Borchard has earned their one-third investment back sooner than predicted and started earning the saved fuel cost. Flinter can now charter their vessels with the effective anti-fouling at better prices: they have proof for the shipping companies that these vessels operate more efficiently. The same goes for Sigma Coatings, having practical evidence to promote their product. The experiment was even nominated for the 2013 Shipping Award from the Royal Association of Netherlands Shipowners (KVNR) and promoted during the Maritime Awards Gala last November in The Hague.

”The test clearly pointed out the cost saving effect of effective anti-fouling”, Steentjes concludes. ”Flinter has begun applying this to the whole fleet. Recently, we had a 1,100 tonnes general cargo vessel in for a docking service. Thanks to the fuel saving coating, this vessel has just passed the point of operating under cost price towards making profit. As a ship owner, we can prove our ships can be operated at less cost than comparable vessels and thus offer a competing rate. Also the shipping company takes a profit: in spite of the higher charter price, operation is more profitable thanks to considerable fuel savings. The fact that we were nominated for the Shipping Award has loosened some lips, there is a buzz. Ship owners and even stock holders in ship exploitation cooperations are seriously considering good underwater coatings next dry dock service. I would certainly promote it.”

Efficiency management

As Steentjes mentioned, there are lots of possible investments that may lead to better efficiency and savings on emissions. Another example at Flinter is the installation of frequency converters at the vessels’ cooling water inlets. ”These pumps take about 20 percent of total onboard electric power,” Steentjes explains, ”because they always work at full capacity, while a lot of times only a fraction of capacity is needed. Cooling water capacity aboard our ships is laid out to allow them to steam full speed in water temperatures of 32 degrees Celsius. When we are navigating the Baltic in wintertime, the engine needs only about ten percent of the cooling water. Still, the pump works at full load, while 90 percent of the water is returned immediately. Using a frequency converter, we save up to 85 percent of needed power for these pump during winter trips. Of course, a reliable electro-technical solution is needed to handle the peak load in the ship’s electrical system when the cooling water systems jump in. But like the underwater coating, I am convinced this investment will pay off in energy savings.”

”A lot is to be gained”, says Steentjes. ”A very large part of the energy potential of diesel is lost as heat through the chimney. Any re-used heat is directly saved in fuel. In compliance with SEEMP, we have installed fuel consumption metres. Only by having knowledge of the actual consumption, captains tend to optimise efficiency. Captains and load masters work together more closely to optimise vessel trim. It appears that having optimal flow towards the propeller does a lot for propulsion efficiency; it actually is of more significance than increased draught.” While harvesting the ‘low hanging fruit’, Flinter proves considerable efficiency gain is achievable – even to the level of making the difference between losing or making money.

Hans Buitelaar