The nascent CO2 shipping industry is still at a stage where the technical standards and rules are those adopted from other cargoes and vessel types. This will change over time but there is a lot of work ahead, explained Lloyd’s Register global gas markets & technology lead, Constantinos Chaelis, who addressed the progress being made towards standards and certification for CO2 shipping, sources Riviera.
Implementation Essential
Mr Chaelis said: “The regulatory framework and design considerations are paramount as we move forward with CO2 shipping.” Mr Chaelis noted that the implementation of Type C containment systems is essential due to the unique properties of CO2 cargoes.
These systems are crucial in managing the non-flammable nature of CO2, which, unlike other hazardous cargoes, presents specific challenges that must be meticulously addressed in collaboration with flag administrations.
These challenges include toxicity which is being addressed via updates from ISO and other international bodies, through standards like ISO 27913 and ISO 27915.
“The recognition of CO2’s toxicity in these new standards is a significant step forward,” he stated, adding that contributions from Japan and other countries to the IMO regarding CO2 toxicity standards are helping shape a comprehensive regulatory environment.
These contributions include the classification of CO2 as Toxic + Asphyxiant product under International Code of the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code), with papers submitted from SIGTTO (CC 9/4/3) and from Japan (CCC 9/4/6) to be submitted to the Sub-Committee on Carriage of Cargoes and Containers (CCC) in September 2024.
He added that specific discussions and analysis will need to be reviewed and considered with the flag administrations and the best approach for the moment is to follow the guidance from the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), as it has been agreed on an IMO level.
Ship Shore Compatibility
Ship-shore compatibility was another crucial aspect addressed by Mr Chaelis, who stressed the importance of ensuring that terminals and vessels are compatible to facilitate the efficient handling of CO2.
This includes considerations such as manifold connections, pressure relief systems, and handling systems designed to mitigate operational challenges. “Ensuring ship-shore compatibility is vital for the seamless integration of CO2 shipping operations,” Mr Chaelis said.
A mature CO2 shipping fleet will follow as carbon capture and sequestration projects develop and expand. Bureau Veritas (BV) Marine & Offshore, Carlos Guerrero, has looked into the optimization of carbon capture and sequestration projects, focusing on LCO2 transport and direct offshore injection.
Mr Guerrero highlighted several key projects that are setting the standard for CCS implementation. These projects are not only pivotal in reducing carbon emissions but also showcase the potential for scaling CCS technologies to meet future environmental targets.
Mr Guerrero underscored the significant investments and collaborations driving these initiatives, illustrating the robust framework supporting CCS advancements across Europe.
He said: “A collaborative approach for innovation is key to increase efficiency. We have seen that many of these new ideas involve some new technologies.” One of the critical aspects of Mr Guerrero’s presentation was the size of the LCO2 fleet required for efficient transport. He provided an in-depth analysis of the current and projected fleet sizes necessary to meet the demands of CCS projects.
Factors such as the capacity of LCO2 carriers, the frequency of voyages, and the distances to injection sites play a vital role in determining the optimal fleet size.
CO2 Case study
Mr Guerrero presented a case study of a CO2 hub supported by three CO2 carriers. The theoretical hub, located in Germany, has a total capacity of 12M tonnes per annum (mtpa), including temporary storage and import/export terminals. Two North Sea offshore storage sites are identified in the case study, one located 500 nautical miles (nm) offshore with a capacity of 6 mtpa, and another 100 nm offshore with the same capacity.
To support the CO2 hub and offshore injection platforms, three shipping routes were proposed: one from collection points to the onshore CO2 hub; one from the hub to the first injection platform (500 nm offshore); and a third from the hub to the second injection platform (100 nm offshore). Different fleet configurations are considered, including small LCO2 carriers (7500 m³) and handy size LCO2 carriers (20,000 m³ or 12,000 m³).
Mr Guerrero noted that the case study helped establish the importance of optimizing berth occupancy, ship utilization, and loading/offloading rates to maximize efficiency. The case study also suggested using barges and inland vessels for short-distance transport, highlighting the need to balance logistical and operational factors.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe
Source: Rivieramm
