LNG-Infrastructure-Inception-report - 110707 PDF

A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure and test of recommendations
Date: 2011-07-06 Report: Inception Report Project Manager: Jim Sandkvist / Monica Gullberg
Reference: Danish Maritime Authority Mogens Schrder Bech
Inception report
A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure and test of recommendations
SSPA Sweden AB
F Industry AB
Jim Sandkvist
Monica Gullberg
1 1
Table of contents
Table of contents ............................................................................................................ 3 1.1 List of Figures.................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 List of tables ..................................................................................................................... 5
2 3 4 5 6
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... 6 Executive summary ....................................................................................................... 8 Purpose of the inception report ............................................................................. 12 Project aim and outcome .......................................................................................... 13 Background ................................................................................................................... 15 6.1 Review of policies and regulations................................................................................. 15 6.2 6.3 6.4 Context of the initiative to this study ............................................................................ 15 Scope of the study .......................................................................................................... 17 Enablers and work packages .......................................................................................... 17
Review of project implementation ....................................................................... 22 7.1 Work package 1, Inception............................................................................................. 23 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 Work package 2, Baseline .............................................................................................. 25 Work package 3, Financial and Economic aspects ......................................................... 29 Work package 4, Technical and operational aspects on LNG filling stations ................ 36 Work package 5, Safety aspects ..................................................................................... 42 Work package 6, Draft feasibility study including setting up recommendations. ......... 49 Work package 7, Test of recommendations .................................................................. 51 Work package 8, Final recommendations...................................................................... 55
Management.................................................................................................................. 56 8.1 Organization ................................................................................................................... 56 8.2 Steering Group ............................................................................................................... 56
F & SSPA project team
3 (102)
Report: Inception Report
8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9
Reference Group ............................................................................................................ 58 Contractual and administrative responsibilities ............................................................ 59 Project responsibilities ................................................................................................... 59 Involvement of in kind contributors .............................................................................. 60 Documentation .............................................................................................................. 61 Checking and approval of produced documents ........................................................... 63 Implementation.............................................................................................................. 64
8.10 Work plan ....................................................................................................................... 65 8.11 Review of logical framework and definition of a monitoring and evaluation system ... 69 8.12 Suggested meeting schedule ......................................................................................... 70 8.13 Deliverables .................................................................................................................... 71 8.14 Progress reports ............................................................................................................. 71 8.15 Financial Control............................................................................................................. 72 8.16 Communication strategy ................................................................................................ 72 8.17 Contact with Authorities ................................................................................................ 72 8.18 Co-ordination with other relevant initiatives ................................................................ 72 9 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 76
10 Appendix 1 Initial list of stakeholders; Authorities, Classes and Gas system owners..................................................................................................................................... 77 10.1 Maritime administrations in Northern Europe .............................................................. 77 10.2 Classification societies.................................................................................................... 84 10.3 Transmission System Operators..................................................................................... 85 10.4 Storage System Owners ................................................................................................. 86 10.5 Terminal Operators ........................................................................................................ 87 11 12 Appendix 2 List of members/contact points in the Steering Group ...... 89 Appendix 3 List of members in the Reference Group ................................. 95
4 (102)
13
Appendix 4 Letter sent to in kind contributors ............................................ 99
1.1 List of Figures

Figure 1: Overview of planned work packages and how they relate to aim and outcome in the Description of Work. ....................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Map of the SECA including the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel...... 14 Figure 3: The major pass ways referred to in the Motorways of the Sea concept of the European Union. ............................................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 4: Different optional LNG supply routes from a LNG import terminal or gas pipe line to a ship. ............................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 5: Overview of planned Work Packages and how they relate to aim and outcome in the Description of Work. ..................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 6: Governance Structure, an example from the ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. .... 32 Figure 7: Basic steps in the FSA (Formal Safety Assessment) process. ........................................ 43 Figure 8: Tasks in the safety analysis and how they correlate to the FSA steps. ......................... 48 Figure 9: Organization chart of the project organisation consisting of the F&SSPA team, the Project Secretariat, the Steering Group and the Reference Group.............................................. 57
1.2 List of tables

Table 1: Categorization of stakeholders and port investment responsibilities, an example from the Port of Rotterdam................................................................................................................... 34 Table 2: Overview of work packages and work package leaders. ................................................ 60 Table 3: Structure of access to project documents. ..................................................................... 62 Table 4: Meeting schedule for the project. .................................................................................. 70 Table 5: Overview of project deliverables. ................................................................................... 71
5 (102)
List of Abbreviations
AIS CEN DAMSA DMA DoS EIA EMSA ERS ESD FSA GSO IGC Automatic Identification System The European Committee for Standardization Danish Maritime Safety Administration Danish Maritime Authority Description of Solution Environmental Impact Assessment European Maritime Safety Agency Emergency Release System Emergency Shut Down Formal Safety Assessment Gas Storage Owners International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk International Code on Safety for Natural Gas Fuelled Ships In Kind Contributor International Maritime Organisation International Organization for Standardization Logical Framework Assessment Liquefied Natural Gas International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships Original Equipment Manufacturer The Convention for the Protection of the marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic
IGF IKC IMO ISO LFA LNG MarPol OEM OSPAR
6 (102)
SECA SIGTTO SMTF TO TSO VTS WP WS
Sulphur Emission Control Area Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators Swedish Marime Technology Forum Terminal Owner Transmission System Operator Vessel Traffic service Work Package WorkShop
7 (102)
Executive summary
The project A feasibility study for an LNG infrastructure and test of recommendations is mainly driven by the sulphur restrictions on fuel being imposed on the maritime sector and within the SECA (Sulphur Emission Control Area) that covers the Baltic Sea, the English Channel and the North Sea. The restrictions that will be in force by January 2015, will lead ship owners to act and opt for low sulphur alternatives for fuelling ships. One possibility for the shipping industry to the meet the new requirements, is to shift to the fuel Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). However, the LNG option will rely on an LNG filling station infrastructure to be developed and established. This project aims to prepare a feasibility study and set up recommendations for central stakeholders with regards to differenet aspects of the establishment of an LNG infrastructure. It is the Danish Maritime Authority who has taken the initiative to this project within the European Union TEN-T programme Motorways of the Seas. The project implementation plan has been set in eight different work packages, see Figure 1. Analysis, discussions, data and results starting from the baseline study through technical, economical and safety aspects will lead to recommendations and tests of recommendations. The final result will be final recommendations and a feasibility report. This inception report describes an update of the project implementation plan as presented in the Description of the Solution including a more detailed time planning and resource allocation. Moreover, the inception report aims to bring up issues of relevance to the study progress in terms of up dated conditions, etc. The inception report also involves in kind contributors interactions, reviews of the problem formulation and elaboration of the resource allocation of the project.
8 (102)
TEN-T application* A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure
Description of Work** 1. Identify and study enablers of an LNG infrastructure 2. Set up recommendations
Work packages
WP 1 Inception phase WP 2 Baseline study
WP 3 Economic and financial aspects WP 6
WP 4 Technical and operational aspects
WP 5 Safety aspects
Setting up recommendations 3. Test recommendations WP 7 Test of recommendations 4. Final recommendations WP 8 Final recommendations
Figure 1: Overview of planned work packages and how they relate to aim and outcome in the Description of Work. *Extracts from the TEN-T application that were appended to Annex 1 to the contract: Description of Work and the Annex 1a (Extracts from EU proposal) ** Appendix 1 to the Contract between DMA and the Consultant: Description of Work
The baseline, work package 2, will be carried out during July and August 2011 and sets the scene for analyzing a number of operational options based on LNG supply chain considerations. The information includes, for example, existing natural gas supply, existing and planned LNG supply. It also covers a review of the different alternatives for the ship owner in order to meet coming regulations, e.g. to invest in scrubbers or opt for low sulphur marine oil diesel. By the end of work package , a baseline study report will include on a description of the investment options that may be further analysed from a technical and operational perspective, as well as financial, economic and safety aspects.
Test of recommendations
9 (102)
In the months of September, October and November, an in depth analysis of the viewed most relevant options will be made. The following alternatives are suggested as relevant from the point of view of a ship owner, a port authority and an LNG supplier: 1. Comparative analysis between newly built LNG fuelled vessel versus investments in conventionally fuelled vessel. Retrofitting aspects are also included; 2. Constructing LNG terminals. Options may include large, medium, small and very small. Economy of scale of these options will be assessed; 3. LNG distribution via coastal bunker vessels. Especially, the option of pragmatic and small-scale technology will be assessed. Solutions such as barge concepts for local bunkering operations are also included here; 4. A comparative analysis between different options for optimal bunkering, strategic ports. Analysis of the alternative investment options will include: a. The financial and economic aspects in work package 3; b. The technical and operational aspects in work package 4; c. The safety aspects in work package 5. Based on the technical, operational, economic and financial as well as safety related analyses performed, a Draft Feasibility study with recommendations will be prepared (work package 6) and delivered in the end of November 2011. The recommendations will be directed towards central stakeholders such as ship owners, equipment manufacturers, port authorities, LNG providers, states, the EU, the IMO, etc. for promote favourable framework conditions for an LNG infrastructure. The Draft Feasibility study will be made available to the general public for review. Workshops will also be held in order to test validate- the results of the study and to increase the understanding of the technical and economic aspects of the implementation of LNG terminals and related infrastructure. The workshops will be arranged together with port authorities, ship owners, LNG providers and other stakeholders during December 2011 and January 2012. The outcome of the workshops will provide input into the final report to be submitted in work package 8 Final Feasibility study including Recommendations, to be delivered in the end of March 2012.
10 (102)
A project management and operations plan has been developed during the inception period. It covers issues such as progress reporting, quality control, documentation and financial control. Dates for Steering Group and Reference Group meetings have been settled, as well as dates for deliverables. The project involves a large number of stakeholders and its success relies to a large degree on the active participation of these different stakeholders. Furthermore, the consultant need to capture current knowledge and industry best practice rather than doing in depth research of certain subject areas. Central issues involve the public awareness and the often lengthy process of environmental impact assessments to be approved. It is further essential to study the regulatory framework for an LNG filling station infrastructure and to identify the possible missing links in this framework.
11 (102)
Purpose of the inception report
The purpose of the inception period and report is to re-assess the project methodology and work plan and to highlight adjustments in relation to the Description of the Solution appended to the contract. The report includes an overview of the updated project plan with dates for meetings and deliverables to the client. The report aims to present an enhanced project planning that links all the different work packages and tasks more clearly to the central objectives of the study. An analysis and screening of the problem context will be made in order to achieve a more refined problem formulation. The consultant team has sought input from the in kind contributors in this process.
12 (102)
Project aim and outcome
The aim and outcome of the project is defined in the Description of Work as follows: o To identify and study enablers for the establishment of an LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) infrastructure from an economic as well as a technical point of view; o To set up recommendations aiming at developing framework conditions for the use of LNG; o To test recommendations on commercial entities taking part in the project from a business case point of view; o To draw up technical and economic recommendations relevant for central stakeholders aiming at developing framework conditions for the use of LNG. The geographical scope of the project is the SECA (Sulphur Emission Control Area) with surrounding countries and with an LNG supply chain focus. The map in Figure 2 below, shows the SECA area.
13 (102)
Figure 2: Map of the SECA including the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel. The map also includes information on existing Ports, LNG production facilities and existing as well as planned LNG terminals.
14 (102)
Background
6.1 Review of policies and regulations

There is a global perspective to the reduction of contaminants and emissions from the shipping industry, as these emissions are significant contributors to GHG emissions as well as to sulphur and nitrogen emissions. Recent IMO (International Maritime Organisation) legislation1 sets the limit of sulphur content in the fuel to be reduced to 0.1% by January 2015, and the emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) to be reduced by 1 January 2016 for new ships. The IMO ship pollution rules are contained in the International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, known as MARPOL 73/78. On 27 September 1997, the MARPOL Convention was amended by the 1997 Protocol, which includes Annex VI titled Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships. MARPOL Annex VI sets the limits on NOx and sulphur oxides (SOx) emissions from ship exhausts and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances.
6.2 Context of the initiative to this study

The capacity to combine different modes of transport in a flexible way is one of the cornerstones of the sustainable mobility concept, which underlies European transport policy. The intermodality of transport, which enables national transport networks to be integrated, is promoted and implemented through EU transport programmes. Trans-European networks (TEN-T), in the form of infrastructure projects of common interest, also aim to improve the intermodality of transport. Specifically, they aim at stimulating investment in order to foster the emergence of an integrated transport network covering all of the Community and encompassing all the different modes of transport. A part of the TEN-T is the Motorways of the Sea (MoS). The Motorways of the Sea concept aims at introducing new intermodal maritime-based logistics chains in Europe, which should bring about a structural change in the transport organization within the next years to come. The major routes considered as maritime motorways are illustrated in Figure 3 below.
MARPOL 73/78, Annex 6, regulation 13 and 14
15 (102)
These maritime-based logistics chains will be more sustainable, and should be commercially more efficient, than land-based transport. The MoS are seen to improve access to markets throughout Europe, and bring de-stress in traffic intense European road system. For this purpose, and as part of an integrated transport chain, a higher capacity and usage of maritime transport resources, but also of the potential within rail and inland waterways, is desired. This is the Community added-value of the Motorways of the Sea.
Figure 3: The major pass ways referred to in the Motorways of the Sea concept of the European Union.
16 (102)
This project is a part of the Motorways of the Sea concept initiated by the Danish Maritime Administration (DMA).
6.3 Scope of the study

To meet the environmental demands in a competitive way, the use of natural gas in the form of LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) seems to be an obvious alternative. But the absence of an LNG infrastructure for supplying LNG to ships that is supported by regulation, industry standards, etc. does not yet make this alternative viable. An LNG infrastructure is to be seen from a supply chain point of view; from the reception of LNG and/or liquefaction of natural gas from the natural gas grid, via storage and distribution of LNG, to the use of LNG in ships for propulsion. This project involves the fulfillment of a feasibility study and test of recommendations with the aim to give recommendations for creating a framework for the establishment of a maritime LNG infrastructure in the SECA . The geographical scope of the project is therefore limited to the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel, with surrounding countries and with an LNG supply chain in focus. Two dimensions of the framework are to be considered: one regarding maritime LNG filling stations (the hard dimension) and the other regarding regulations, classification rules, industrial standards and cooperation, etc. (the soft dimension). The recommendations are to target central stakeholders (ship-owners, ports, LNG providers, industry organizations etc.) for the establishment and use of an LNG infrastructure encompassing technical as well as economic issues. As an important part of the work, mapping of existing regulations and standards and the need for further regulations and standards shall be worked out and seen from an LNG supply chain perspective.
6.4 Enablers and work packages

The Description of Work has identified the following enablers of developing an LNG filling station infrastructure: safety; local municipalities and public awareness; technical possibilities for fuelling ship engines with LNG; fuelling of other transport modes than ships from maritime LNG filling stations; LNG filling stations; economy from a ship, a port and an LNG provider point of view; the LNG market; and the overall potential.
The consultant will analyse the enablers throughout the project implementation. Below is a summary review of the enablers and a key to how the enablers will be studied in different work packages.
17 (102)
6.4.1 Safety The status of legal and regulative framework for LNG is complex and often characterized by split responsibilities and authorities between land/port and sea/ship. Potential gaps, overlaps or contradicting conditions in existing safety management routines is therefore important to identify. Further, critical safety issues regarding LNG infrastructure in the port, various modes of bunkering and onboard operation will be analyzed, assessed and relevant risk control options will be identified. The safety issues will be studied in work package 5. 6.4.2 Municipalities and public awareness The implementation of LNG infrastructure projects includes land use approval and environmental permissions, matters that often are handled at the municipal or sub-national level. The public is often involved in the approval process and is often committed to safety issues, security issues and environmental issues. Further, the development towards fuelling of ships, but also other modes of transport like trucks, will decentralize the LNG industry and develop local terminals and hubs in the vicinity of cities and villages. Both the opinion of decision-makers in municipalities and public awareness of LNG infrastructure are therefore vital issues to address within LNG projects. Aspects on public awareness and municipalities will be studied in work packages 2, 4 and 5. Security aspects are reviewed as being a relevant part of public awareness. 6.4.3 Technical possibilities for fuelling ships with LNG For the feasibility study it will be important to consider the actual technical possibilities for fuelling ships with LNG. There are gas fuelled engines available in the market as well as new engines of dual fuel type. Pros and cons with these engines will be reviewed in work package 2, and the costs involved further in work package 3. It is also necessary to analyze retrofitting of existing engines to LNG dual fuel. The approach will be to map existing options and to assess their price and possible price development. 6.4.4 Fuelling of other transport modes than ships The possibilities to fuel other modes than ships, for example fuel trucks, reach-stackers and other machinery in ports, supplying internal logistics, will be analyzed in work packages 2 and 3. Within land transport, LNG is seen to compete with first and foremost diesel and, to some extent, also with DME and biodiesel. Fuelling of other transport modes than ships from maritime LNG filling stations can be extended to other potential uses of LNG to create economies
18 (102)
of scale, for example for industrial energy use. This analysis is relevant since it may enhance the market opportunities for an LNG infrastructure investor.
6.4.5 LNG infrastructure and LNG filling stations An inventory of the existing gas supply, liquefaction plants, as well as existing and planned LNG supply routes will be executed in work package 2 and will provide a basis for the analysis of feasible options for LNG filling stations. Technical and operational aspects on LNG filling stations will be analyzed, mostly in work package 4, by elaborating a schematic distribution system from potential LNG sources to the end user, refer to Figure 4 below. Different bunkering solutions will be described and evaluated with the ambition to define criteria for the identification of strategic ports. Scaling effects and importance of size will be analyzed and the financial and economic aspects as well as safety aspects will be analyzed (work packages 3 and 5). Furthermore, different layout options of LNG filling station will be assessed in work package 4. Regulations concerning location within the port area have to be considered. Also, aspects to ensure a neutral access to the service will be addressed. .
19 (102)
Figure 4: Different optional LNG supply routes from a LNG import terminal or gas pipe line to a ship.
6.4.6 Economic aspects Investments and operational cost of LNG-ships and LNG-terminals of different sizes will be analyzed from a ship owner, a port authority and an LNG supplier point of view. Economy of scale of terminals and bunker barges will be assessed. The analysis will consider replacement of existing ships, modernization and retrofit of existing ships and compare with new LNG ships for frequent and relatively short routes. These aspects will be addressed in work package 3. Further important economic aspects include the readiness of financial institutions to provide advice and commercial loans. 6.4.7 The LNG market Assumptions of the price development of LNG short term and long term set prerequisites for investment options. Price development for LNG is historically set by oil indexed long term contracts, now moving towards a growing share indexed by spot market prices. The LNG market
20 (102)
will also be influenced by the price development and technology development of the competing alternative fuels such as 0.1 % sulfur maritime gas oil/maritime diesel oil, scrubber technology development and HFO (Heavy Fuel Oil). A review of existing studies on the development of supply and demand and price development will be performed and a set of different scenarios will be evaluated. 6.4.8 The LNG potential The potential market for LNG as ship fuel depends on how soon ships will convert to LNG as well as on potential other market segments, such as fuelling of other transport modes than ships. To map the ship profile in the SECA is a base for analyzing how soon ships will be replaced or retrofitted for LNG propulsion. The suggested method for the analysis is based on Statistics on vessel movements such as AIS data that provides an inventory the age structure of current ships. With such data it will be possible to estimate the likely number of new built ships and use these projections for an estimation of how many ships may use LNG in the future. A similar analysis has been presented be Germanisher Lloyd for the Baltic Sea. From statistics on vessel movements it is also envisaged that the bunker consumption can be calculated with the help from algorithms created at SSPA. Linked to the estimated number of new built ships, we can then project an areas potential use of LNG. With further input from work packages 6 (financial and economic aspects) and from the test of recommendations, work package 7, the algorithm can be enhanced and calibrated with respect to analysis and test results. This mathematical algorithm can in the longer term as well be used for follow up of for example market development. The project will focus on the above-mentioned enablers. Furthermore, other central issues to be addressed are: Permit processes, the consultancy process and the EIA and the time factor; Regulations, guidelines and standard: changes take time; Lack of standards and guidelines; Small scale versus large scale LNG installations; Bunkering; Innovations.
21 (102)
Review of project implementation
The project is based on a number of work packages, all interlinked and interdependent. The project layout has been set in eight different work packages, see Figure 5. Analysis, discussions, data and results starting from the baseline study through technical, economical and safety aspects will lead to recommendations and tests of recommendations. The final result will be final recommendations and a feasibility report.
TEN-T application* A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure
Description of Work** 1. Identify and study enablers of an LNG infrastructure 2. Set up recommendations
F & SSPA work packages
WP 1 Inception phase WP 2 Baseline study
WP 3 Economic and financial aspects WP 6
WP 4 Technical and operational aspects
WP 5 Safety aspects
Setting up recommendations 3. Test recommendations WP 7 Test of recommendations 4. Final recommendations WP 8 Final recommendations
Figure 5: Overview of planned Work Packages and how they relate to aim and outcome in the Description of Work. *Extracts from the TEN-T application that were appended to Annex 1 to the contract: Description of Work and the Annex 1a (Extracts from EU proposal) ** Appendix 1 to the Contract between DMA and the Consultant: Description of Work
Test of recommendations
22 (102)
Below, the different work packages are presented in more detail. The managerial issues are covered in chapter 7.
7.1 Work package 1, Inception

The inception phase covers the organisational, contractual and administrative issues, team building, detailed project planning, and an analysis and screening of the problem context in order to achieve a more refined problem formulation. Above this, four specific tasks where outspoken in the tender. o o o o Intial mapping of stakeholders and enablers; Revisit the logical framework and define a monitoring and evaluation system; Review of detailed work plan; Initial coordination with other relevant initiatives, projects and programmes.
The fulfilment of these tasks is summarised below. 7.1.1 Task 1.1 Initial mapping of stakeholders and enablers An initial mapping of stakeholders and enablers has been made based on the preparatory work presented in the tender material.The list of stakeholders is enclosed in appendix 1. The initial mapping of enablers is as presented in 6.4 Enablers and work packages. 7.1.2 Task 1.2 Revisit the logical framework and define a monitoring and evaluation system In the DoW, there is an overview of the action presented as part of the Annex 1A to the DoW (section 2.9). On a similar format, this project has developed a logical framework summarizing the objective including the intermediate objectives, activities, expected results, milestones, indicators and means of verification for each work package and task. A draft logical framework is enclosed to the contract appendix 2, DoS. The logical framework matrix has been revisited again and delivered in draft form. Read more about this in the management chapter. The Log frame is to be considered as an internal project steering document. The monitoring and evaluation indicators defined so far are for the follow up and monitoring of the project implementation and are completely consistent with the planned deliverables and activities as presented in this inceptions report.
23 (102)
7.1.3 Task 1.3 Review of detailed work plan A review has been made, including a review of time allocation and incorporation of in kind contributors. An overview of the work plan is presented in the chapter on management in this report. The Client is provided with a more detailed plan. 7.1.4 Task 1.4 Initial coordination with other relevant initiatives, projects and programmes The coordination has involved initial contacts with stakeholders and representatives from other ongoing projects and initiatives. There is a summary in 8.18 Co-ordination with other relevant initiatives, which is part of the management chapter.
24 (102)
7.2 Work package 2, Baseline

The baseline study constitutes the base for our further analysis of an LNG infrastructure establishment in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel. The main objective is to provide information, data and maps etc. to show the current situation of relevance to the study. Furthermore, boundaries for the analysis are determined in the baseline. The time plan for the baseline includes the following activities: A start up meeting with in kind contributors is arranged on June 29 2011. A draft base line report is delivered on August 31, 2011, and the final baseline report on September, 30, 2011. There is a number of tasks in WP 2 with a methodology proposed for each task. Taks to be covered are: o Historical review of earlier propulsion and fuelling changes in the shipping industry; o Updating of the logical framework and the design of a monitoring and evaluation system; o Inventory of significant publications, studies and projects of relevance to this project; o Review of Existing Regulations and Standards; o Review of institutional context, mandates, roles and responsibilities; o Inventory of existing and planned LNG infrastructure and supply routes; o Natural gas network in Europe and its integration with LNG filling stations; o Technical possibilities to fuel ship engines with LNG; o The potential of LNG as a fuel including fuelling of other transport modes than ships from maritime LNG filling stations. Suggestions on sources for information are made as well as a plan for how contributions from the different IKCs can be linked to the process. Regarding the in kind contributors involvement, the time allocation and expert areas relevant for work package 2 are planned based on contacts with them. 7.2.1 Task 2.1 Historical review of earlier propulsion and fuelling changes in the shipping industry A relatively short and concise literature review will be made and the consultant will only interview selected marine experts from the in kind contributors. For example Gazprom has knowledge on this history and development.
25 (102)
7.2.2 Task 2.2 Updating of the logical framework and the design of a monitoring and evaluation system This task has been moved from work package 2 to the management. The updating will be made by the Team Leader together with the Deputy Team Leader and based on input from the different work packages. 7.2.3 Task 2.3 Inventory of significant publications, studies and projects of relevance to this project The inventory is commenced and the literature is stored on Fs ONE site or as hard copies. Access to these files is as explained in Table 3: Structure of access to project documents, in the chapter about project management. Our method to find relevant publications, studies and projects of relevance to this project is literature search through communication with the in kind contributors and networking within the sector, conventional libraries and internet search. 7.2.4 Task 2.4 Review of Existing Regulations and Standards As the shipping industry is international, the regulations and rules are set on an international global basis. Here the relevant IMO codes, SIGTTO, and other standards and rules will be identified and listed. Furthermore, regional and local standards shall be investigated and considered. Special focus will be put on safety standards and regulations related to bunkering and ship to ship transfer. Variations and gaps, if found, will be listed here. The issue of possible overregulation is important and must be dealt with if revealed. The review will not only cover areas within the SECA, but will also address the Russia since it is relevant to the supply of gas and LNG. The methodology will be to gather published documentation from established sources as well as experiences from in kind contributors. The assessment will include a gap analysis in order to analyse possible inconsistencies, differences and potential problems together with a handful of selected in kind contributors, especially GL, MAN, Lauritzen Kosan and Gazprom. 7.2.5 Task 2.5 Review of institutional context, mandates, roles and responsibilities A list of relevant stakeholders will be developed in the baseline, these and structured into global, regional, national and local. Their mandate and potential interest in the project will be assessed and, if deemed useful, their contact details will be included. Supporting in kind contributors for this task will be primarily Gasnor, Gasum and Energinet.dk.
26 (102)
7.2.6 Task 2.6 Coordination with other relevant initiatives This task has been moved from work package 2 to the management. The coordination is made by the Team Leader and the Deputy Team Leader. Other senior staff in the project team are encouraged to also interact with other relevant initiatives. However, the coordination responsibility lays with the Team Leaders. Refer also to chapter 8.18.
7.2.7 Task 2.7 Inventory of existing and planned LNG infrastructure and supply routes and Task 2.8 Natural gas network in Europe and its integration with LNG filling stations An inventory of the existing natural gas and LNG infrastructure as well as current and currently planned actions of relevance to this study will be organised in a database and illustrated with a GIS representation. By developing a database with geographical representation of the current situation a baseline - , a useful tool is developed for systematically analysing the feasibility of different elements in the LNG filling station infrastructure. Complementary to the inventory, SWOT analyses will be performed for the major alternatives for LNG-supply based on interviews with a selection of TSOs (Transmission System Operators), ship owners and port authorities in the project. The baseline database will contain the following information as regards existing and planned LNG infrastructure and the natural gas network in Europe: o Definition of the geographical boundaries of the study, including the SECA; o Existing ports with LNG infrastructure and those with currently existing plans for such construction; o Existing and (currently) planned LNG infrastructure; o Existing and currently planned natural gas network in Europe and its integration with LNG filling stations; o LNG supply routes. In kind contributors such as Gazprom, Gasnor and Gasunie will provide with useful information to the base line inventory. 7.2.8 Task 2.9 Technical possibilities to fuel ship engines with LNG
This task aims at clarifying what possibilities there are to run ship engines on LNG. The options that
are available today shall be reviewed and described in short. Asset prices and other relevant
27 (102)
costs associated with the different options should be estimated. The mapping is part of the base line and settles the basic features for these different options and to what extent they shall be further analysed in the work packages 3-5. The options include conversion of existing engines and design of new engines. Single fuel (pure LNG), Dual Fuel (LNG and HFO/MGO/MDO) technonolgies will be reviewed and analysed. The engine manufacturer and in kind contributor MAN is thought to provide helpful input. 7.2.9 Task 2.10 The potential of LNG as a fuel including fuelling of other transport modes than ships from maritime LNG filling stations This task encompasses the collection of relevant statistics on ship movements and vessel data to build up a database on ships routes, ship age (to enable an estimate of future new constructions), ship numbers, and bunker demands (based on engine size and ship size, and some times, design speed and ship type. To enable this data collection, it is desired to get access to AIS data from DAMSA. This access has not been confirmed yet. The collected data will feed information into WP4 task 4.1 where schematic distribution system of LNG as a marine fuel will be developed with this data. Further it will feed valuable data to work package 3. The AIS data, or other data of ship movements and vessel data, will be organised into the database, and if feasible illustrated in a map. Valuable input from MAN may enable the project to make a model for fuel consumption. An inventory of the possibilities to fuel other modes than ships, for example fuel trucks, reachstackers and other machinery in ports, supplying internal logistics, will as well be carried out in this task. Fuelling of other transport modes than ships from maritime LNG filling stations can be extended to other potential uses of LNG to create economies of scale, for example for industrial energy use. All in all, this information will provide a baseline scenario and representation of the current state of affairs and will serve as a basis for the definition of future development options to be further assessed in this feasibility study.
28 (102)
7.3 Work package 3, Financial and Economic aspects

Alternatives to the traditional ship fuel are driven primarily by the MARPOL directive on sulphur and nitrogen reduction. From the ship owners point of view, there are a few different options that may be more or less feasible. How to strategically adapt to the new regulations is yet an unresolved issue for most ship owners. Apart from the existing technical possibilities, a major aspect will be the financial and economic aspect. In the short and medium term, the following alternative action routes are considered for meeting the environmental requirements: Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO)emissions reductions via installed exhaust gas scrubbers; Replace HFO with Marine Gas Oil (MGO)/ Marine Diesel Oil (MDO) with a sulphur content of 0.1% or less; Retrofit and use methanol/DME (methanol converted on board to a mixture of water, alcohol and DME which is then used as fuel); Shift shipping fuel to LNG, and; o Retrofit ships, or o Invest in new ships.
Within work package 3, a handful of technical options and logistic structures to be screened in work package 2 and work package 4 will be analyzed from the financial and economic point of view. The central alternative for this feasibility study is the LNG alternative, which involves the establishment of an LNG filling station infrastructure. Financial and economic aspects as seen from the point of view of port authorities and gas suppliers will therefore be analyzed. Tasks to be covered are; o o o o A review of the LNG price development in comparison with e.g. low sulphur MGO/MDO A brief review on the LNG market development (global and European outlook) Financial analysis of different options Operational models for different LNG supply chains
Of these, the first three were included in the DoS, while the fourth has been shifted from work package 4 (task 4.5) in the DoS. 7.3.1 Task 3.1 Analysis of economic models for price of LNG This task has been integrated in task 3.2.
29 (102)
7.3.2 Task 3.2 Analysis of market and price of LN The price of LNG will be fundamental for the overall feasibility of opting for LNG. Therefore the LNG price development needs to be projected. Projections of the oil and gas market are subject to considerable uncertainties. Many of the players in the industry have their own expertise for making forecasts. In this specific case, we may mention the European Union of the Natural Gas Industrysi forecasts for the sector. A review of different forecasts, developed by internationally recognized sources, such as Platts, the IEA, etc., will be performed in order to provide an aggregated forecast for this feasibility study. Based on historical pricing conclusions about possible future bunkers, prices at different oil price scenarios will be drawn by linear regression. A similar calculation will be done for LNG prices. A review will also be carried out on the current conditions of contracts and pricing. Various factors have recently contributed to making the market more short term and thereby creating a more flexible and transparent market. 7.3.3 Task 3.3. Financial analysis of different investment options Work packages 2 and 4 will subsequently identify the investment alternatives which will be addressed by an in depth analysis. o The business as usual scenario does not exist, as the industry is forced to take action; o Analysis of different alternatives for the shipping industry facing new regulations infrastructure at sea options for conversion to cleaner fuel; o Low sulphur MGO/MDO; o HFO and installing of scrubbers; o Methanol and its subsequent conversion to DME; o Use of LNG. Cost estimates for the different options will be gathered with the assistance of in kind contributors and these will be applied in the financial analysis. A number of technical scenarios will be defined for the distribution chain. It is assumed that the existing and currently planned large scale import terminals or small/medium size production plants will be used as base supply of LNG.
30 (102)
Tankers and trucks will transport LNG to intermediate LNG terminals and/or to even smaller terminals. This intermediate terminal may supply LNG directly to ships, and or to smaller tankers and LNG pipeline. Investment options for the distribution system include: o o o o o o o o Export facilities at large scale import terminals; Medium size intermediate terminals (example in Nynshamn terminal); Small scale terminals for direct distribution to ships; LNG feeder vessels, operated to distribute LNG from large terminals to medium/small terminals and bunker very large ships; LNG bunker vessels, operated to bunker ships and distribute LNG to small LNG terminals; LNG trucks for which the need for LNG, in volume, is less than 100 m3; LNG pipeline and filling stations where a local LNG tank is used to bunker a ship; LNG barges.
These options will be assessed by application of e.g. NPV, IRR, and/or Payback period. A present value analysis will be applied. In addition, there may be a number of investments in larger ports/terminals which may be required in order to make the entire system operational. These large scale terminals currently have no means of exporting the LNG to small ships. Such export facilities will therefore need to be constructed. These large scale terminals will then become hubs in the distribution network. These additional investment at the large ports/terminals will be estimated and assessed Mapping of Economic Instruments: Further to the inventory of existing and planned gas and LNG infrastructure as covered in work package 2, the legal and regulatory framework (command and control instruments) as well as the so called economic instruments will be assessed. Each country is different and different political priorities and so are the economic instruments put in place. In kind contributors are asked to provide information on the existing situation in each specific country. This will contribute to form a basis for assessing the degree of enabling environment that different countries /regions provides. 7.3.4 Task 3.4 Operational models In order to get an operational understanding for the governance structure in the ports, as well as the ownership structure and financial flows in exchange for services, it is recommended to
31 (102)
undertake an in depth assessment of a the three ports listed for tests; the Port of Hirtshals, the Port of Szczecin & Swinoujscie and the Port of Zeebrgge and their respective partners. However, the analysis is proposed to be complement complemented ed by at least three more ports for reference purposes. The analysis will look into various questions such as: o Up Stream Distributors: Who will deliver and sell LNG to the large, medium and small terminal?; o Operators: Who will operate and own the terminal terminal?; o Down Stream Distributors: Who will deliver the LNG to the end-user user or intermediate terminal?; o Traders: Who will sell the LNG to the end user? Charts s alike the example presented in Figure 1 below will be used in order to illustrate illustr and assess such relationships.
Figure 6: Governance Structure, , an example from the ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam.
Source: EU Public Financing and Charging practices of Seaports in the EU, Final, June 2006
32 (102)
Furthermore, it is important to have an understanding for the ownership of infrastructure and services, as well as the payment flows in relation to the different services provided. Table 1 below provides for a schematic example on how to categorize stakeholders and port investment responsibilities for the Port of Rotterdam.
33 (102)
Table 1: Categorization of stakeholders and port investment responsibilities, an example from the Port of Rotterdam.
Category
Land development Maritime infrastructure
Element
Development of new port areas Capital dredging Sea locks, dams & exterior breakwaters VTS/Radar Light buoys and navigational aids Land reclamation Internal locks, docks, quays, light boys and navigational aids, river berth and harbor basin dredging Pavements, warehouses, sheds, cranes and gantries, link spans, pontoons, terminal and office buildings, leasing/renting Fire fighting, police, pollution control Railways & metro links in area Maritime infrastructure maintenance Maintenance of port infrastructure and superstructure Cargo handling Technical-nautical services
Responsibility
Port Authority Government Government Port Authority Government 66% Port Authority 33% Government 66% Port Authority 33% Government Port Authority Government Port Authority
Port infrastructure
Port superstructure
Private
Public utilities Infrastructure links Port maintenance
Municipality, port Authority, government State railway company, Municipality Government Port Authority Private
Port services
Source: EU Public Financing and Charging practices of Seaports in the EU, Final, June 2006
This type of information will be collected for a number of ports. Furthermore, this information will subsequently serve as test cases, providing realistic figures, and applied in the investment analysis of different investment scenarios for LNG infrastructure investments. Points to address o Assessment of the political will in the countries to be studied, as well as existing economic instruments (incentives), including subsidies, taxes, etc. Definition of specific enabling issues in each country with respect to the investments in the LNG terminal, feeder and bunker vessels, etc.;
34 (102)
o Definition of the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders within port and LNG terminal development, e.g. the municipality, the port authority, and private sector; o Address the costs with respect to investments in LNG terminals and a system of bunker and feeder vessels and highlight best practices; o Explore the barriers to switching of fuels in the shipping industry. An assessment of the cost effectiveness of LNG fuelled vessels compared to ships utilizing conventional fuel and identification of possible gaps in financial viability.
35 (102)
7.4 Work package 4, Technical and operational aspects on LNG filling stations
As the establishment of an LNG infrastructure in Europe is still in an early phase, there are only a few examples of LNG supply solutions. In order to assess relevant alternatives, the technical and operational aspects of the LNG supply solutions are central and will be used as selection criteria for further analysis. The alternatives for LNG filling stations that appear the most feasible from a technical and operational point of view will also be analysed from a financial and economic perspective as well a safety perspective. The aim of this work package is to describe the technical an operational aspects on LNG bunkering and filling stations. The work package includes the following points: o To provide a clear and documented view on how to build up an LNG distribution system for a number of relevant scenarios; o To document the layout of LNG bunkering stations; o To document the operational procedures for LNG bunkering; o To produce a method to enable identification of strategic ports for LNG filling stations. 7.4.1 Task: 4.1: Schematic distribution system of LNG In this task, different schematic systems for the distribution of LNG from potential sources to the end user will be elaborated. Three port cases will be identified, and subsequently used, to produce an overall view of LNG distribution systems, including information such as size of ships, distance to source, size of LNG distribution/redistribution system, number of berths, number of filling stations for tank trucks, etc. As the volume of LNG to be distributed is the most important factor for the definition of a logistic system in a LNG terminal, the scale of LNG terminals (small, medium and large) is also an important aspect to take into account in this task. From a larger geographical perspective, the network will be examined based on the baseline inventory covered in work package 2 and including distances between LNG terminals, maximal suitable distance for the LNG bunkering vessel, etc. In addition, aspects on various critical parameters such as volumes, hazards, thresholds, bottlenecks, as well as technological, operational and regulatory conditions will be described and evaluated based on the three port cases. Three types of bunkering solutions will be compared and the best solution for each port case will be identified. The three available bunkering solutions are: terminal to ship through a pipeline, ship to ship at quay or at sea, and
36 (102)
tank truck to ship. The supply of LNG as outlined in work package 2 Baseline will also be taken into account. This task takes a logistic approach to the distribution of LNG within a port area. LNG supply options from producers to LNG import terminals are not altered and analysed in this task. The work is closely linked to work package 3 where the economic aspects will be considered. The quantification and description of required infrastructure and equipment for LNG bunkering in port will provide input to task 3.3 (in terms of cost levels for the different solutions) and 3.4 (in terms of roles and responsibilities for investments and operations of different solutions). The set of statistical data produced in work package 2 will be an important input to the description of the different port cases, as this gives a good idea of the potential customers operating in the region. Furthermore, work package 2 Baseline will provide Task 4.1 with other inputs, e.g. the collection of relevant statistics on vessel data and inventories of existing regulations and standards that affect the design of an LNG terminal. Description of technical and logistic aspects from a port perspective in this task will be the input to Task 4.4 Strategic port criteria for LNG bunkering. The parameters related to technical and logistic aspects in Task 4.4 will be compiled in this task. Points to address: o The aim is to describe distribution systems from a logistics perspective. Three different port cases will be developed to define and analyze different suitable distribution systems from potential LNG sources to end users including technical and logistics aspects; o It will be important to quantify storage volumes, berth space, LNG feeder vessels, LNG bunker vessels based on knowledge of market potential and distances to import terminals and competing terminal for the different port cases; o It will be central to make realistic assumptions of the future volumes of LNG. These assumptions will be based on accessible information on the current situation concerning bunker volume of all fuels in the region, the current ship traffic based on statistical data and market development (from work package 3 task 3.2). 7.4.2 Task 4.2: Layout of LNG filling stations This task aims at finding standardized ways of designing connections for LNG bunker manifolds and connected safety systems as Emergency Shutdown System (ESD) and Emergency Release System (ERS). This task will be carried out in parallel with other initiatives working on the same
37 (102)
task such as the ISO TC67WG LNG marine Fuel committee (who is reviewing the LNG fuelling process and nozzles/connections specifications), the IGF working group (who are developing IMO standard for gas fuelled ships, currently released as a draft code (IGF CODE)) as well as other relevant initiatives found during the work process. The task will take into account facts such as: Variation in ship size; Type of ship; Time available for bunkering; Bunkering rate; Amount of LNG to be bunkered.
Important factors to research include (but are not limited to): LNG ESD system for bunkering; LNG ERS system for bunkering; LNG Bunker manifold arrangements.
The layout/s produced here will be evaluated in work package 5 and work package 3 and will be finalized in work package 6. As part of this task, it is important to ensure the access to a neutral market when establishing standards. Points to address: One important question is how to design a standard way of describing LNG fuelled ships manifold arrangements Items to be taken into account: LNG fuelled vessel can be bunkered via; o Ship / Bunker vessel; o Truck; o Pipeline / Fixed shore tank; Variation in ship size, type of ship Time available for bunkering, amount of LNG to be bunkered; LNG ESD system for bunkering, LNG ERS system for bunkering; Vapor return system; LNG Bunker manifold arrangements;
38 (102)
Current IGF, IGC, SIGTTO, ISO guidelines / recommendation.
How can a system be safe, inexpensive, fast and easy to connect at the same time? This optimisation challenge will be handled on a wide basis actively involving the in kind contributors, manufacturers of equipment, experts inside SSPA/F/DnV and authorities. 7.4.3 Task 4.3: Operational aspects on LNG bunkering Based on the joint industry guidelines on LNG bunkering ship to ship and Task 4.2, operational procedures, for terminal to ship, ship to ship, and truck to ship bunkering of LNG will be analyzed. The ISO standard on LNG operations dated December 2010, the all-new SIGTTO guidelines on LNG transfer ship to ship and new technical and operational development since the joint industry guidelines were written will be taken into account. The aim is to form a basis for the recommendations produced in work package 6 for the use of the stakeholders. The ultimate goal is that these recommendations can form a basis for an international standard on LNG bunkering. Safety aspects will be looked into in work package 5 and a draft version of the Feasibility Report and Recommendations will be produced in work package 6. It is important to ensure the access to a neutral market when establishing standards. This aspect will be included in this task. Contacts with relevant in kind contributors, industry partners, authorities for useful input will be made. Point to address: o How to describe operations in LNG bunkering, with respect to the joint industry project and the all new LNG ship to ship guidelines and other relevant documents? 7.4.4 Task 4.4: Strategic port criteria for LNG bunkering The possibility to define suitable ports for LNG bunkering is important from both a port perspective, from an LNG provider perspective and for society. The purpose of this task is to create a list of criteria that describes what makes a port suitable for LNG bunkering of vessels. The criteria list is useful to explore whether a port has the features to provide LNG bunkering to vessels or not, and how to achieve the necessary qualities, i.e. what is important to strive for in order to increase the prospects of investing in a sound and profitable business for the individual ports. For the quantitative parameters, measures will indicate suitable levels.
39 (102)
The criteria are quite diverse and their individual importance varies, but they can be related to: o market aspects (e.g. distance to competing port, available LNG volumes, industries in the region that use LNG, etc.); o technical aspects (e.g. number of ship calls, required sizes of LNG filling tanks, required quay lengths and turning basins, etc.) o logistics aspects (e.g. size of the areas for the LNG terminal, necessary infrastructure for distribution of LNG within the port, available land-based LNG infrastructure, etc.) o safety aspects (e.g. separation of dangerous goods and/or hazardous activities and the LNG, etc.); and o financial / economic aspects (e.g. investment cost, break-even for profitability, prices for LNG and other alternative fuels, etc.) o environmental aspects (e.g. sensitive environmental areas); o regulatory aspects (e.g. local versus regional regulations and legislations).
Points to address: o Parameters to find strategic ports will be identified and quantified when possible and criteria for strategic ports will be formulated. o In order to define and to get information of these criteria, this task will be closely interlinked with work package 3, work package 5 and task 4.1. 7.4.5 Task 4.6 Port and terminal aspects on LNG Bunkering Aspects on how to adapt existing large scale LNG standards and best practices for ports and fairways to smaller scale LNG is the key issue to be addressed in this task. The aim of this task is to find important factors for a successful establishment of an LNG terminal in a port and/or to have LNG bunkering within the port area. The following aspects will be analyzed: o LNG vessels transiting the port to/from a terminal, o LNG bunker vessel transiting the port, o LNG bunkering aspects from a port perspective (bunkering alongside or at anchorage) and the terminal/LNG filling stations perspective. The task will not only focus on the LNG aspect but also the influence on other traffic in the port and around the terminal.
40 (102)
Standards and industry best practice focusing on large scale LNG distribution system will be considered. The aim is to give input to existing LNG standards, guidelines and industry best practice to highlight and introduce smaller scale of LNG than what exist today. As in part of this task 4.3, it is important to ensure the access to a neutral market when establishing standards. This aspect will be included in this task. Points to address: o The challenge is to transfer existing standards and best practices to smaller scale LNG operations in ports, rather than developing entirely new standards; o Necessary risk assessments will be performed in work package 5.
41 (102)
7.5 Work package 5, Safety aspects

The aim of this work package is to identify potential risks, efficient risk control options and measures to ensure that adequate safety requirements are developed and applied for the development of the LNG infrastructure to supply LNG as ship fuel. The risks associated with the provision and use of LNG differs significantly from the risks connected to marine fuel oil handling. It is therefore of utmost importance that all new possible technical solutions and proposals on new regulative schemes identified and developed in the previous Work Packages will be subject to thorough safety considerations and that a framework for risk analysis is established. Besides safety, this work package will touch upon the security issues even if security is an horizontal issue that will be reviewed mainly from an public awareness point of view. During the startup meeting for work package 5 the security issues were discussed. It was the consensus of that meeting that security was out of scope for this work package. Voices were raise against taking security in at all. However, security will be part of the HAZID process of the FSA. Limited efforts will be made for a quantitative approach, rather security aspects will be brought up in a qualitative and descriptive way. 7.5.1 Methodology For safety issues in maritime industry and in the maritime safety rulemaking process in particular, the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) approach is well established. It is developed within and recommended by the IMO and it is widely adopted in the maritime communities in Europe. The FSA approach and the specific available tools for various components of the safety assessment process will provide the basis for the efforts focussing the safety issues associated to the provision and use of LNG as a marine fuel. The FSA process was approved by the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine Environmental Protection Committee in 2001 and 2002 and is described in: Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rulemaking process. London: MSC/Circ.1023, International Maritime Organization. (IMO, 2002). IMO describes the FSA as a rational and systematic process for assessing the risks related to maritime safety and the protection of the marine environment and for evaluation of the costs and benefits of IMOs options for reducing these risks. The FSA process includes five basic steps as summarised in Figure 7 below.
42 (102)
Figure 7: Basic steps in the FSA (Formal Safety Assessment) process.
In each of the steps, a number of different techniques and risk analytical tools may be by applied. The project team will apply well established techniques and tools such as structured what-if-techniques for hazard identification, risk contribution tree models for analysis of identified risk scenarios and iterative comparison of various risk control options. The FSA process is primarily designed for maritime applications and ship safety but the scope of this study is also addressing safety issues in the port. The FSA approach will be followed in applicable parts but the applied methodology and terminology will also refer to established
43 (102)
standards in the area of industrial safety assessment, such as: Risk management Principles and guidelines (ISO 31000:2009, IDT) and Risk management - Risk assessment techniques (IEC/ISO 1010:2009). The methodology in general as well as the risk analytical tools and techniques applied, will be described in detail to ensure full transparency and analysis of the output accuracy. Outcome of this work package: This work package will provide the following outcome: o Safety assessment considerations on technical and operational aspects presented in work package 4; o Identification of critical safety issues and hazards associated with distribution of LNG to and in the port area; o Identification of critical safety issues and hazards associated with various modes of bunkering of LNG; o Identification of critical safety issues and hazards associated with the use of LNG for other applications; o Framework and methods to ensure that safety management structures and assessment are established, implemented and applied in the development of operational procedures on LNG handling; o Identification of areas where new regulative instruments need to be developed and implemented and methods applicable in the rulemaking; o Identification of areas and phases in the permitting process where specific safety issues need to be addressed; o Systematic presentation of safety considerations and applicable risk reduction approaches seen from the ship owners as well as ports and LNG providers perspective.
The work package 5 is proposed to be divided into three tasks specifically addressing the port, the bunkering operation and the need for new safety regimes respectively. The tasks are denominated as 5.1 5.3 and described below. 7.5.2 Task 5.1: Safety issues regarding LNG in the port The possible solutions for LNG infrastructure and distribution to and in the port outlined in work package4 will be analysed with regard to critical safety issues. Applicable methods to identify hazards, assess the risks and identify relevant risk control options are presented on the basis of established practices and experience from ports handling LNG today. Established
44 (102)
frameworks on how to describe potential consequences of accidents by scenario models and quantification in terms of human injuries/fatalities, environmental damage and material losses will be described and adapted for application to development of a port LNG infrastructure. Special consideration will be directed to safety requirements and scaling of potential accident consequences with respect to the quantities of LNG handled and the relation to other flammable or hazardous substances handled. Safety considerations to be addressed in the strategic planning process with regard to other activities in the port, the location of the port, the distance to residential areas and potential exposure of third parties will also be discussed in this task. Critical safety issues and hazards associated with the potential use of LNG for other applications in the port, like in trucks, trains, boilers and emergency generators will be addressed as well. Points to address: o It is important to define the geographical/operational scope in terms of gas transportation modes, storage facilities, and handling in the port; o Safety assessment of three specific port cases according to proposals outlined in work package 4 is preferable in terms of specific conclusive output rather than another general port LNG safety assessment; o Should task 1 and 2 be treated as two separate FSA studies or as different phases in each of the consecutive steps in one FSA study?; o Task 3 compiles FSA step 5 output from both task 1 and 2.
7.5.3 Task 5.2 Safety issues regarding bunkering and onboard operation of LNG A number of optional concepts and layouts of bunkering systems will be described in work package 4 and this task will address critical safety issues and hazards associated with the various modes of bunkering LNG. Various solutions from small scale bunkering from trucks ashore to bunkering from dedicated LNG bunker vessels, and to land based filling stations with large storage tanks or supplied by pipelines need to be subject to careful safety assessments by reliable and transparent methods that allow for comparative analysis and consistent output. A general approach for a hazard identification process for the presented bunkering systems will be outlined including representative scenarios of operational failures, incidents and accidental events and their respective consequences. Accident statistics on LNG bunkering is scarce and not conclusive and it is important to ensure that detailed incident and accident reporting routines are established in order to facilitate future identification of proactive safety measures.
45 (102)
Points to address: o It is important to define the geographical/operational scope of the bunkering process and the LNG handling onboard carefully to ensure all relevant risks are covered and addressed; o It is important to define the interface between the land/port and the sea/ship aspects side of the bunkering operations in order to attribute the safety measures to relevant regulatory schemes; o Safety assessment of three specific bunkering concepts according to proposals outlined in work package 4, including large scale concepts with dedicated bunker vessels, small scale truck based bunkering and concepts with bunkering via fixed manifold and pipeline installations from intermediate storage tanks in the port.
7.5.4 Task 5.3 Needs and development of new regulations, operational procedures and safety standards In the previous Work Packages, a number of international and national regulating schemes and standards on LNG handling in the port and for use of LNG as marine fuel and related safety requirements are referred. The status of the legal and regulative framework for LNG handling and bunkering issues is complex and often characterised by split responsibilities and authorities between land/port and sea/ship. Different safety regulations apply to an LNG bunker vessel and a land based bunkering station even if they handle the same amount of LNG at the same location. This task will identify areas of potential gaps, overlaps or contradicting conditions in existing safety regulating schemes. Areas where new regulative instruments may need to be developed and implemented will be described and methods to be applied in the rulemaking process to ensure the output will be adequate safety requirements and measures based on cost benefit considerations. Modern Goal related rulemaking from the authorities often means that classification societies and other industry organisations need to develop detailed technical prescriptive standards and recommendations. The need for an adequate development process for such standards addressing various safety areas related to handling and bunkering of LNG will be discussed and feasible proposals will be presented. In order to ensure safe operations by competent staff a large number of operational procedures need to be developed, implemented and trained. A number of areas where the LNG powered ships, the bunker company, the port organisation as well as the LNG supplier need to
46 (102)
establish new safety management routines including operational procedures are identified and proposed in work package 4. This task will specifically address established frameworks of safety management routines and methodologies to develop and implement this type of operational procedures and scrutinize the proposed procedures outlined in work package 4 from a wide safety perspective. Points to address: o Gaps in the existing regulative framework may be identified from qualitative safety assessments of generalised port and bunkering lay-out concepts; o Specific proposals based on cost-benefit considerations require quantitative safety assessment modelling. Proposals for new regulatory schemes should, however, be general and applicable for any port and LNG bunkering lay out concepts; o Representatives from the following in kind contributor organisations will also be engaged in hazard identification workshop, for technical consultation and for estimation of probabilities and consequences of various accident scenarios.
7.5.5 Meetings and workshops Start meeting will be on 7 July 2011 engaging participants from the F&SSPA project team, including DNV together with invited in kind contributors (preliminary: Port of Hirtshals, Port of Zeebrgge, port of Swinoujscie, Gasnor, Gasum, Gasunie, Energinet.dk, Fluxys, GL, MAN and Lauritzen Kosan) A Hazard identification workshop (HAZID) will be arranged on September 20 (tentative). The HAZID workshop will be arranged at and by SSPA Gteborg, Sweden. Work package 5 and the HAZID workshop will require that some basic input from the work package 4 outputs is available. In addition to the project team, represented primarily by SSPA and DNV, selected representatives from in kind contributors will be invited. Additional expertise from regulating authorities and stakeholder may also be invited. In total, about 15-20 participants are considered optimum. A second workshop specifically addressing existing and possible additional risk control options (RCO) may be arranged in October (October 25) with selected key personnel from the HAZID workshop.
47 (102)
Conclusions and findings from work package 5 will be outlined and submitted to work package 6. Work package tasks and FSA steps are shown in Figure 8 below. The tasks 5.1 and 5.2 are conducted in parallel through the first four steps of the FSA process. The Task 5.3 is basically addressing the output from FSA step 4 and 5.
Task
Task 5.1 Safety issues regarding LNG in the port
FSA step
Task 5.2 Safety issues regarding bunkering and onboard operation of LNG
Task 5.3 Needs and development of new regulations, operational procedures & safety standards
1 Hazard Identification 2 Risk Analysis 3 Risk Control Options 4 Cost-Benefit Consideration 5 Recommendations
Figure 8: Tasks in the safety analysis and how they correlate to the FSA steps.
48 (102)
7.6 Work package 6, Draft feasibility study including setting up recommendations.

In this task, findings will be compiled and presented in a draft feasibility study for further review and test of recommendations. The recommendations will contain technical, as well as economic and environmental considerations and they will be presented according to the two categories specified in the tender as well as in the contract: The hard dimension addresses technical specifications and the specific infrastructure development options presented in the study. Furthermore, a framework for an operational methodology addressing the potential for the single port and/or port cluster port authority, LNG provider, etc. will be developed under this heading. The other dimension the so called soft dimension - will contain recommendations which address the legislatory and regulatory frameworks, the industrial standards, as well as issues related to public consultation processes, coordination and collaboration aspects with In Kind Contributors, enablers, and other ongoing activities. In addition, the presentation of the recommendations will follow a previously agreed upon structure and/or table of contents in order to provide for user friendly reading and understanding. The recommendations will be used for creating proper framework conditions of the LNG sector. During eleven weeks in September, October and November previous intermediate results and conclusions from the project will be shared, assessed and summarised in a report. Two activities are formulated. 7.6.1 Task 6.1 Knowledge Transfer As per DoS, appendix II to Contract. This work package may begin with a conference with all work package leaders and project management team with the aim to give all a firm understanding of findings and results. This will give everybody a broad knowledge and understanding of technical, operational and economical aspects on LNG filling stations. The Client will be invited to this workshop to give input and be informed. Others from the F&SSPA and persons identified during the inception phase will be invited. There will be no documented output of this conference; this task should be considered as a knowledge transfer between technical, operational and economical experts. This will be important when formulating the recommendations.
49 (102)
Work Package Leaders and members for each stakeholders recommendation setup will be invited in order to have technical, operational and economical competencies present at all times. Points to address: o This task is an internal conference where work package leaders and key consultants will meet to draw mutual conclusions of work done. The conference dates are suggested to be October 24-25; o No documented deliverable from this task, only internal minutes. 7.6.2 Task 6.2 Formulating Recommendations As per DoS, appendix II to Contract. A framework for an operational methodology addressing the central stakeholders - will be developed during this task. The central stakeholders identified by the Client are: o o o o o o o o o Ship owners; Equipment manufacturers; Ports; LNG providers; Industry organizations; Local municipalities; States; EU; IMO.
More stakeholders will be added to this list during the project as needed. Recommendations that will contain technical as well as economic considerations will be formulated. These recommendations will be both on a soft and hard level. The output will be put into a context containing public regulation, classification rules, industrial guidelines and standards. Examples of such context could be recommendations for the IMO IGF code, investment calculation recommendations for ship owners and the need for moving safety zones around LNG bunker vessels. A draft feasibility report will be delivered on November 25. Point to address:
50 (102)
o Work package 6 is an ongoing process during and parallel to the work package processes 3-5 where work package and task leaders will collect and write draft recommendations as findings are concluded. With this said, a large part of this work package is done continuously in other work package and only after Task 6.1 all earlier finding will be put into a context that address the whole scope of work.
7.7 Work package 7, Test of recommendations

7.7.1 Overview The purpose of work package7 is to test the validity of the technical and economic recommendations relevant for central stakeholders aiming at developing framework conditions for the use of LNG. The recommendations are developed and compiled in work package 2 - 6. Further, the purpose is also to validate the enablers for the establishment of an LNG infrastructure that have been identified and described in previous work packages. The recommendations will be circulate for comments. The relevant recommendations will further be tested at three port cases and their respective partners as LNG providers, LNG terminals, ship owners, etc. The work will be based on three workshops to be conducted in the Port of Zeebrgge, the Port of Hirtshals, and the Port of Swinoujscie (or, if preferred, in the Port of Szczecin), respectively. Each workshop will result in a written summary of the discussion and findings from the workshop session that will provide important input to the final recommendations in Work Package 8. Another purpose of conducting workshops is to present information about the project. Results and findings will be presented and fora for wider discussion opportunities are opened. 7.7.2 Time frame The schedule of Work Package 7 has been modified, mainly due to practical reasons. Still all activities are within given frames. While all tests were originally planned for December, the work starts in December, but the workshops and the evaluation of the result are planned to be carried out in December till January. The reasons for the adjustment are to ensure that previous work packages are finalized and that the recommendations are ready for validation. This also fits into the planning of Steering Group meeting and delivery of draft reports, see time
51 (102)
schedule. There is still time after the workshops to transfer the knowledge gained to be included in the final recommendations. 7.7.3 Workshops Workshops with ports, ship owners, LNG providers and other stakeholders will be carried out to test the results and to increase the understanding of technical and economic aspects of the implementation of LNG terminals and related infrastructure. The preliminary recommendations that will be developed in work packages 2 - 5 and compiled and elaborated in Work Package 6 will be applied for each port, presented and critically discussed and evaluated during the workshops. Each workshop will have duration of two half-days and will be led by the F&SSPA project team members in close cooperation with relevant port representatives, acting as local hosts. The result from previous work packages will be presented by the work package leaders. The production of the material is included in Work Package 6. Further, a representative of the port will present the port and its activities in order to describe regional and local specific conditions and the ports needs and characteristics as these are expected to affect the discussion. Three workshops are suggested, two of them are at this stage confirmed by the local hosts, Zeebrgge and Hirtshals, respectively. Still the suggested workshop in Swinoujscie is not confirmed.
o 1st workshop in Zeebrgge: 8 9 December, 2011. Confirmed; o 2nd workshop in Hirtshals: 16 17 January, 2012. Confirmed; o 3rd workshop in Swinoujscie: 23 24 January, 2012. To be confirmed, in progress.
The workshop participant list should cover all in kind contributors as well as other important actors and stakeholders and the ports respective partners. The list of invitations will be established by F and SSPA together with the accommodating port. The workshops are free of charge for external companies, but they have to pay their own travel expenses. By using workshops with both in kind contributors and external parties as work method, a wide audience will be addressed with considerable amount of knowledge. This gives a very good opportunity to discuss all findings and contribute to the establishment of final recommendations.
52 (102)
All three workshops will follow an identical agenda and presentations of the results by the work package leaders are the same. However, there will be a focus on each ports specific conditions and needs, and diverse characteristics of the three port cases are expected to affect the discussion and the outcome. These characteristics are for examples geographical differences, expected capacity, market needs, areas of impact, technical and operational conditions, company sizes and types of stakeholders. The workshops cover three geographical areas and the in kind contributors are divided into groups based on their location. All in kind contributors have a budget to participate in one workshop, but they are of course very welcome to take part also in additional ones. However, the budget only covers one air ticket for one person in each company, so in that case, the companies need to pay for travel expenses by themselves. The following division of participants among projects members is suggested: o Zeebrgge: Port of Zeebrgge, Gasunie, Fluxys, invited external companies and stakeholders; o Hirtshals: Port of Hirtshals, Gasnor, Gasum, Energinet.dk, invited external companies and stakeholders; o Swinoujscie: Szczecin & Swinoujscie seaports Authority SA, GL, MAN, Gazprom, invited external companies and stakeholders. Even though the validation of the result is the most important outcome of this work package other advantages of carrying out workshops with both in kind contributors and external companies are dissemination of the projects results and to get valuable feedback from different types of actors, stakeholders and interested parties. 7.7.4 The tabletop exercise A formal tabletop exercise with players around the table vocalize their responses to the scenario as they would do in real life that cover all aspects of bunkering LNG, will be modified, due to practical reasons. Instead, some tasks will be carried out at the workshops that contain elements from the tabletop exercise, e.g. a selection of operational and technical recommendations will be tested by brainstorming sessions and real life scenarios will be discussed more in detail. These discussions will involve all participants and stimulate them towards in-depth problem solving. The aim is to evaluate and test operational and technical recommendations during various scenarios.
53 (102)
7.7.5 Documentation and reporting F and SSPA will document the discussions and the findings from the workshop sessions, which will be important input to the final analysis in Work Package 8. All participants have the opportunity to get access to presentation materials, findings and conclusions. Presentations will also be distributed and made public within the established web site and in reports. 7.7.6 Participants All work package leaders will participate in the workshops, as well as other experts from the F&SSPA project team, if appropriate. All in kind contributors will take part in one workshop. Time schedule for the project members are: In kind contributors (ports): In kind contributors (remaining): and Lauritzen Kosan. Zeebrgge, Hirtshals and Szczecin & Swinoujscie Gasnor, Gasum, Gasunie, Energinet.dk, Fluxys, GL, MAN
As described in earlier documents, F and SSPA will organize the workshops together. F is responsible for the administrative part, which includes practical organizational issues, sending invitations, booking tickets for in kind contributors, etc. Identifications of potential participants will be carried out by F and SSPA in cooperation with the hosting in kind contributor. Thus, the ports will have the possibility to invite local and regional stakeholders. SSPA is responsible for the case formulation, coordination and evaluation, and these tasks will be carried out in cooperation with F. The F&SSPA team also will invite representatives from the other, ongoing relevant programs and initiatives. Each port is suggested to act as host for the actual workshop planned. This will be discussed with the ports at an early stage of the project in order to confirm their role and practical arrangements. Remaining in kind contributors will be invited to participate in the workshop that is located in their regions. Contacts with in kind contributors In Work Package 7, all three ports were contacted during the inception phase. The ports have confirmed they are ready to host the workshops and dates need to be decided. An invitation to the in kind contributors that will participate in the workshops will be sent out in the autumn.
54 (102)
7.8 Work package 8, Final recommendations

Referring to the Contracts Appendix II, Description of Solution, as well as to the Appendix I, Description of Work, this work package will fulfil and finalize expected Aim and outcome. This final part of the project collects all results and findings from the work packages 2 - 6 and all contributions from tests of business cases and workshops carried out in work package 7. As indicated in the title, the final recommendations are based on earlier presented preliminary recommendations and testing and validation procedures. The recommendations are structured in a framework for implementation of LNG for maritime use. The report delivered is a platform further strategic papers and actions taken on EU-level. This final report will also be the final document of the project, available to stakeholders and the public. It will also be the source for presentations, pamphlets and papers to be presented, in accordance with contract agreements. As agreed, the report will be printed in 250 copies and available in electrical forms as well. The report will become available on the website. Formats and layout is based on standards set for this project. The F&SSPA project team sees an interest in participation in the finalizing conference to be arranged preferably before the end of March 2012.
55 (102)
Management
8.1 Organization
The overall project organization is illustrated in Figure 9 below. The consultant is represented in the centre and the lower half of the Figure with team leaders, work package leaders and quality management. The consultant reports to the client, DMA (the Danish Maritime Authority), and its Project Secretariat. The project manager and the head of the Project Secretariat is Mr Mogens Schrder Bech. The project also involves the cooperation with a Steering Group and a Reference Group.
8.2 Steering Group

The Steering Group consists of the public and private contributors associated to the project. A list of members/contact persons in the Steering Group is attached in appendix 2. The Steering Group has the overall responsibility for the execution of the activities involved in the project. Three Steering Group meetings are planned (refer to meeting schedule) and material to review will be distributed one week ahead.
56 (102)
Steering Group Public and private partners to the project

Flemish Ministry of Mobility and Public Works Mr. Pim Bonne
Danish Maritime Authority Project Manager Mogens Schrder Bech
Reference Group
Quality Management ISO 9000 and internal audit: Kristina Haraldsson, F and Jim Sandkvist, SSPA
Project Secretariat
Project Manager/Administrator, Mogens Schrder Bech, DMA with Bengt Sangberg Bureau Veritas and administrative staff
Team Leader Monica Gullberg, F
Deputy Team Leader Johan Gahnstrm, SSPA
Work Package 1 Inception Jim Sandkvist
Work Package 2 Baseline Gunilla Gransson
Work Package 3 Financial and economic aspects Gunilla Gransson Work Package 7 Test of recommendations
Work Package 4 Technical and operational aspects Johan Gahnstrm Work Package 8 Final recommendations (and Feasibility Study) Johan Gahnstrm and Gunilla Gransson
Work Package 5 Safety aspects Bjrn Forsman
Work Package 6 Setting Up Recommendations (and Draft Feasibility Study) Johan Gahnstrm and Gunilla Gransson
Test of recommendations: Port of Hirtshals Port of Szczecin & Swinoujscie Port of Zeebrugge
Central Stakeholders:
shipowners, port authorities, LNG providers, industry organizations, states, the EU and the IMO, etc.
Figure 9: Organization chart of the project organisation consisting of the F&SSPA team, the Project Secretariat, the Steering Group and the Reference Group.
57 (102)
8.3 Reference Group

A list of present members in the Reference Group is included in appendix 3. In order to ensure proper involvement of the reference group, regular mail and telephone contacts will be withheld, especially on issues that fall directly within their respective business areas. Contacts can be with the thematic work package leaders or with the management. Specific issues will be brought up when appropriate and through mail and telephone contacts. It is foreseen that the Reference Group can: o Provide special competences; o Provide facts from real cases, such as time and financial resources for different investment cases; o Provide references regarding impacts on LNG infrastructure activities from legislation; o Provide references to on-going initiatives in the sector; and o Give feedback on proposed analyses and recommendations There are two Reference Group meetings planned (refer to the suggested meeting schedule). Furthermore, the members of the Reference Group will be invited to contribute to the project workshops and the conference initiating work package 6. They are also invited to provide with comments on reports delivered by the consultant. The Reference Group will be informed about new reports delivered to the DMA and up-loaded on the DMA-web page. The Reference Group further has access to the ONE-client site (refer to Table 3 ), and will be alerted when news are up-loaded there.
58 (102)
8.4 Contractual and administrative responsibilities

8.4.1 Contracting firm F Industry AB (abbreviated F) is the contracting firm. Responsibilities, rights and signature rights follow the system of the consultant. The consultant, the F&SSPA team, is led by F and approves expenditures and costs within the framework of the project. 8.4.2 Sub consultant agreements SSPA and DNV are contracted as sub-consultants to F. They are reporting time and expenditures to F and take the responsibility on their behalf for the accuracy of this information. 8.4.3 In kind contributors In kind contributors are sub-contracted to F based on the number of hours agreed in Appendix 4 to the contract. Their expenses are administered and reported by F according to the accounting principles given by DMA.
8.5 Project responsibilities

The organizational structure of the F&SSPA team has been adjusted in reference to the tender. The management of the team consists of: Monica Gullberg, F, Team Leader Johan Gahnstrm, SSPA, Deputy Team Leader Monica Gullberg, F, is the Team Leader for the project and responsible for the work performed including time planning, resource allocation. Monica Gullberg is further responsible for project administration, contractual issues, time and cost reporting to the Client. As F is the contracting firm, Monica Gullberg is the main contact point for the Client. However, communication from the Client is directed to both Johan Gahnstrm and Monica Gullberg. The work is divided into eight work packages, each with a responsible work package leader. The work package leaders are experts in their respective area and will lead the work in that specific subject area. The work package leaders are also responsible for deliverables in the respective work packages.
59 (102)
In Table 2 below, the work package leaders are listed.
Table 2: Overview of work packages and work package leaders.
Work package # Description of Work Package 1 Inception 2 Baseline 3 Financial and Economic Aspects 4 Technical and Operational Aspects 5 Safety Aspects 6 Setting up Recommendations
Work package leader
Jim Sandkvist SSPA Gunilla Gransson F Gunilla Gransson, F Johan Gahnstrm, SSPA Bjrn Forsman, SSPA Gunilla Gransson, F/ Johan Gahnstrm, SSPA Linda Styhre, SSPA Gunilla Gransson, F/ Johan Gahnstrm, SSPA
7 Test of Recommendations 8 Final Recommendations
8.6 Involvement of in kind contributors

The project has active involvement of in kind contributors arising to a total of more than 3 700 hours, divided between 12 different contributing firms. They are: Energinet.dk, Fluxys, Gasnor, Gasum, Gasunie, Gazprom, GL, Port of Hirtshals, Lauritzen Kosan, MAN, Port of Swinoujscie and Port of Zeebrgge. The consultant is responsible for the work produced in the project as well as the coordination responsibility for the in kind contributions. It is anticipated that the in kind contributors will be contributing input based on their expertise, their affiliation, and their nationality. The competences and time resources of the in kind contributors are allocated in different work packages and according to the in kind contributors interests and experiences.
60 (102)
All in kind contributors have been introduced to the work plan and time plan including the tasks they are expected to contribute to. Work package start meetings have been arranged and in kind contributors have been invited (refer to meeting schedule). The in kind contributors will have access to the ONE system as specified in Table 3.
8.7 Documentation
This project shall be transparent to the general public. The project involves several contributing parties from different countries. In the F project centre ONE, which is a part of the operational system, a unique project site is created for this assignment. The content in the project site is adapted to the specific project, and this is where all relevant information is created, managed and filed. The operational system is documented and administrated in ONE, which is a SharePoint application available through the internet by a personal login consisting of a user name and a password. The Client can choose to up-load any of the documentation that the client can access in ONE on their own web-page (www.dma.dk).
61 (102)
Table 3: Structure of access to project documents.
Site
www.dma.dk
ONE-client
ONE- platform for in kind contributors In kind contributors F & SSPA Drafts, not delivered Draft deliverables
ONE- internal
Accessed by
The general public
DMA Steering Group & Reference Group Contract and appendices including budget Draft deliverables
Internal F and SSPA Working material Internal minutes Invoices
Type of information
Information about the project Events
Deliverables;
Inception report Base line report Draft feasibility study Final feasibility study
Deliverables;
Draft Inception report Inception report Draft base line report Base line report Draft feasibility study Final feasibility study
Deliverables;
Draft Inception report Inception report Draft base line report Base line report Draft feasibility study
Final feasibility Minutes from relevant internal project meetings Reference library Minutes from RG and SG meetings Reference library
Presentations
Time plan and dates Presentations Minutes from RG and SG meetings Reference library
Minutes from RG Reference library
8.7.1 Control of documents The document manager at F, Britt kerberg, is responsible for filing incoming time reports from the sub-consultants and in kind contributors. Team Leader Monica Gullberg is responsible for the administration of means to the in kind contributors.
62 (102)
The ONE site manager for the project, Hanna Paradis is responsible for managing group members access and login details as well as the actual up loading of documents for external files. 8.7.2 Control of records External meeting minutes with the client and stakeholders, and internal meeting minutes will be documented on ONE. Also, email correspondence and phone meeting notes are to be archived in ONE. The access to different meeting minutes is as described in Table 3. 8.7.3 Project Diary A project diary is made by Team Leader Monica Gullberg and archived in ONE-internal.
8.8 Checking and approval of produced documents

The Team Leaders Monica Gullberg and Johan Gahnstrm organize the report deliveries and have the overall responsibility for the quality of the reports. Each work package leader is responsible to check the facts and to provide high quality texts. Proof-reading and stream lining of texts will be provided two weeks before a report is to be delivered to the client. The Quality Management team Kristina Haraldsson, F and Jim Sandkvist, SSPA are responsible for this part. 8.8.1 IT security IT security procedures are provided within the ONE operational system. 8.8.2 Sensitive information Sharing information and data and information collection are vital parts in the project. However, some pieces of information may be confidential business information. The Consultant and its employees shall observe absolute secrecy as regards the information concerning the Client, in kind contributors and other parties to which they may gain knowledge in connection with the performance of this Agreement. The Consultant imposes such obligation on all subcontractors and others assisting the Consultant with the Project. More specifically, it has been agreed that each in kind contributor have a private file for up loading such documents that can be supportive to the analysis. The Consultant shall return all the material received from the Client and in kind contributors to the Client and/or the in kind
63 (102)
contributors upon the performance of the Agreement or the completion of the Project except questionnaires filled in by the employees or accounts of interviews with the Client's employees, including questionnaires etc. Such material shall be destructed by the Consultant upon completion of the Project.
8.9 Implementation
8.9.1 Administration of project Relevant background literature and documents produced by the team are filed in ONE. The document manager is responsible for filing incoming time reports from the sub-consultants and in kind contributors. Monica Gullberg is responsible for the administration of means to the in kind contributors. The overall project planning is performed by the Team Leaders. The information is provided by email and documented in ONE. Work package leaders plan the work in the work packages. Here, coordination with in kind contributors is vital and close cooperation with them is needed. Depending on the subject, the contribution of the in kind contributors could be to be a sounding board, to be a source of information and / or to provide quality check. 8.9.2 Start-up meetings for work packages Work package leaders are responsible for calling to meetings, setting the agenda including date, time, location and video conference options if required. Invitation emails to F&SSPA team members and in kind contributors are submitted. Start-up meetings should primarily be personal meetings as one of the aims of the project is to establish a network of stakeholders. For participant convenience, also phone meetings and video conferences are possible. Each work package leader is to define the work package, clarify the content, the extent of the contribution by the in kind contributors (if any), time plan for deliverables, the level of quality expected and next meeting.
64 (102)
8.9.3 Project meetings Internal project meetings could be over the phone, video conferencing and personal meetings. The Team Leaders are responsible for calling to these meetings, setting the agenda including date, time, location and video conference options. Invitation emails to the F&SSPA team members and in kind contributors are submitted. Meetings within work packages with in kind contributors are important to establish a good relationship and understanding (network part) as well as to receive, and exchange, information of elevance and high quality. 8.9.4 F Steering Group F Golden Rules include the set up of a Steering Group in large projects to supervise the overall progress of projects. In this case, the Business Area Manager and the Market Area Manager, along the Team Leader, are to be included in such a Steering Group. The group will meet with a certain frequency to ensure a normal development of the project including overall budget control, and quality control.
8.10 Work plan

An overview of the revised work plan is given in Figure 10 below, including resource allocation over time and per work package. The in kind contributors time resources are also included in the accumulated time as presented in Figure 10. Deliverables are marked out in relevant work packages with a yellow romb. The timetable for deliverables is presented in Table 5.
65 (102)
May 2011
Nov 2011
Dec 2011
Aug 2011
Sep 2011
Feb 2012
Months
Week Schedule Work Packages

Project deliverables are mentioned in the relevant task bars.
Responsible
Per-centage of time resources
Duration (weeks)
Work package 1: Inception Work package 2: Baseline Work package 3: Financial and economic aspects Work package 4: Technical and operational aspects Work package 5: Safety aspects Work package 6: Setting up of recommendations Work package 7: Test of recommendations Work package 8: Final recommendations Management Project management Quality assurance Steering Group and Reference Group meetings Project steering group meeting 1 Project Steering Group meeting 2 Project Steering Group meeting 3 Reference Group meeting 1 Reference Group meeting 2 Deliverable Timetable for deliverables: refer to Table 5 Hours per week, consultant team Consultant's relative timeresources per week Including in kind contributors time Accumulated hours, ikc
Jim S Gunilla G Gunilla G Johan G Bjrn F Johan & Gunilla Linda Styhre Johan & Gunilla Monica G
2% 18% 16% 18% 9% 7% 12% 4% 7%
8 18 16 16 19 11 11 5 48
48
7%
Mar 2012
Jun 2011
Jan 2012
Oct 2011
Jul 2011
0 0 0 0
# #
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49
0 0
Figure 10: Overview of work plan and time allocation
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49
67 (102)
68 (102)
8.11 Review of logical framework and definition of a monitoring and evaluation system
The Logical Framework which was submitted in the proposal has been updated in order to incorporate the detailed planning which is contained in this inception report. The development objective and the overall results remain the same. More specifically, the logical framework presents a systematic approach to each of the work packages, with their specific activities, detailed as much as possible given the current level of planning. The logical framework matrix is used as an internal instrument for follow up on project progress and deliverables. In order for the logical framework of this project to reach its potential, it will be assessed together with the in kind contributors that are involved in the baseline. Based on the developed logical framework matrix, monitoring and evaluation indicators (M&E indicators) can be identified that assist the monitoring of the project, both in the ongoing project and potentially also serve in subsequent evaluation of the LNG market establishment. For the on-going project, indicators correlate to the agreed deliverables and meetings as presented in this report. Regarding the long term monitoring and evaluation indicators, a CO2 footprint will be estimated. To the extent that the baseline provides reasonable insights in quantification of different emissions such as NOx. SOx and CO2, and, if the Steering Group finds it relevant, the emissions inventory may be considered to present these as a reference scenario for future monitoring.
69 (102)
8.12 Suggested meeting schedule

Meetings are planned during the project period as presented in Table 4 below.
Table 4: Meeting schedule for the project.
Meeting; Invitees 1st Steering Group meeting & Reference Group meeting; Steering Group and Reference Group Work package 2 start up meeting; part of team and relevant in kind contributors Work package 3 start up meeting; part of team and relevant in kind contributors Work package 4 start up meeting; part of team and relevant in kind contributors Work package 5 start up meeting; part of team and relevant in kind contributors Progress meeting Work package 2-5; work package leaders and relevant in kind contributors Conference initiating Work package 6; full team, relevant in kind contributors and the reference group 2nd Steering Group meeting; Steering Group
Date June 17, 2011 June 29, 2011 June 29, 2011 June 29, 2011 July 7, 2011 September 2011 October 2011 December 2011 23, 24-25,
Proposed location Brussels Stockholm/video Stockholm/video Stockholm/video Gothenburg/video Stockholm or at one of the IKC Helsinki / (Viking Line) to be discussed Stockholm or at one of the ikc, for example Gazprom to be discussed Port of Zeebrgge Port of Hirtshals
2,
1st Workshop for test of recommendations; Gasunie, Fluxys, invited external companies and stakeholders* 2nd Workshop for test of recommendations; Energinet.dk, invited external companies and stakeholders 3rd Workshop for test of recommendations; Szczecin & Swinoujscie Seaports Authority SA, GL, MAN, Gazprom, invited external companies and stakeholders 3rd Steering Group meeting & Reference Group meeting Final working meeting for discussing draft report, part of team and relevant in kind contributors Final conference
December 8 9, 2011 January 16 17, 2012 January 23 24, 2012 January 31, 2012 February 10, 2012 March 2012
Port of Swinoujscie
Copenhagen Gothenburg Copenhagen
70 (102)
8.13 Deliverables
A number of milestones are defined in the project including deliverables of drafts and final reports. In Table 5 below deliverables are listed with dates.
Table 5: Overview of project deliverables.
Deliverable Draft Inception report Final Inception report Draft Baseline report Final Baseline report Draft Feasibility report Draft Final Feasibility report
Date delivered to DMA and BV June 10, 2011 June 30, 2011 August 29, 2011 September 26, 2011 November 21, 2011 February 27, 2012
8.14 Progress reports

For quarterly follow up of expenses and activities, a progress report shall be delivered to the project secretariat on the following dates: August 15, a report covering May 10 to July 31, 2011 November 15, a report covering August 1 to October 30, 2011 February 15, a report covering November 1, 2011, to January 31, 2012 Plus a final report on April 15, 2012.
The report template is agreed upon. The report shall be not exceeding ten pages and include the following information:
Progress Report Summary Team management in the period Progress of work plan in the period Work plan for the next period Table 1: Updated list of submitted deliverables since starting date Table 2: Updated indicative state of advancement of hours spent since starting date per partner and per work package Table 3: Updated indicative state of advancement of money spent since starting date per partner and per work package Table 4: Updated list of main persons in charge of the action
71 (102)
8.15 Financial Control

The progress report will contain an up-date on resources used, and compared to planned usage. The progress can be compared to the overall planned usage of hours per week and planned accumulated hours as presented in the enclosed Gantt-chart. The client will have a more detailed chart for reference. Audits Internal audits may be executed once every 6 months by F internal auditors. Internal Audits can also be scheduled for specific milestones or deliverables.
8.16 Communication strategy

The F&SSPA team proposes a communications strategy including: A project web-site; the DMA web-site A project site in F: s operational system (ONE) for the Secretariat and the Steering Group and the in kind contributors. Meetings including Steering Group and Reference Group meetings Workshops for test of recommendations Reports Final Conference
The consultant further suggests to design and update basic factsheet and introductory power point presentation for the distribution of the project in a consistent way.
8.17 Contact with Authorities

The consultant shall present any need for permits, duties to report, statements and approvals, etc. to the client. If any application negotiations should come into existence, they will be prepared by the consultant in dialogue with the client. The client will send applications.
8.18 Co-ordination with other relevant initiatives

The project shall be coordinated with other initiatives, such as on-going standards committees, feasibility studies and projects. Through contacts with the EU and the Maritime administrations in northern Europe, the project expands its network of other relevant initiatives. Co-ordination is carried out on the basis of e-mail communication with lead organizations and contacts persons from the
72 (102)
projects and primarily focus on published results from these initiatives. It can also be relevant to use methods and assumptions made by others, and in some cases background information may be useful that has not been published. The F & SSPA team has together with SMTF (Swedish Marine Technology Forum) initiated a meeting within all ongoing EU funded projects that work with LNG as a fuel for ships in some form. The meeting is scheduled for early September 2011 and will be reported after the baseline study. The goal of the meeting is to share information within the projects and to ensure that as little work as possible is duplicated. After the base line study and as a preparation for the progress meeting on September 23, an analysis of which information will be relevant to coordinate with different initiatives during work packages 3-7. Some contacts and cooperation already established are mentioned in short below. Feasibility study for LNG bunkering in South Korea Performed by SSPA Sweden in cooperation with Swedish Marine Technology Forum, FKAB and White Smoke, 2010-ongoing. An extensive study of the opportunities and conditions for LNG bunkering in South Korea. Contacts and experience from this project will be used in the LNG filling station project. LNG bunkering in Stockholm Viking Line and AGA prepare a LNG powered Ferry. SSPA is contracted to analyze the risks and the technology for bunkering. For AGA gas a risk analysis will be made for the bunkering operation and for the LNG bunker boat traffic in the Stockholm harbor. The result from these projects and the knowledge and experience gained will be of good use for the LNG filling station project. Maritime Conditions for building LNG/LBG Infrastructure The study is completed, during the study an extensive network of Swedish ports was built up. This network and the knowledge gained during the project will be used. Effship The research project EffShip is based on the vision of a sustainable and successful maritime transport industry one which is energy efficient and has minimal environmental impacts. Contacts, knowledge and experience from Effship project will be of use for this LNG filling station project. MonaLisa SSPAs main responsibility, within the Mona Lisa project, is to create optimal route based
73 (102)
on the following criteria: fuel consumption, speed, estimated time of arrival, emissions and traffic movements. The result, an effective overall route plan, contributes to a secure transport system, which in turn provides optimized fuel consumption for each vessel and thus less emission. Contacts and experience from Mona Lisa might be useable in the LNG filling station project.
74 (102)
Clean ship Contacts have been initiated with the Clean Ship project, through Mr. Jrg Straussler who is invited to the reference group. Clean ship's goal is to ultimately ensure that shipping in the Baltic Sea is carried out by ships that do not emit any nutrients in the ocean and run on clean fuels with low emissions. The project will be carried by ship operators in the Baltic Sea, the largest Baltic ports, shipping companies, manufacturers of marine fuels and the companies that are working to develop high security in shipping. To begin with, the focus will be on reducing emissions from ferries and cruise ships as well as technical solutions for this. Port of Trelleborg AB is in charge of the project, which has a scale of 3 million Euros and will last 3 years. Part of the project is to investigate how the logistics of liquid methane can be organized. Upcoming activities: Maritime Stakeholder Event "Clean air at sea -- promoting solutions for sustainable and competitive shipping", referring to information meeting held in Brussels, 1 June 2011. DG MOVE & ENV, European Commission Anja Kerp European Commission Directorate General for Mobility and Transport Unit C2: Maritime Transport Policy, Ports & Inland Waterways Postal address: DM 28 - 3/110 B-1049 Brussels Office address: Rue de Mot 28, B-1040 Brussels Tel. +32 2 2953908 E-mail: mailto:Anja.Kerp@ec.europa.eu http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm
75 (102)
Conclusions
The project A feasibility study for an LNG infrastructure and test of recommendations is highly linked to the maritime sectors needs to assess low sulphur options for fuelling ships before January 2015. Other stakeholders taking active actions towards developing a LNG infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the English Channel are the TSOs and the port authorities. The challenge for this project is to identify weaknesses in the framework conditions that enable investments in a LNG filling station infrastructure, and to formulate recommendations that eliminate these weaknesses. Central issues involve the public awareness and the often lengthy process of environmental impact assessments to be approved. The time period for the study is relatively short which limits the possibility to await new experiences from pilot and demonstration projects. The consultant need to capture current knowledge and industry best practice rather than performing in depth research of certain subject areas. The project involves a large number of stakeholders and its success relies to a large degree on the active participation of these different stakeholders. It is essential to bring about a constructive communication among the stakeholders that have know-how and insights of strategic importance. It will be important that the consultant firmly coordinates the different inputs made by the in kind contributors throughout the project. Acheivements made during the inception phase: o The team of consultants and including the in kind contributors have interacted and together discussed the project and the content of the DoW; o The project work plan has been updated and tasks specified, with a clear understanding of who will work with different tasks, including the in kind contributors; o The consultant has met with the Steering Group and the Reference Group; o Dates for major meetings and work shops throughout the project are settled; o Dates for deliverables to the client are settled; o The consultant team has refined the central problem formulations for the assignment and received useful input from the in kind contributors and other stakeholders in this process.
76 (102)
10
Appendix 1 Initial list of stakeholders; Authorities, Classes and Gas system owners
10.1 Maritime administrations in Northern Europe
Ireland Department of Transport, Transport House, Kildare St. Dublin 2 Ireland. Tel: + 353 1 670 7444 Web: http://www.transport.ie/maritime/overview.aspx
France Secrtariat Gnral de la Mer SGMER 16 boulevard Raspail F-75007 Paris France Telephone: + 33 1 4275 6600 Facsimile: + 33 1 4275 6678 E-Mail: sm2.dgmt@equipement.gouv.fr Web: www.sgmer.gouv.fr The United Kingdom Maritime and Coastguard Agency Spring Place 105 Commercial Road Southampton Hants SO15 1EG Web: http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca
77 (102)
Belgium Ministry for Communications and Infrastructure het Directoraat-generaal Maritiem Vervoer Vooruitgangstraat 56 1210 BRUSSEL Belgium Phone : 02 277 31 11 fax : 02 277 40 05 Web: http://www.mobilit.fgov.be
The Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment Directorate-General for Public Works and Water Management Koningskade 4 2596 AA The Hague Postbox 20906 2500 EX The Hague The Netherlands Telephone number: +31 (0)70 456 00 00 Fax number: +31 (0)70 456 11 11 Telephone number: +31 (0)70 456 80 81 Fax number: +31 (0)70 456 83 35 http://english.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/
78 (102)
National Ports Council The National Ports Council is the independent consultation body of Dutch sea ports, the national government and lobby organisations of the business community in the ports sector. The Council provides solicited and unsolicited recommendations about subjects that are of importance to Dutch sea ports. Nationale Havenraad Koningskade 4 Postbox 20906 2500 EX Den Haag The Netherlands Phone: (070) 351 76 15 Fax: (070) 351 76 00 info@havenraad.nl Web: http://www.havenraad.nl/english Germany Bundesamt fr Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie BSH Hamburg Bernhard-Nocht-Strae 78 20359 Hamburg Germany Tel. + 49 (0) 40 - 3190 0 Fax + 49 (0) 40 - 3190 5000 BSH Rostock Neptunallee 5 18057 Rostock Germany Tel. + 49 (0) 381 - 4563 5 Fax + 49 (0) 381 - 4563 948 Web: http://www.bsh.de/en/index.jsp
79 (102)
Denmark Danish Maritime Authority Vermundsgade 38 C 2100 Kbenhavn Denmark Phone: 3917 4400 E-mail: sfs@dma.dk Web: http://www.dma.dk/Sider/Home.aspx Danish Maritime Safety Administration Overgaden oven Vandet 62 B P.O.Box 1919 DK-1023 Copenhagen Denmark Telephone:(+45)3268 9500 Fax: (+45)3257 4341 E-mail: frv@frv.dk Web: http://frv.dk/en/Pages/default.aspx Norway Norwegian Maritime Directorate P.O Box 2222 N-5509 Haugesund Norway Phone +47 52 74 50 00 Fax +47 52 74 50 01 E-mail: postmottak@sjofartsdir.no Web: http://www.sjofartsdir.no/en The Norwegian Coastal Administration NCA Postboks 1502 6025 lesund Norway Phone: +47 33 03 48 08 Fax: +47 70 23 10 08
80 (102)
E-mail: post@kystverket.no Web: http://www.kystverket.no
Sweden Swedish Maritime Administration SE-601 78 Norrkoping Sweden telephone: +46 771 63 00 00 fax: +46 11 10 19 49 E-mail: sjofartsverket@sjofartsverket.se Web: http://www.sjofartsverket.se Swedish Transport Agency Maritime Department P.O. Box 653 SE-601 15 Norrkping Sweden Telephone: +46 771-50 35 03 fax: +46 11 23 99 34 E-mail: sjofart@transportstyrelsen.se Web: http://www.transportstyrelsen.se Poland Ministry of Infrastructure 4/6 Chaubiski Street 00-928 Warsaw Poland Shipping Safety Department tel. 0048 22 630 16 39 fax 0048 22 630 14 97 Department for Maritime Transport and Inland Navigation tel. 0048 22 630 15 40 fax 0048 22 630 15 49 Web: http://www.en.mi.gov.pl
81 (102)
Lithuania The Lithuanian Maritime Safety Administration J. Janonio str. 24 92251, Klaipda Lithuania Phone: ( 370 46) 469 602 Fax: ( 370 46) 469 600 E-mail: msa@msa.lt Web: http://www.msa.lt/en/home-page.html Latvia Maritime Administration of Latvia Phone: +371 67062101 Fax: +371 67860082 http://www.jurasadministracija.lv/en/index.php
Estonia Estonian Maritime Administration Valge 4 11413 Tallinn ESTONIA Phone: +372 620 5500 Fax: +372 620 5506 E-mail: eva @ vta.ee Maritime Safety Division: Lume 9 10416 Tallinn Estonia Phone: +372 620 5700 Fax: +372 620 5706 E-mail: mot@vta.ee Web: http://www.vta.ee/atp/?lang=en
82 (102)
Russia Ministry of transport Russian Maritime Security Service ul. Kazakova d. 3 stroyenie 2 Moscow Russia 105064. Phone: +7 (495) 221-71-30 +7 (495) 221-71-31 +7 (495) 221-71-32 +7 (495) 221-71-33 7 (495) 221-71-34 Fax: +7 (495) 607-01-95 E-mail: smb@msecurity.ru Web: http://www.msecurity.ru/eng
Finland Finnish Transport Agency P.O. Box 33, 00521 HELSINKI Finland Phone +358 2063 7373 Fax +358 2063 73700 E-mail: kirjaamo@trafikverket.fi Web: www.fta.fi
83 (102)
10.2 Classification societies

10.2.1 IACS members http://www.iacs.org.uk American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) Det Norske Veritas (DNV) China Classification Society (CCS) Bureau Veritas (BV) Lloyds Register (LR) Germanischer Lloyd (GL) Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (NK) Korean Register of Shipping )KR) USA Norway China France England Germany Japan Korea http://www.eagle.org http://www.dnv.com http://www.ccs.org.cn http://www.veristar.com http://www.lr.org http://www.gl-group.com http://www.classnk.or.jp http://www.krs.co.kr/eng/index.ht ml http://www.prs.pl http://www.rina.org http://www.rs-head.spb.ru
Polish Register of Shipping Poland (PRS)* RINA Italy Russian Maritime Register of Russia Shipping (RS) Indian Register of Shipping (IRS) India Croatian Register of Shipping Croatia (CRS)** * PRS is a IACS member since June 2011 **CRS is a IACS member since May 2011
http://www.crs.hr/
10.2.2 Non IACS member Hellenic Register of Shipping (HRS) China Corporation Register of Shipping (CR) Turk Loydu (TL) Biro Klasifikasi Indonesia (BKI) Registo Internacional Naval (RINAVE)* International Naval Surveys Bureau (INSB) Asia Classification Society (ACS) Brazilian Register of Shipping (RBNA) International Register of Shipping (IROS) Greece China Turkey Indonesia Portugal Greece Iran Brazil USA, Florida http://www.hrs.gr http://www.crclass.org.tw http://www.turkloydu.org http://www.klasifikasiindonesia.com http://www.rinave.org http://www.insb.gr http://www.asiaclass.org http://www.rbna.org.br http://www.intlreg.org
84 (102)
Ships Classification Malaysia (SCM) Dromon Bureau of Shipping (DBS) Iranian Classification Society (ICS) Guardian Bureau of Shipping (GBS)
Malaysia Cyprus Iran USA, Delaware
http://www.myscm.com.my http://www.dromonbs.com http://www.ics.org.ir http://www.gbs-syr.org
10.3 Transmission System Operators

Company Energinet.dk Fluxys Gassco Gas transport services Gasunie Gasum Gaz system GRT gaz Interconnector National grid Ontras Open grid Europe Country of origin Denmark Belgium Norway Netherlands Netherlands Finland Poland France United Kingdom United Kingdom Germany Germany
85 (102)
Svenska Kraftnt Swedegas Thyssengas TIGF Wingas
Sweden Sweden Germany France Germany
10.4 Storage System Owners

Company BEB Erdgas und Erdl GmbH Centrica Storage DONG Storage EDF Energinet.dk E.ON Gas Storage Essent Exxon Mobil Fluxys Gasunie Country of origin Germany United Kingdom Denmark France Denmark Germany Netherlands United States of America Belgium Netherlands
86 (102)
Gazprom Germania National grid PGNiG RWE NAM Storengy TAQA TIGF Verbundnetz Gas AG Wingas
Germany United Kingdom Poland Germany Netherlands France United Arab Emirates France Germany Germany
10.5 Terminal Operators

Company Essent Fluxys Gasunie Gaz system National grid South Hook LNG Terminal company Country of origin Netherlands Belgium Netherlands Poland United kingdom United Kingdom
87 (102)
11
Appendix 2 List of members/contact points in the Steering Group
Belgium Pim Bonne Flemish Ministry of Mobility and Public Works Koning Albert II laan 20 bus 5 - 1000 Brussel T: +32 2 553 62 51 E-mail: pim.bonne@mow.vlaanderen.be
Denmark Mogens Schrder Bech Danish Maritime Authority Vermundsgade 38C Copenhagen T: +45 39174501 M: +45 21784652 E-mail: mb@dma.dk
Finland Sten Sundberg Finnish Transport Safety Agency Porkkalankatu 5 PO Box 320, 00101 Helsinki T: +358 20 618 6463 M: +358 40 515 5413 E-mail: sten.sundberg@trafi.fi
Norway Henrik Hoel Consultant The Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry Postboks 8014 Dep, 0030 Oslo T: +47 22240411 E-mail: hho@nhd.dep.no F & SSPA project team
89 (102)
Sweden Swedish Maritime Administration Reidar Grundstrm
T: +46 11 191038 M: +46 733 019930 SE- 601 78 Norrkping E-mail: Reidar.Grundstrom@sjofartsverket.se
Swedish Gas Association Anders Mathiasson Box 49134 100 29 Stockholm Sverige E-mail: anders.mathiasson@energigas.se
Szczecin and Swinoujscie seaports Authority SA Pawel Krzych og Andrzej Baron uli Bytomska 7, 70-603 Szczecin E-mail: P.Krzych@port.szczecin.pl
Port of Hirtshals Jens Kirketerp Jensen og Peter Ydesen 9850 Hirtshals Denmark E-mail: J.Jensen@HirtshalsHavn.dk
90 (102)
Port of Zeebrugge Patrick Van Cauwenberghe Isabellalaan 1, 8380 Zeebrugge Belgium T: +32 50543211 M: +32 478696245 E-mail: pvc@mbz.be
Fluxys LNG Dirk Nous Guimardstraat 4 1040 Brussels Belgium T. (Zeebruge): +32-(0)2.282.7481 T. (Brussels) : +32-(0)2-282.6480 M: +32-(0)475.72.18.02 E-mail: dirk.nous@fluxys.com
Gasnor Aksel Skjervheim Solheimsgatgaten 11 5058 Bergen Norway T: +47 55214316 M: +47 95868604 E-mail: Aksel.Skjervheim@gasnor.no
91 (102)
Gasum OY Bjrn Ahlns Miestentie 1 02151 Espoo Finland T: +358 20 4471 M: + 358 400 4033 19 E-mail: Bjorn.Ahlnas@Gasum.fi
Gasunie Piet Kager Concourslaan 17 Groningen The Netherlands T: +31505213322 M: +31629096238 E-mail: p.c.a.kager@gasunie.nl
Germanischer Lloyd AG Lars Langfeldt Brooktorkai 18 20457 Hamburg Germany T: +49 (0)40 36149-7120 E-mail: lars.langfeldt@gl-group.com
Energinet.dk Torben Brabo Lautruphj 7 DK-2750 Ballerup Denmark E-mail: tbr@energinet.dk
92 (102)
MAN Diesel og Turbo Chris Underwood Teglholmsgade 41 2450 Copenhagen SV Denmark T: +45 33852955 E-mail: Chris.Underwood@man.eu
LAURITZEN KOSAN A/S Sren Berg Sankt Annae Plads 28 1291 Copenhagen K Denmark E-mail: sb@j-l.com
Bureau Veritas Bengt Sangberg stbanegade 55 2100 Copenhagen Denmark T: +45 7731 1039 M: +45 2088 8901 E-mail: bengt.sangberg@dk.bureauveritas.com
Gazprom Global LNG Fred Smits E-mail: fred.smits@gazpromlng.com
93 (102)
Observers TEN-T EA Jaroslaw Kotowski Chausse de Wavre 910 1040 Brussels Belgium T: +32 2 297 41 64 F: +32 2 297 37 27 E-mail: jaroslaw.kotowski@ec.europa.eu
EMSA Pia Berglund European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) Cais do Sodr 1249-206 Lisbon, Portugal T: +351 21 1214 606 E-Mail: Pia.BERGLUND@emsa.europa.eu
94 (102)
12
Appendix 3 List of members in the Reference Group
Reference Group Members

Company Contact Address Telephone/Mobile Email/Webbsite
Svenskt Marintekniskt Forum
Johan Algell
Riverside Museigatan 2 SE-451 50 Uddevalla Sweden P.O. Box 27314 SE-102 54 Stockholm Sweden Hulvejen 1 DK-6700 Esbjerg Denmark Tel +46 8 670 28 05 Mobile +46 70 770 28 05
www.smtf.se
Energy Ports
Ola Joslin
Ola.joslin@stoports.com
Port of Esbjerg
Kjeld Dahl Srensen
Tel +45 5150 8454
kds@portesbjerg.dk www.portesbjerg.dk edewitte@delphis.be brombouts@delphis.se Ludovic.laffioneur@brv.be
Delphis N.V.
Edouard De Witte Bart Rombouts
Tel +32 32 47 60 21 Mobile +32 477 88 40 48 Tel +32 32 47 70 21 Ernest Van Dijckkaai 8 2000 Antwerpen Belgium Tel +32 03 232 72 32
Royal Belgian Shipowners Association
Ludovic Laffineur
95 (102)
Company
Contact
Address
Telephone/Mobile
Email/Webbsite
Grand Port Maritime de Dunkerque
Frdric Caron
Terre-Plein Guillain BP 46 534 59 386 Dunkerque Cedex 1 France
Tel +33 (0)3 28 28 74 49
fcaron@portdunkerque.fr
Jean-Nol Carlier
Tel +33 (0)3 28 28 74 41
jncarlier@portdunkerque.fr
Belgian Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport ECSA European Community Shipowners Association
Walter Mille Alfons Guinier Rue Ducale 67 P.O. Box 2 B-1000 Brussels Belgium
Walter.mille@mobilit.fgov.be guinier@ecsa.eu
Benoit Loicq Kzlekedsmrnk szakrt Henrik Domanovszky Elnk Magyar Gzzem Kzlekeds Klaszter Egyeslet P.O. Box 10 SE-681 29 Kristinehamn Sweden +36 70 396 75 02
loicq@ecsa.eu domanovszky@gmail.com
Rolls-Royce AB
Peter Rydahl
Tel +46 550 84 141 Mobile +467 70 603 71 27 Tel +31 613 00 36 17
Peter.rydahl@rolls-royce.com
Keppel Offshore & Marine Europ Technology Centre
Ruud Haneveer
Rhaneveer@keppelverolme.nl
96 (102)
Company
Contact
Address
Telephone/Mobile
Email/Webbsite
Rolls-Royce Marine A/S Rolls-Royce AB
Bent O Pedersen Peter Rydahl General Sales Manager - Sweden P.O. Box 1010, S-681 29 Kristinehamn, Sweden Postboks 924, 5008 Bergen Sten Bjrk Kari Pihlajaneimi Jaap Kolpa P.O. Box 2094 2500 EX The Hague The Netherlands Grevesmhlener Str 8 223936 Mallentin Siberiastraat 20 2030 Antwerp Belgium Mindet 2 Postboks 130 DK-8100 Aarhus C Denmark Port of Trelleborg
Tel +45 99 30 36 07 Mobile +45 404 30 560 Direct tel: +46 550 84141 Direct fax: +46 550 84173 Mobile: +46 70 603 7127 Phone: +47 90 27 95 55
bengt_ove.pedersen@rolls-royce.com peter.rydahl@rolls-royce.com
Rolls-Royce Marine
Oliver.Lane@Rolls-Royce.com
Baltic Sea Clean Shipping Viking Line Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment Baltic Energy Forum e.V.
Mobile +46 708 817 145
Sten.i.bjork@telia.com Kari.pihlajaniemi@vikingline.fi
Tel +31 70 351 16 24
Jaap.kolpa@minvenw.nl
Jrg D Strussler
Tel +49 38824 81013
js@baltef.de
Port of Antwerp
Tessa Major
Tel +32 03 205 2477 Mobile +32 0486 03 64 41 Tel +45 89 36 82 12 Mobile +45 20 60 52 82
Tessa.major@haven.antwerpen.be
Port of Aarhus
Kim Meilstrup
khm@port.aarhus.dk
97 (102)
Company
Contact
Address
Telephone/Mobile
Email/Webbsite
Ministry of Transport
Sren Clausen
Frederiksholms Kanal 27 F DK-1220 Copenhagen K Denmark Amaliegade 33 DK-1256 Copenhagen K Denmark Weidekampsgade 10, Postboks 3370 2300 Kbenhavn S. c/o Actia Forum Ltd Pulaskiego Str 8 81-368 Gdynia Poland P.O. Box 863 3000 AW Rotterdam The Netherlands Amaliegade 33 B DK-1256 Copenhagen K Denmark
Tel +45 33 92 43 87
scl@trm.dk
Danish Shipowners Association
Peter Wallbohm Olsen
Tel +45 33 48 92 07 Mobile +45 29 36 88 70
Danish Ports
Nete Herskind
Tel +45 33 70 31 37 Fax:+45 3370 33 71 Tel +48 58 627 2467 Mobile +48 502 559 631
neh@danskehavne.dk
Baltic Ports Organization
Bogdan Oldakowski
Bpo.sg@actiaforum.pl
Vopak LNG Holding B.V.
Joop Jonkers
Danish Society of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
Steen Sabinsky
Tel +31 (0) 10 400 2417 Mobile +31 (0) 6 2279 9430 Tel +45 33 33 74 88 Mobile +45 29 66 24 08
Joop.jonkers@vopak.com
Ssa@maritimecenter.dk
98 (102)
13
Appendix 4 Letter sent to in kind contributors
Feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure and test of recommendations.
Dear Sirs, Since October 2010, the Danish Maritime Authority has managed a large scale initiative to enable ships in, for example, the Baltic Sea to be fuelled by natural gas in the future. The project has the form of a broad cooperation with 20 partners, including companies, ports and authorities and is partly financed through the TRANS-EUROPEAN TRANSPORT NETWORKS EXECUTIVE AGENCY TEN-T EA as part of the Motorways of the Seas programme. Please refer to the enclosed press release. In May 2011, two Swedish consultancy firms, F & SSPA, were assigned to perform a feasibility study resulting in recommendations on how to develop an infrastructure of LNG filling stations. The contract was signed on May 9 in Copenhagen and a final report is due in arch 2012. Hereby the F & SSPA project team would like to establish a contact with you as one of the in kind contributors to this TEN-T project. The F & SSPA team is manned by experts from the two consultant companies F Industry AB and SSPA Sweden AB, respectively. The project is in its inception phase and we are now fully engaged in the detailed planning of the project. The inception report shall be presented in June. Within the next few weeks, someone from the project team will contact You and in more detail discuss how You and Your company can contribute to the project. We would like to emphasize that the contribution and input from all in kind contributors are of outmost importance for a valuable outcome of the project. An overview of the project plan is given in the figure below. It illustrates how the F & SSPA project, the feasibility study, fits into the wider TEN-T project. The F&SSPA team will conduct a number of work packages as illustrated in the figure. Those key elements are conducted by experts from F and SSPA and in close cooperation with the in kind contributors. Based on the Baseline study (WP2), three parallel processes will go deeper into; Economic aspects (WP3), Operational and technical aspects (WP4) and Safety aspects (WP5) F & SSPA project team 99 (102) Report: Inception Report
respectively. This work leads to WP6 where recommendations for a LNG filling station infrastructure are set up. Recommendations will then be validated in a very open process in WP7. The F & SSPA project team will conduct three workshops in order to establish open fora for knowledge exchange and validation discussions. The workshops will be conducted in three different places in the studied area in order to expose geographical differences and variations in conditions. Focus is on ship owners, ports and gas providers, also representing the majority of in kind contributors. Finally, in WP8 the Final recommendations will be settled and presented as a strategic paper. A detailed time schedule is now under development: one first Steering group meeting will take place in Brussels on June 17th. The workshops in WP7 will take place from the earliest in December 2011 and up to the end of January 2012. The project will be finalized in March 2012. A detailed work plan and time schedule will be presented in the Inception report. We look forward conducting this important project and we appreciate cooperating with You during the forthcoming 10 months! Kindest regards
For the F & SSPA project team
Monica Gullberg Contractor, deputy project leader Deputy Head of Department F Industry AB monica.gullberg@afconsult.com
Jim Sandkvist Project team leader Vice President SSPA Sweden AB jim.sandkvist@sspa.se
100 (102)
Monica Gullberg
Tekn. Lic./Lic. Eng. (Civ. Eng.)
Jim Sandkvist
Vice President Tekn. Lic./Lic. Eng. (Civ. Eng.)
Energy and System Analysis F, Industry Division Frsundaleden 2A, Solna SE-169 99 Stockholm, Sweden Switchboard: +46 (0) 10 505 00 00 Direct: +46 (0)10-505 10 46 Mobile: +46 (0)70-616 10 46 Fax: +46 (0)10-505 00 10 monica.gullberg@afconsult.com www.afconsult.com
SSPA SWEDEN AB - YOUR MARITIME SOLUTION PARTNER Chalmers Tvrgata 10 Box 24001 SE-400 22 Gteborg Sweden Switchboard: +46 (0)31 772 90 00 Direct: +46 (0)31 772 90 78 Mobile: +46 (0)730 72 90 78 Fax: +46 (0)31 772 91 24 jim.sandkvist@sspa.se www.sspa.se
102 (102)

LNG-Infrastructure-Inception-report - 110707 PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

LNG-Infrastructure-Inception-report - 110707 PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure and test of recommendations

Reference: Danish Maritime Authority Mogens Schrder Bech

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

Appendix 4 Letter sent to in kind contributors ............................................ 99

1.1 List of Figures

1.2 List of tables

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

IGF IKC IMO ISO LFA LNG MarPol OEM OSPAR

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

SECA SIGTTO SMTF TO TSO VTS WP WS

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

TEN-T application* A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure

WP 1 Inception phase WP 2 Baseline study

WP 3 Economic and financial aspects WP 6

WP 4 Technical and operational aspects

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

Purpose of the inception report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

Project aim and outcome

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

6.1 Review of policies and regulations

6.2 Context of the initiative to this study

MARPOL 73/78, Annex 6, regulation 13 and 14

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

6.3 Scope of the study

6.4 Enablers and work packages

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

F & SSPA project team

Report: Inception Report

Review of project implementation

TEN-T application* A feasibility study for an LNG filling station infrastructure

F & SSPA work packages

WP 1 Inception phase WP 2 Baseline study

WP 3 Economic and financial aspects WP 6