a

University of the Aegean, Department of Shipping Trade and Transport, 8 Korai Str. Chios 82100,Chios,
Tel: +302271035272 Email: aglykas@aegean.gr

b
National Technical University of Athens

VesselPerformanceIndexCO2IndexBaseline
Alexandros Glykas
a*
, George Papaioannou
b

Summary
TheMarineEnvironmentProtectionCommitteeMEPC57,2008oftheInternationalMaritimeOrganization,IMO,agreedtotake
anaustereapproachtowardstheemissionscreatedbythemarinefleet.InordertoreducethegloballevelsofCO
2
emissionsit
wasnecessarytointroduceabaselineandusethisasabenchmarkforallvesselsofsametype.Onabasisoftheoreticaldata,
IMOintroducedareferencebenchmarktoofferarationalleveltocomparetheperformanceandemissionscreatedfromeach
vessel.ContrarytoIMOanalysisthereportedworkinthismanuscriptprocessedactualdatafrom57cargovessels(Tankersand
Bulk Carriers) operating worldwide and the results are compared to the theoretical ones from IMO. It is concluded that any
presented benchmark requires being representative and available for all the vessels so that operators can measure an index
associatedtothefuelefficiencyofeachshipindividually.Theintroducedbenchmarkpollutionlevelisoneofthebuildingblocks
foramandatorydesignCO
2
index.

Approach
MEPC 57, 2008 was tasked the first intercessional Meeting of the Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Ships
(GHGWG1)inordertocreateamandatorydesignCO
2
index.TheGHGWG1developedaconceptforamandatorydesignCO
2

indexfornewships,basedonsubmissionsfromDenmarkandJapan.ThisindexiscalledEEDI(EnergyEfficiencyDesignIndex)
anditisformedasshownbelowonEquation(1):

EEI =
(
]
M
]=1
) A + B P
AL
+ C B -

Copocity I
c]

w

A = _ CF
ML
SFC
ML
P
ML
nML
I=1
_

B = CF
AL
SFC
AL
(1)

C = _ P
P1I
- P
wHR
nwHR
=1
nP1I
I=1
_

= _
c]]
P
c]]
C
c]]
SFC
ML
nc]]
=1
_

Factorsassociatedwithaboveequation1areexplainedinTable1.

Table1:EEDIparameters
Symbol Explanation Units
CF
MEi

anondimensionalconversionfactorforthemainenginesbetweenfuelconsumptionmeasuredin
gramsandCO
2
emissionalsomeasuredingrams,basedoncarboncontent

CF
AEi

anondimensionalconversionfactorfortheauxiliaryenginesbetweenfuelconsumptionmeasuredin
gramsandCO
2
emissionalsomeasuredingrams,basedoncarboncontent

P
Mei
installedpowerofthemainengines kW
P
AE
installedpoweroftheauxiliaryengines kW
SFC
Mei
SpecificFuelConsumptionofthemainengines g/kWh
a
University of the Aegean, Department of Shipping Trade and Transport, 8 Korai Str. Chios 82100,Chios,
Tel: +302271035272 Email: aglykas@aegean.gr

b
National Technical University of Athens

SFC
AEi
SpecificFuelConsumptionoftheauxiliaryengines g/kWh
P
PTIi
is75%oftheratedpowerconsumptionoftheshaftmotors
P
WHR
istheratedelectricalpowergenerationofwasteheatrecoverysystematP
Mei
f
eff
istheavailabilityfactorofanyinnovativeenergyefficienttechnology
P
eff
isthemainenginepowerreductionduetoinnovativeenergyefficienttechnology
SFC
eff
isthespecificfuelconsumptionofthemainenginesatPeff
Cf
eff
istheCO
2
conversionfactorofthefuelusedinthemainengine
V
ref

istheshipspeed,measuredinnauticalmilesperhour(knots),ondeepwaterinthemaximumdesign
loadcondition(Capacity)attheoutputoftheengine(s)onPmeandassumingtheweatheriscalm
withnowindandnowaves.Themaximumdesignloadconditionshallbedefinedbythedeepest
draughtwithitsassociatedtrim,atwhichtheshipisallowedtooperate.Thisconditionisobtained
fromthestabilitybookletapprovedbytheadministration
knots
Capacity
DWTforDryBulk,Tankers,Containerships,Generalcargoships,
TankvolumeforGascarriers
GTforRoRocargoshipsandpassengerships
tonnes
m
3

Grosston
f
j
arethecorrectionstoaccountforshipspecificdesignelements
f
i

isthecapacityfactorforanytechnical/regulatorylimitationoncapacity,andcanbeassumedone
(1,0)ifnonecessityofthefactorisgranted

f
w

isanondimensionalcoefficientindicatingthedecreaseofspeedinrepresentativeseaconditionsof
waveheight,wavefrequencyandwindspeed.fwcanbedetermendbyconductingtheshipspecific
simulationofitsperformanceatrepresentativeseaconditions,orincasethatthesimulationisnot
conducted,fwvalueshouldbetakenfromthestandardfwtablecurve.fwshouldbetakenas1.0
untiltheguidelinesfortheshipspecificsimulationorfwtable/curvebecomesavailable

TheC
FMEi
andC
FAEi
fordifferentfueltypesaregivenintable2.

Table2:Carboncontentineachfueltype

FuelType gCO
2
/gofFuel
DieselGasoil 3.206
LightFuelOil(LFO) 3.151
HeavyFuelOil(HFO) 3.114
LiquidPetrolGas(LPG) 2.967
NaturalGas 2.931

Methodology
The developed work in this study aims to introduce an effective way to categorize the vessels according to their real fuel
performanceandthroughanalysisofaccumulateddataonadailybasisforaapproximateperiodofabout5yearsandpropose
a baseline for each ship. This baseline will serve as a benchmark for each specific vessel category. Furthermore, the reported
workseekstoanalyzeandcomparethetheoreticalEEDIvalueswhichareproposedintheIMOreport.TheIMOreportisbased
on the assumption that the specific fuel consumption for all ship types is 190 g/kWh whilst the analysis presented herewith
corresponds to real daily consumption data. This analysis also presents the degree upon the theoretical and real values are
correlated.
IMOAnalysis
IMOreportonEEDIwasbasedonalargesampleofshipsgivenbyLloydsRegisterFairplay(LRFP).Thecriteriasetforretrieving
thedatasetwerethefollowing:
Newbuildingsintheperiod01January1995to31December2004;
Minimumof30shipsinaselection,preferablymorethan100ships;and
Alltheshipsmusthavetheirmainparametersgiventobetakenintoaccountinthebenchmarking(i.e.speed,
capacitymeasurementandenginedata).SpeedisreceivedastheservicespeedofthevesselatMCRcondition
(MaximumContinuousRatingoftheengines).Capacityisthemaximumsummerdeadweightofthevesselintones
andpoweristheinstalledpowerofmainandauxiliaryenginesmeasuredinkW.

Thevesseltypesconsideredfordeterminationwere:
Drybulkcarriers;
Tankers;
Gascarriers;
Containerships;
Generalcargoships;
Rorocargoships;and
Passengerships,includingroropassengerships,butexcludinghighspeedcraft.

IMOprocessedthedatafurtherusing thefollowingassumptions:
Thecarbonemissionfactorisconstantforallengines,i.e.CF,ME=CF,AE=CF=3.114gCO2/gFuel;3
Thespecificfuelconsumptionforallshiptypesisconstantforallmainengines,i.e.SFCME=190g/kWh;
Thespecificfuelconsumptionforallshiptypesisconstantforallauxiliaryengines,i.e.SFCAE=210g/kWh;
Theloadonmainandauxiliaryenginesaresetto75%ofMCR
Allcorrectionfactorsfj,fkandfwaresetto1.

Table3concentratesalltheresultscomingfromtheIMOanalysis.

Table3:Concentratedtablewithexponentialregressionlinesfromallvesseltypes.

Graph1belowshowsthecalculatedbaselineaccordingtoIMOforDryBulks.

Graph1:IMObenchmarkforDryBulks.

4
VesselDailyDataAcquisition
Records for 57 vessels were provided by 4 Major Hellenic Management Companies. The company made available daily noon
reportdataforbothbulkcarriersandtankersamongsttheirfleet.Thedeliveredinformationincludedthefollowing:
RPMofthemainengines,
Travellingdistance [Nm]
Steamingtime. [hours]
Averagedailyspeed [Knots]
Thefuelconsumed [Mt]
LocalWeatherconditions
The acquired daily noon reports were obtained in raw text format and had to be categorized in a shorted tabular format in
ordertoproceedwiththestatisticalanalysis.Fromtherawdatathecalculatedindexesforeachvesselarethefollowing:

FuelEconomy,measuredintn/mileandtn/hour
BrakeSpecificFuelConsumption(BSFC),measureding/kWh
EnergyEfficiencyDesignIndex(EEDI),measuredingCO
2
/tnNm

Interpretationoftable2
FuelEconomy
The Fuel Economy index was calculated simply by dividing daily oil consumptions with the distance traveled or with the time
themainenginewasoperating.
BreakSpecificFuelConsumption
BSFCistherateoffuelconsumptiondividedbythepowerproduced.BSFCallowsthefuelefficiencyofdifferentreciprocating
enginestobedirectlycompared.TheBSFCindexwascalculatedasfollows:
BSFC [
g
kwh
=
PC
ME
(tn)1,000,000
ML
kW
0pcutng Hous
(2)
Where:
FC
ME
(tn): istheFuelConsumptionofthemainenginemeasuredintn
ME
KW
: isthemainenginepowermeasuredinkW
EnergyEfficiencyDesignIndex
Equation(1)includesthecorrectionfactorsf
j
,f
i
,f
w
aswellastheInnovativeenergyefficienttechnologyfactor.Howeverthose
factorshavenotbeenaccountedasshownintheMEPC57,2008andwassimplifiedasfollows:

Thecarbonemissionfactorisconstantforallengines,i.e.CF
ME
=CF
AE
=CF=3.114gCO2/gFuel,
TheSpecificFuelConsumption(SPF)forallauxiliaryenginesisconsideredconstant,i.eSFC
AE
=210g/kWh,
Theloadonmainandauxiliaryenginesaresetto75%ofMCR
Correctionfactorsf
j
,f
i
,f
w
areconsidered1
Innovativeenergyefficienttechnologyisnotincluded

Soequation(1)becomes:
EEI = S.114 7S%
SPC
ME
P
MEi
+210 P
AEi
NAE
i=1
NME
i=1
Cupuctv
rc]
(3)
Equation (3) was applied to the number daily values received from the supporting companies for all 57 vessels. Furthermore,
usingthedatafromtheseatrialspecificationsforeachvessel,abenchmarkEEDIwascalculatedforeachship.Thisbenchmark
wasusedandcomparedwiththeEEDIresultingfromthedailydataandtheEEDIfromtheIMOreport.
DataInterpretation
ThedataacquiredfromtheManagementCompanies,wereprocessedandanalyzed.Foramorepreciseanalysis,extremeEEDI
valueswereexcludedinordertoeliminatetheeffectofinsignificantvaluesonthefinalresult.Toeffectivelycustomizethedata

5
andignoreirrelevantvalues,CrystalBallsoftwarewasused.Thissoftwarecalculatedthe90%10%boundaries.Valuesoutside
oftheseboundariesareconsideredtrivialandcontributetoalargerstandarddeviation.Additionally,CrystalBallcalculatedthe
best curve that could fit the data allocation. The distribution compatibility with the data was ranked based on Anderson
Darling goodnessoffit test (O. Thas, 2003). The AD test is a onesided test
1
and the hypothesis that the distribution is of a
specificformisrejectediftheteststatistic,A,isgreaterthanthecriticalvalue.CrystalBalloutputisshownattheappendix.
Graph2and3depicttheEEDIresultsfortankersandBulkCarriers,whicharebasedontheseatrialspecifications
2
.Thetrend
lines(darkandlightblue)representtheEEDIforthevesselsinafullspeedandloadedconditionandinaneconomicspeedand
ballastcondition.ThosetwolinescanbefurthermorecomparedtotheglobalDryBulkBenchmarkandTankerBenchmarkgiven
bytheIMOstudy.

Graph2:ComparisonseatrialschartforTankerswiththeIMObenchmark

Graph3:ComparisonseatrialschartforBulkCarrierswiththeIMObenchmark

1
A one- sided t est is a st at ist ical hypot hesis t est in which t he values for which we can rej ect t he null hypot hesis, H0 are locat ed
ent irely in one t ail of t he probabilit y dist ribut ion. I n ot her words, t he crit ical region for a one- sided t est is t he set of values less t han
t he crit ical value of t he t est , or t he set of values great er t han t he crit ical value of t he t est . A one- sided t est is also referred t o as a
one- t ailed t est of significance.

2
Sea t rial t est s refer t o t he ship performance dat a of her Main Engine and auxiliary machinery upon sat isfact ory complet ion of
vessels const ruct ion from t he ship yard. The t rial dat a are recorded as opt imal dat a for t he ship and are unique for each vessel.
y=640.72x
0.444 y=2401.1x
0.54
y=829.16x
0.496
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
E
E
D
I

(
g
C
O
2
/
t

N
m
)
DWT
Tankers
Full Loadedcondition IMOBenchmark Economic Ballast condition
y=14795x
0.734
y=3174.7x
0.612
y=2503.1x
0.56
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000
E
E
D
I

(
g
C
O
2
/
t

N
m
)
DWT
BulkCarriers
Economic Ballast condition Full Loadedcondition IMOBenchmark

6
Graph2and3revealsthattheIMObenchmarkforTankersandBulkCarrierslaysabovealltheseatrialspecifications,bothfor
economicspeedandballastcondition,andfullspeedandloadedcondition.ThustheproposedEEDIbyIMOoverestimatesthe
CO
2
emissionsfromvessels.
However, it is obvious that the sea trial specifications deviate in most of the occasions from the real daily consumption data
becauseofnumerousparametersassociatedwiththeoperationofthevesselsuchastheMaintenanceSchemeandprocedures
followed by each operator, hull biological corrosion, fuel quality ect . The performance level of the vessel and her engine is
becoming inferior compared to the data when the vessel was originally delivered from the shipyard. Furthermore, there are
otherparameters which affect the consumption performance that cannot bepreliminary determined such assea and current
conditions. For that purpose, it became essential for this work to come up with some EEDI levels that correspond to the real
daily consumption data and compare them with the IMO proposed levels. In this study the SFC of auxiliary engines was also
receivedas210g/kWhduetolackofdata.
Asmentionedpreviously,thedataacquiredfromthesupportingcompanieswereanalyzedexcludingvalueswhichwereoutside
the90%10%confidencelevel.Itwasessentialtokeepthe80%ofthedatawhichweremostlyconcentratedaroundthemean
andexcludedatathatweremoreaberrant.Thisprocedurehelpsforamorepreciseresult.Fromtheremainingdata,minimum
andmaximumvalueswereusedasupperandlowerlimitandcorrespondtothedifferentperformanceofeachvesselamongst
the period of accumulated data. This upper and lower limit defines the boundaries were the 80% of the data lay with high
probability.Graph4depictstheresultsforthetankers.

Graph4:TankerscomparisonchartofminandmaxvalueswithIMObenchmark
Theminimumandmaximumvaluesofthevesselsareshownwiththegreenandreddotsrespectively.Thediscontinuousgreen
and redlinesresult from thepower basedtrend lines andshowrespectively thelower and upper limits. The IMO benchmark
fortankers(purpleline)isapproachingtheupperlimitofmostofthevessels.
A similar analysis is followed for the Bulk Carriers. Graph 5 shows that the IMO Benchmark for Bulk Carriers (black line) lies
betweenthelowerandupperEEDIlimitforDWTsabove50,000.Morespecifically,IMObenchmarkisapproachingcloserthe
EEDI for deadweights around the area of 40,000 80,000. Below the 40,000 area the benchmark is declining and is placed
belowalltheminimumandmaximumEEDIvalues,asderivedfromtheacquireddata.Furthermore,intheregionabove80,000
theIMObenchmarkalthoughitisbetweenthetwolimits,ithasmajordivergencefrommostofthebullets
3
showninthatarea.

3
Eachbulletrepresentsthemaximum(red)andminimum(green)EEDIvaluesforavessel.
y=7196.x
0.67
y=8023.x
0.64
y=2401.x
0.54
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
E
E
D
I
(
g
C
O
2
/
t
N
m
)
DWT
Tankers
min max IMOBenchmark

Graph5:BulkCarrierscomparisonchartofminandmaxvalueswithIMObenchmark
From both graphs (4 and 5) it is shown that by accepting the IMO EEDI levels as a benchmark could in several occasions act
favorably for some vessels and in many other will act against them. For instance, some ships have both minimum and
maximumEEDIvaluesabovetheproposedIMOEEDIlevel.Thesevesselswillalwaysfaceapollutionpenalty,eveniftheshipis
properlymaintained.
EnergyEfficiencyDesignIndexAnalysis
The EEDI seems to be a sufficient way to measure conventional ship performance
4
. This index successfully combines aspects
suchasvesselspeed,deadweightcapacity,mainandauxiliaryengineinstalledpower.Allthoseparametersseemtohaveavery
important impact on CO
2
emission levels. For instance the larger the speed the shorter the travel time will be for the same
distance.AlsohighercapacitywillenablelargercargotobetransferredandconsequentlylessCO
2
emissionsperunitofcargo.
Furthermore,largermainandauxiliaryengineinstalledpowermeanshigheremissionvolumes.
However, it becomes essential to determine how much influence each of the above parameters has on the EEDI. The way to
examinethisissueisbyapplyingaMonteCarlosimulation
5
andperformasensitivityanalysis.Forthesensitivityanalysisallthe
independent variables were formed based on some distribution assumptions, which are mentioned on the appendix. The
outputofthesimulationispresentedingraphs6,7and8.

4
The EEDI doesnt appear to apply in vessels with complex and sophisticated machinery installations. It is more suitable for
applicationtoconventionalpoweredandpropelledshipswhichcomprisethemajorityoftheworldfleet.
5
MonteCarlomethodsareaclassofcomputationalalgorithmsthatrelyonrepeatedrandomsamplingtocomputetheirresults.
y=14056x
0.93 y=12269x
0.89
y=2503.1x
0.56
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000
E
E
D
I
(
g
C
O
2
/
t
N
m
)
DWT
BulkCarriers
min max IMOBenchmark

8

Graph6:DistributionofEEDI

Graph7:SensitivityanalysisfortheEEDI

Graph8:EEDIandDeadweightcorrelationchart

9
Graph 6 shows the distribution of the EEDI after 1,000,000 trials. The mean EEDI value is 7.49 gCO2/tn Nm with a standard
deviation of 4.26 gCO2/tn. Moreover, the sensitivity analysis in Graph 7 presents the factors that mostly affect the EEDI. As
shownfromGraph7theDeadweightofVesselshasamajorcontributionintheEEDI.CapacityisnegativecorrelatedtotheEEDI
and influences this index by a factor of 91.8%. Other less influencing parameters are the main engine power (kW) and the
specificfuelconsumption(g/kWh)with2.9%,andfinallythevesselspeedwhichalsonegativelyaffectingtheEEDIbyafactorof
1.4%.

ThehighlynegativecorrelatedcapacityandEEDIarealsopresentedinGraph8afterthe1,000,000trials.Thecorrelation
betweenEEDIandCapacityis0.9521,whichisconsideredarelativelyhigh.
EnvironmentalImpact
Defining a benchmark for each vessel in the global fleet will eventually create higher performance standards and will reduce
carbon dioxideemissions. Thisbenchmark could be defined bythe initial manufacturingspecifications andimpose the ship to
restrictlifetimeemissionsaccordingly.
The issue that may be raised is whether the potential fuel efficiency gains will be higher from replacing existing vessels with
largeronesratherthanwiththesamesize.Asitwasshowninthesensitivityanalysisabovethedeadweighthasaconsiderable
impactontheEEDI.Thus,itmightbemuchmoreenergyefficienttopromotethelargercapacityvessels.HoweverontheTrade
pointofviewthiswouldnotbeefficient.
Conclusions
TheConclusionsdrawnfromthecurrentanalysisaresummarizedasfollows:
1. InmanyoccasionswherethedeadweighttonnageofthebulkcarriersisrelativelylowtheMEPC57estimationis
deviatingfromtherealdata.
2. TheEEDindex(definedbytheMEPC57)isoftenoverestimatingtheCO
2
emissionlevel.
3. Allvesselshaveaminimumandamaximumaverageconsumption,whichdependson:
a. Themainenginecondition
b. Fuelpurity
c. Weatherconditions
d. Thetimepassedsincethelastdrydocking
4. The electric propulsionsystemsare facing a disadvantage in theexistingformula, because thedefinitionof installed
powerisnotunambiguous.Thustheconfigurationsdonotcontainthespecificamountofenergywhichiswastedjust
forpropulsion.ConsequentlyvesselswithdieselpropulsionenginescannotrealisticallyintroduceanEEDIbenchmark.
5. ThenegativecorrelationofDWTandEEDIisveryhigh.ThismeansthatDWTaffectsgreatlytheleveloftheEEDindex.
6. The IMO assumptions regarding the SFC of main and auxiliary engines (190 g/kWh and 210 g/kWh) are
overgeneralizationsanddonotnecessarilystandforthemajorityofengines.InthisstudytheSFCofauxiliaryengines
wasalsoreceivedas210g/kWhduetolackofdata.
Recommendations
There are numerous parameters which should be taken into consideration under a legitimate scheme for implying maximum
CO
2
emissions. It is the view of the writers that such future legislation should be addressed and assessed for each individual
vesselbytheflagadministration.
TheCO
2
emissionlevelforeachboatshouldnotbedeterminedbyageneralbenchmarkleveldefinedbytheEEDI.Eachvessel
shouldbeexaminedseparatelyfromtheflagadministrationandreceivearelevantcertificatefortheAllowableShipEmissions
level. Hence, performance data from the sea trials of each vessel during the construction should be taken carefully into
considerationandbasedonthosedatatheFlagAdministrationshoulddefinetheEEDIofthevesselforarangeofoperations.
TheEEDIofeachshipshouldnotconstitutetheupperlimitofpollutionallowance.Thiswouldbethecaseinidealconditions,
wheretheshipperformanceisalwaysgoingtobesimilarwiththeseatrials.Howeverthisisnotthecase.Theanalysisshowed
that there is a deviation in the daily consumption of 215% from the sea trials during the 2 year data. Ideally the vessel
performancewouldbethesamewiththeseatrialspecificationswhen:
1. Thehullismaintainedclean

10
2. Thecombustionchamberisperformingbasedonthespecifications
3. Thefuelpurityisaccordingtothespecifications
The engine performance and the fuel purity can be directly or indirectly controlled by the ship owner or ship operator.
However, the hullcleaningless condition is primarily depended on thefreight market or the period intervals during which dry
docking(orunderseacleaning)takesplace.Forinstance,ifavesselstayswithoutfreightforaperiodoftime,thehullwillbe
exposedtobiologicalcorrosionwhichwillconsequentlyaffectfuelconsumption.ThustheshipwillexceeditsspecifiedEEDI.In
thatcasethereshouldbeanallowanceforaspecificperiod(fromdrydockingtodrydocking).
The75%operationalleveloftheauxiliaryandmainengineneedsfurtherinvestigation.
EEDIbenchmarkshouldbebasedonfullcapacityconditions.Otherwisetraderswouldavoidloadingthevesselatthemaximum
capacity.
Correction factors f
i
, f
j
, f
w
need to be taken more seriously into consideration and receive values different than 1. Factor f
w

(weather conditions) has a great contribution to the vessel performance and needs to be determined based on a standard f
w

tablecurve.
Acknowledgements
ThereportedworkownsmuchtothepersonnelcooperationanddatareleasefromthefleetofEasternMediterranean
Shipping,EvalentNavigationandChartworldShipping.
References
1. DavidAnink,MarnixKrikke,January2009.TheIMOEnergyEfficiencyDesignIndex.ANetherlandsTrendStudy.Centrefor
MaritimeTechnologyandInnovation,reportNr.3064.
2. Directive2005/33/ECOfTheEuropeanParliamentAndOfTheCouncilof6July2005amendingDirective1999/32/EC,
2007,OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion,22.7.2005
3. EntecUKLimited,August2005.ServiceContractonShipEmissions:Assignment,AbatementandMarketbased
Instruments,EuropeanCommissionDirectorateGeneralEnvironment.
4. Internationalmeetingofthegreenhousegasworkinggroup,February2009.Considerationoftheenergyefficiencydesign
indexfornewships.ApplicationofEEDItoshipsotherthanthoseoperatingwithconventionalmachineryandpower
distributionarrangements.IMOreport.
5. JamesJ.Corbett,HorstWKoehler,October2003.Updatedemissionsfromoceanshipping,JournalofGeophysical
research.
6. IMO(2008a),"FutureIMOregulationregardinggreenhousegasemissionsfrominternationalshipping,"Submittedby
Denmark,MarshallIslands,BIMCO,ICS,INTERCARGO,INTERTANKOandOCIMF,MEPC57/4/2.
7. IMO(2008b),"AmandatoryCO2DesignIndexfornewships,"SubmittedbyDenmark,MarshallIslands,BIMCO,ICS,
INTERCARGO,INTERTANKOandOCIMF,MEPC57/4/3.
8. IMO(2008c),"DevelopmentofanindexforCO2emissionsperunitshippingcapacityinactualoperationalconditions,"
SubmittedbyJapan,MEPC57/4/11.
9. IMO(2008d),"AmandatoryCO2DesignIndexfornewships,"SubmittedbyDenmark,MEPC57/W.12.
10. Shipemissionsstudy.NationalTechnicalUniversityofAthensLaboratoryforMaritimeTransport,May2008.
11. NeilKelso,BerylCuthbertson,1994.Fuelefficiencyofshipsandaircraft,BureauofTransportandCommunications
Economics,workingpaper4,ISBN0642185859.
12. O.Thas,J.P.Ottoy,SomegeneralizationsoftheAndersonDarlingstatistic,Statistics&ProbabilityLettersVolume64,
pages255261,2003
13. PredictionofairemissionsfromdifferentshiptypesbyHansOttoKristensen,2000,DanishMinistryofTransport,TEMA
2000,DocumentfromBIMCO.

11
Appendix

VesselPerformanceData
Table 1 below shows the performance of the dry bulkers and tankers, which is based on the daily noon reports. All the data
wereprocessedanddisplayedinagraph.Therewerethreegraphsforeachcategory(tn/mile,tn/hourandg/kWh).Thelinear
trendlineofthesedatawascalculatedinordertopresentthegeneraltendencyofthevesselperformanceduringtheperiodof
study.Thecontentoftable1,isthepercentagedifferencefromthefirstandlastpointofthelineartrendline.Thepositivesign
showsanincreasingtrend,whereasthenegativeadecreasingtrend.
Table1:Vesselperformanceduringtheperiodofstudy.
DRYBULK
FuelEconomy
tn/mile
FuelEconomy
tn/hour
BreakSpecificfuel
consumption
g/kWh

Vessel1 3.26% 1.74% 1.58%
Vessel2 5.25% 5.89% 5.75%
Vessel3 6.00% 4.81% 2.10%
Vessel4 3.75% 1.73% 11.99%
Vessel5 4.17% 0.15% 5.43%
Vessel6 2.08% 8.52% 3.44%
Vessel7 8.56% 8.26% 7.97%
Vessel8 0.56% 2.13% 3.33%
Vessel9 8.89% 0.21% 3.89%
Vessel10 5.01% 0.37% 0.00%
Vessel11 7.84% 5.71% 6.89%
Vessel12 5.05% 0.13% 1.72%
Vessel13 9.89% 5.40% 5.12%
Vessel14 6.04% 1.19% 1.22%
Vessel15 13.58% 3.67% 4.23%
Vessel16 2.46% 2.73% 2.87%
Vessel17 4.41% 1.41% 1.31%
Vessel18 108.80% 88.70% 93.71%
Vessel19 4.65% 10.31% 0.26%
Vessel20 2.63% 2.38% 2.44%
Vessel21 59.23% 44.84% 48.13%
Vessel22 3.08% 0.15% 0.16%
Vessel23 4.59% 6.10% 5.93%
Vessel24 8.32% 4.67% 4.73%
Vessel25 7.93% 6.04% 5.76%
Vessel26 19.26% 27.99% 27.25%
Vessel27 4.52% 1.56% 1.47%
Vessel28 7.44% 3.79% 3.53%
Vessel29 23.06% 1.82% 2.41%
Vessel30 22.60% 8.70% 8.94%
Vessel31 8.02% 1.53% 1.45%
Vessel32 26.57% 7.83% 7.68%
Vessel33 3.22% 7.77% 7.91%
Vessel34 15.62% 7.26% 7.20%
Vessel35 8.10% 7.22% 7.35%
Vessel36 3.36% 0.73% 0.64%
Vessel37 4.37% 5.62% 5.41%
Vessel38 15.18% 6.44% 6.56%
Vessel39 14.47% 10.04% 9.56%

12

Tankers
FuelEconomy
tn/mile
FuelEconomy
tn/hour
BreakSpecificfuel
consumption
g/kWh

Vessel1 14.63% 4.95% 6.17%

Vessel2 0.60% 9.15% 8.01%
Vessel3 0.27% 4.67% 2.00%
Vessel4 14.74% 15.24% 14.76%
Vessel5 1.66% 10.00% 7.03%
Vessel6 3.37% 5.25% 1.66%
Vessel7 8.25% 0.61% 9.13%
Vessel8 9.88% 0.69% 10.72%
Vessel9 9.87% 0.17% 4.70%
Vessel10 5.15% 0.37% 4.11%
Vessel11 17.84% 0.37% 3.06%
Vessel12 12.95% 3.76% 4.63%
Vessel13 3.12% 2.01% 2.03%
Vessel14 0.15% 1.14% 1.17%
Vessel15 5.29% 1.54% 1.59%
Vessel16 1.75% 1.27% 1.36%
Vessel17 2.59% 14.90% 15.70%
Vessel18 7.06% 4.89% 4.89%

MonteCarloSimulationandSensitivityAnalysis

Table2and3belowshowthestatisticsfromgraph6.

Table2:CrystalBallsoftwareoutputfortheEEDIindex
Statistics: Forecastvalues
Trials 1,000,000
Mean 7.47
Median 6.13
Mode
StandardDeviation 4.26
Variance 18.18
Skewness 1.50
Kurtosis 5.20
Coeff.ofVariability 0.5706
Minimum 1.56
Maximum 34.41
RangeWidth 32.85
MeanStd.Error 0.00

Table3:CrystalBallsoftwareoutputfortheEEDIindexinpercentiles
Percentiles: Forecastvalues
100% 1.56
90% 3.49
80% 4.11
70% 4.71
60% 5.37

13
50% 6.13
40% 7.09
30% 8.38
20% 10.30
10% 13.65
0% 34.41

SensitivityAnalysisAssumptions
Assumption:AuxiliaryEngine[kW]

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 2,500.00
Std.Dev. 360.00
Selectedrangeisfrom800.00to4,000.00
Assumption:Capacity(DWT)

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 120,000
Std.Dev. 95,797
Selectedrangeisfrom20,000to300,000
Assumption:conversionfactor

Uniformdistributionwithparameters:
Constant 3.114

Assumption:MainEngine[kW]
Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 27,161
Std.Dev. 2,716
Selectedrangeisfrom7,000to40,000
Assumption:Loadofthemainandauxiliaryengines

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 85%
Std.Dev. 10%
Selectedrangeisfrom75%to90%

14

Assumption:SpecificFuelConsumptionoftheAuxiliaryEngine
(g/kWh)

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 190.00
Std.Dev. 21.00
Selectedrangeisfrom150.00to220.00
Assumption:SpecificFuelConsumptionMainEngine(g/kWh)

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 149.00
Std.Dev. 14.90
Selectedrangeisfrom100.00to200.00
Assumption:Velocityreference

Normaldistributionwithparameters:
Mean 13.50
Std.Dev. 1.55
Selectedrangeisfrom12.00to15.00