Filter manufacturer Boll & Kirch explains what OEM providers and operators need to understand about filters to achieve best performance and emissions abatement equipment supplier PureteQ comments on designing for performance, not power rating
At Riviera Maritime Media’s Getting it right: selecting the right filters for emissions technology webinar, Boll & Kirch Filterbau business development manager, business unit for filtration technology, Thomas Mann provided an update on filter technology with the latest developments for full-flow lube oil automatic filtration and innovative concepts to combine engine protection and oil care for diesel engines.
What criteria should be considered? “There is always a cheaper solution,” he said, “ but will it survive past the warranty time?”
In a poll, delegates were asked: When selecting a water treatment system we prioritise... 86% chose higher cost, but lower operational expenditure. The remainder (14%) preferred lower cost, but higher operational expenditure.
Other factors to consider are environmental footprint, operator ability, performance, handling and product support. Mr Mann suggested the main criteria for a filter-based system should be compliance.
“No operator wants to be in the news for violations or for being fined for violations. Due to the very high public awareness in these matter, you need equipment that complies reliably and safely with IMO discharge regulations now and with future amendments,” he said. He noted that IMO does not require type-approval for washwater systems, unlike other equipment covered in Marpol, annex one.
Compliance was the number one concern of delegates with 72% choosing performance and compliance with discharge regulations when asked: When opting for a washwater treatment system, what is the number one priority? Environmental footprint was chosen by 6% and 12% picked price or ease of operation.
Mr Mann introduced the ceramic membrane as the filter for emissions technology, citing the very narrow and homogenous pore size distribution, high filtration area, high flux rate and lack of rotating parts. He also noted that a high degree of automation is required to mitigate crew workload and the constant interruption of alarms.
Operational aspects to consider include consumables. “Some systems require chemicals for the treatment process. And are these cleaning chemicals available worldwide? Are they environmentally sound?” he asked. He also noted that any residue has to be assessed – what is the volume of residue produced, and how will it be disposed of?
He added that using a well-known and reliable business partner rather than a simple supplier is preferable. “No treatment technology is plug and play, you always have to do minor things related to systems, but it should never be plug and play,” he said.
In a poll, Who would you prefer to contract for retrofitting water treatment technology? Over half picked the scrubber maker (52%). 24% chose the water treatment technology provider and 24% the shipyard.
There are fluctuations around the current regulations and the impact of any amendments or imposition of local regulations. In a poll, delegates were asked: Do you expect more and/or stricter discharge regulations for open-loop EGCS in the near future? The majority (85%) replied yes. More or stricter discharge regulations for open-loop EGCS is a certainty. The answers: the current level of regulations for open-loop EGCS will stay the same, we will see a relaxation of the way discharge regulations for open-loop EGCS are interpreted, and we will see a reversal of discharge regulations for open-loop EGCS, were chosen by 5% each, respectively.
PureteQ chief executive Anders Skibdal said PureteQ does not make exhaust gas cleaning systems. The company buys them and integrates the EGCS and EGR. “We design this process and we deliver the equipment.”
In choosing the best fit, he emphasised it is not simply a question of relating the energy output of the engine to the scrubber. “The scrubber is designed for the operational pattern, the load and the time of operation,” he said, “That is what will decide the basic footprint of your system.”
As far as upgrades, Mr Skibdal noted there are huge differences in power consumption among the various models and this is an area to consider. He also noted there can be a huge variance in the amount of slops produced – from 2.4 kg per tonne of fuel to 28 kg per tonne of fuel – and this influences the cost of disposal. This can be very high in the US, he noted.
Another factor he noted from his experience is the wide range of operating costs. In general a low capex would result in higher opex and vice versa. This is worth bearing in mind. “The cost of operating a water treatment system would be anywhere between €0.50 (US$0.61) to €2.5 per MW,” he said.
The final poll asked the question: Will there be a future need for water treatment systems in light of the current climate focus (e-fuels)? The vast majority (94%) agreed with the statement: Yes: there will be a future need for water treatment systems in light of the current climate focus, which must have been a comfort to both panellists.