The first in a new series of 12 methanol enabled container ships, made her launching and undocking milestone last weekend. Unveiling the first of our large ocean-going vessel class with dual-fuel engine able to operate on green methanol.
Big and Beautiful. Measuring at 350m in length and 53.5m beam width, with capacity to carry 16200 TEU for our customers.We are partnering with industry leaders Hyundai Heavy Industries and MAN Energy Solutions for delivery of the first large container ship in early 2024.
Canât wait to see what they do after 2 or 3 second engineers go blind.
Put up this sign:
âSymptoms may include a decreased level of consciousness, poor or no coordination, vomiting, abdominal pain, and a specific smell on the breathâ.
Would be difficult to know if the 2nd Eng. had been drinking the fuel, or just returned from shore leave.
Methanol toxicity would be from the fumes Iâd expect.
You seem to have quite the poor attitude about health and safety concerns. All the deep sea vessels that are in the US fleet these days have strict drinking policies and zero tolerance when it comes to termination of offenders, so not really sure what decade you are going on aboutâŚ
This decade by the look of the order list for methanol fueled vessels:
Building more bad ideas doesnât make it a good idea.
1 Like
It appears that a lot of people in shipping thinks it is a good idea to build ships that will be able to still meet the requirements of the future, (aka âfuture proofâ ships)
That also means that the training of crews and service personnel will have to adjust to the new reality. New technology requires new skills and new regulations to meet the new safety environment.
(Or it may be cheaper and easier to develop unmanned vessels??)
DNVâs AFI platform is available to guide those in the shipping industry that leads the development of the âships of the futureâ:
One of the reasons why LNG as fuel are still leading the pack of newbuild orders is that both e-LNG, Bio-LNG and CO2 capture and storage for ships are under development.
The other reason may be that LNG/LPG fueled ships delivered in the next few years will probably be due for recycling before 2050 anyway.
PS> Existing Ferries, Tugs and Short Sea ships powered by LNG are already being made redundant in Europe, or converted to operate on âplug-in electricityâ, or alternative fuels.
Thatâll be your safest course if they are ammonia. As far as methanol and the new technology⌠have they managed to come up with a cheap pipe that doesnât corrode or will they build these ships all out of chrome moly alloy pipes?
Ships break (and are sunk) all the time at sea, to the tune of 50+ a year. Long term vibration damage isnât kind to pipes and equipment, even overbuilt stuff (see Wartsila engine). Even robustly constructed vessels can suffer from long-term vibration damage, and this is especially relevant for two-stroke engines. Pipes regularly break on vessels filling bilges with fuel. Pump seals regularly need replaced due to leaks. It all eventually starts to leak.
Everything eventually comes down to reality. And unless something is wildly advanced/different in pump seals or pump bearings or the materials used to transport the methanol then these systems will leak. I can already imagine what a blown out injector return line will smell like with methanol spraying on a 90C liner. Smells like toxic poisoning and blindness. Automation is the way to do this sort of thing if it should be done at all.
The paper you cited reports some mild CNS effects in some of the experimental subjects, but zero increase in blood formic acid, which is the metabolic product that causes serious effects like blindness, at the industrial exposure levels tested.
Such serious effects are far more likely from drinking the stuff.
This study was on absorption of methanol via breathing (it was done because of this safety concern in alternative fuels). Yes the human test subjects were only exposed to a very low dose of 100-200 ppm methanol vapor and they did not expose them more than 2 hours.
It is also true that they did not expose them to a concentration that could make them develop formic acid and go blind in that 2 hour time frame. These are human test subjectsâŚ.
This doesnât conclude that methanol exposure via inhalation is safe, rather the opposite. The studyâs main finding was about detection of low dose exposure and that a breathalyzer will not be effective and a blood test or immediate saliva test is needed. It shows that it is rapidly absorbed by saliva and rapidly enters the blood.
The only conclusion about formic acid is that it isnât a good indicator for low dose exposure, which they knew before they ran this test.
I did read the entire paper. The 200 ppm exposure used is the same as OSHAâs time-weighted average Permissible Exposure Limit.
People have been using methanol industrially for a hundred years. Global production is over a hundred million tons yearly. I havenât heard of folks dropping like flies from working around it. Yes itâs nasty stuff and poisoning by it requires prompt treatment; but as far as I can find out the vast majority of methanol poisoning happens by ingestion. Which is where I came in.
Meanwhile more Methanol powered ships of different types are ordered:
I understand your point of view, but I think the disconnect I have is that most places that produce/use methanol today are built to high standards and dont expose themselves intentionally to salt water corrosion and high levels of vibration and sea state poundings over 25 years.
Iâve seen enough fuel pipes sheared off or pump seals dramatically fail to feel like this fuel isnt a good idea.
Does anyone believe that maritime conditions on an aging vessel will limit exposure to 200ppm?
1 Like
Gee, maybe somebody will invent a double wall type thingy with forced ventilation and an alarm system for fuel lines that keeps the smell from disturbing anyone. Maybe even IMO or one of the class societies will write some kind of rule!
1 Like
Modern fuel rails are already double wall and call me shocked to find that they just about all leak.
Rules dont seem to improve conditions of materials⌠if only it were so simple.
Iâm sure there will be⌠plenty of alarms. They love adding alarms. They also love adding rules and new gimmicks that will ensure safety.
Seems like we will get to test it out and find out for sure. At the end of the day they like this fuel because is doesnt instantly kill you and mild leakage seems âokayâ for health. This makes production cost lower since you basically treat it as a normal fuel.
Maersk is securing supplies at strategic location worldwide: