International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijggc

Novel methodology for EEDI calculation considering onboard carbon

capture and storage system
Sanghyuk Lee a, Seunghyeon Yoo a, b, Hyunjun Park c, Junkeon Ahn d, Daejun Chang c, *
a
Graduate School of Ocean Systems Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daehak-ro 291, Yuseong-
gu, Daejeon, 34141, Republic of Korea
b
Safety & Systems, Approval Centre Korea, DNV GL, Marine City 2-ro, Haeundae-gu, Busan, 48120, Republic of Korea
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daehak-ro 291, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34141, Republic of Korea
d
Korea Maritime Transportation Safety Authority (KOMSA), 27, Areumseo-gil, Sejong City, 30100, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study proposes a novel Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) estimation method considering the Onboard
Onboard carbon capture and storage system Carbon Capture and Storage (OCCS) system. The OCCS selectively captures and stores carbon dioxide (CO2)
Carbon capture and storage contained in exhaust gas emitted from the internal combustion engines of a ship. It also utilizes a CO2 capture
Energy efficiency design index
process, a CO2 liquefaction process, and a CO2 storage tank. The status of greenhouse gas regulation for ships
International maritime organization
currently being discussed at the International Maritime Organization was investigated, and a modified EEDI
CO2 emission factor
Container feeder estimation formula and a method for EEDI calculation considering the OCCS were evaluated. Case studies on a
container feeder were conducted based on the proposed method in accordance with the EEDI regulations. The
chemical absorption with an activated methyldiethanolamine solution was selected for the CO2 capture process.
The captured CO2 was liquefied using cold energy from liquefied natural gas and ammonia. To improve the
volume efficiency of the containment system, a prismatic pressure vessel was adopted for the CO2 storage tank.
The results demonstrate that the required carbon capture ratio in the CO2 capture process is higher than the
actual EEDI reduction rate.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) develops strategies

1. Introduction
As the environmental impact of global warming increases, efforts
have been made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Ac­
cording to the first report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) in 1990, the global average temperature has
risen owing to greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. It was
mentioned that reduction of greenhouse gases is urgently needed.
(Houghton et al., 1990) Accordingly, governments from various coun­
tries gathered to develop the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Convention (UNFCCC), and consequently, the Kyoto Protocol to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions was adopted in 1997 in Kyoto. In
accordance with the Kyoto Protocol, member states have been forced to
implement practical actions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
since 2005. In addition, various methods for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions from international airlines and shipping have been explored.
(UN, 1998)
for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping. In
the IMO, a corresponding group (CG) is periodically formed, and a study
on greenhouse gas emissions from ships was conducted. The first study
was conducted in 2009, and the results of the third study were
announced in 2014. According to the third report on the IMO GHG
study, GHG emissions from international shipping accounted for 2.1 %
of all global emissions as of 2012. (IMO, 2014a) Although GHG emis­
sions from international transport may appear to be less than global
emissions, as of 2014, GHG emissions from international shipping were
more than those from Germany, Canada, or South Korea. (Olivier et al.,
2017)
In addition, according to the results of the fourth IMO GHG study
released in 2020, the greenhouse gas emission from international ship­
ping has increased considerably. In 2018, GHG emissions decreased by
90 % compared to 2008 owing to global efforts, but GHG emissions from
international shipping account for 2.9 % of all global GHG emissions.
(IMO, 2020) Robust actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the

* Corresponding author at: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daehak-ro 291, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon,
34141, Republic of Korea.
E-mail address: djchang@kaist.ac.kr (D. Chang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103241
Received 4 August 2020; Received in revised form 27 November 2020; Accepted 15 December 2020
Available online 12 January 2021
1750-5836/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Nomenclature IMO International maritime organization

IPCC Intergovernmental panel on climate change
AE Auxiliary engine K2CO3 Potassium carbonate
BAU Business-as-usual LCC Life cycle cost
BSEF Brake specific exhaust gas flow LNG Liquefied natural gas
BSGC Brake specific gas consumption mcapture Mass flow rate of CO2 captured in OCCS
BSPC Brake specific pilot oil consumption MCR Maximum continuous rating
CAP Capacity of the container vessel MDEA Methyldiethanolamine
CCS Carbon capture and storage ME Maine engine
CF Factor representing the amount of CO2 generated per 1 ton MEA Monoethanolamine
of ship fuel MEPC Marine environment protection committee
CG Corresponding group mexhaust Mass flow rate of CO2 in exhaust gas
DWT Deadweight nm Nautical mile
EEDI Energy efficiency design index OCCS Onboard carbon capture and storage
EEOI Energy efficiency operational indicator P Engine power
EG–water Ethylene glycol–water PFD Process flow diagram
eNRTL Electrolyte non-random two-liquid model PZ Piperazine
EOS Equation of state RO Recognized organization
f correction factor SFC Specific fuel consumption rate
fCO2 CO2 emission factor tEaTM Exhaust temperature after turbo-charger
GA General arrangement TEU Twenty-foot equivalent unit
GHG Greenhouse gas UNFCCC United nations framework convention on climate
GT Gross tonnage convention
HEPT Height equivalent to a theoretical plate Vref Reference speed of a ship

Fig. 1. Overall GHG reduction pathway to achieve the initial IMO strategy (IMO, 2019e).

international shipping sector are required to curb global warming.
The initial strategy for reducing GHG emissions from international
shipping was announced in 2018 at the 72nd Meeting of the IMO Marine
Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), and efforts were initiated
to reduce GHG emissions. (IMO, 2018a) The initial strategy focused on
efforts to reduce CO2 emissions per transport work by at least 40 % and
70 % by 2030 and 2050, respectively, with 2008 levels as the baseline.
In addition, it was reported that the IMO will take action to reduce the
total annual emission from international shipping by 50 % by 2050 with
the 2008 levels as the baseline.
To achieve the initial IMO strategy, it is necessary to introduce
innovative technologies that can reduce GHG emissions from ships.
According to the results of the third IMO GHG study, when GHGs are
emitted through the Business-as-usual (BAU) pathway, which is defined
as “no adoption of new regulations that have an impact on energy effi­
ciency,” the total emissions from international shipping might increase
from 50 % to 250 % in 2050 compared to 2008. (IMO, 2014a) The fourth
IMO GHG study predicted that the emissions trend would decrease
owing to the recent replacement of old ships and the enlargement of
fleets, and the total emissions will be 90%–130% in 2050 compared to
2008. (IMO, 2020) In particular, owing to the impact of COVID-19, total
emissions from international shipping might drop sharply in the short
term. However, in the long term, it was expected that the total emissions
will be similar to the current emission level or will increase further. As
the GHG emissions from international shipping continue to increase, as
shown in Fig. 1, innovative technologies for ships as well as existing
regulatory levels and operational efficiency are required to bridge the
gap between the goals of the initial IMO strategy and the expected future
GHG emissions. To accelerate the introduction of innovative technolo­
gies, regulations on the energy efficiency of ships have been gradually
strengthened since the initial strategy was announced. At the 74th MEPC
meeting, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) Phase 3 was

2
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

implemented earlier than expected, and discussions related to the
implementation of EEDI phase 4 were initiated. (IMO, 2014a, 2019b,
2019c) To comply with the strengthened EEDI regulations, technologies
that reduce GHG emissions from ships should be developed.
An onboard carbon capture and storage (OCCS) system complies
with the EEDI regulations. The OCCS system selectively captures and
stores CO2 contained within exhaust gases emitted from the internal
combustion engines on board a ship. The stored CO2 is unloaded while
berthing at a port, and it can reduce GHGs emitted to the atmosphere
through various utilization processes, such as underground storage or
methanation. CO2 capture technology, which is the core technology of
the OCCS system, is already commercially available worldwide. CO2 had
been captured and stored in 19 locations worldwide since 2019. In
addition, carbon capture and storage (CCS) plants are being constructed
in four locations, and development has been undertaken at 28 locations.
(Global CCS Institute, 2019) In addition, CO2 capture systems have
already been applied in offshore sectors; Prelude FLNG has an acid gas
removal process that captures CO2 and H2S before liquefying natural gas
produced in a well. (Songhurst, 2016).
Previous researchers have suggested OCCS systems that use various
solvents. Zhou and Wang (2014) proposed a system for capturing CO2 in
the form of solid calcium carbonate using sodium hydroxide absorbent
and calcium hydroxide aqueous solution, and they experimentally
measured the absorption capacity. Based on the experimental results, a
case study was conducted on 157,500 deadweight (DWT) class bulk
carriers using high sulfur fuel oil as a fuel. The amount of absorbent
required to capture 20 % of the CO2 in the exhaust gas was estimated,
and an economic evaluation was conducted aiming at the IMO phase 2
requirement. Van Den Akker and Feenstra et al. (Van den Akker, 2017;
Feenstra et al., 2019) proposed an absorption process for CO2 capture
using monoethanolamine (MEA) and piperazine (PZ) as an absorbent,
and a system for liquefying and storing CO2 using cold energy from
liquefied natural gas (LNG) regasification. Based on the proposed pro­
cess, a case study was conducted on an 8000 DWT general cargo ship
using LNG and diesel as fuel. For capturing 60 % and 90 % of the CO2 in
exhaust gas, capture and liquefaction processes were simulated, and an
economic evaluation was conducted. Luo and Wang (2017) presented
the results of designing a CO2 absorption process using MEA for a 35,000
gross tonnage (GT) cargo ship. As CO2 is stored at a pressure of 100 bar,
the liquefaction process is designed to store liquid CO2 at room tem­
perature; hence, an additional CO2 liquefaction process is unnecessary.
The simulation and economic evaluation results were presented for both
cases, i.e., the case where 73 % of CO2 in the exhaust gas was captured
using only the waste heat from the main engine and the case where 90 %
of CO2 was captured using the additional gas turbine system. Erto et al.
(2018) proposed an adsorption process for CO2 capture using potassium
carbonate (K2CO3) supported onto porous alumina. The capture capac­
ity of the K2CO3-based adsorbent and the characteristic time of the
regeneration process were experimentally verified, and the design
results for the ro-ro passenger ship were presented. Fang et al. (2019a,
2019b) presented the results of estimating the optimal CO2 capture
system capacity on board according to the actual GHG emission scenario
based on the energy efficiency operational indicator (EEOI). Awoyomi
et al. (2019) proposed a process for capturing 90 % of the CO2 in exhaust
gas that used ammonia. In addition, the effect of the exhaust gas recir­
culation (EGR) system on the capture process was studied, and economic
evaluation results were presented. However, previous studies have not
considered EEDI regulations in designing an OCCS system. The current
guideline for calculating the attained EEDI provided by the IMO does not
reflect the OCCS system. To introduce an OCSS system, a new EEDI
estimating formula that reflects an OCCS system is required.
This study aims to propose a new factor to reflect the OCCS system in
the attained EEDI calculation formulae and to present a methodology for
designing the OCCS system considering the suggested factor. Using the
proposed methodology, a case study was conducted for a container ship.
Finally, the estimated results reveal that amount of CO2 that should be
captured in the OCCS system to satisfy the required EEDI for each phase.
2. Novel methodology for EEDI calculation
2.1. New factor for OCCS in the EEDI formula
According to Chapter 4 of ANNEX 6 in the International Convention
for the Prevention of Marine Pollution for Ships (MARPOL)guideline,
the attained EEDI of every international sailing ship with a gross tonnage
of 400 ton or above should be estimated. (IMO, 2011) The attained EEDI
is an index that represents the design efficiency of individual ships and,
more precisely, the amount of CO2 in grams generated from ships to
transport 1 ton of cargo per 1 nautical mile (nm). The attained EEDI
should be calculated based on the EEDI technical guidelines and verified
by the appropriate officials or recognized organizations (RO) during the
shipbuilding process. Eq. 1 is a simple expression of the attained EEDI
formula provided by the IMO. (IMO, 2018b) In the equation, P repre­
sents engine power in kW, ME indicates a main engine, and AE indicates
an auxiliary engine. The power of the main engine is determined by 75
% of the maximum continuous rating (MCR) for the installed engine, and
that of the auxiliary engine includes the power consumed by ship pro­
pulsion and accommodation. SFC represents the specific fuel consump­
tion rate of the installed engine in g/kWh. CF is an emission factor that
represents the amount of CO2 generated per ton of ship fuel in a ton of
CO2/ton fuel, and the value is suggested in the guideline. Capacity
represents a DWT or gross tonnage of a ship in tons, and Vref represents
the reference speed of the ship in knot. In addition, when a shaft motor is
installed as a measure to assist ship propulsion on the ship, the amount
of CO2 generated from the shaft motor is calculated using the power
take-in (PTI) term. If a device is installed, for example, a solar power,
wind power, or waste heat recovery system, which reduces further CO2
emissions during the voyage, the reduction amount is calculated using

Table 1
Required capture ratios in the reference case using the proposed equation.
Reference A Reference B
(Luo et al., 2017) (Feenstra et al., 2019)

Item Unit Case A-1 Case B-1 Case B-2

Ship type – Ro-ro cargo General cargo General cargo
Fuel type – Diesel Diesel LNG
Deadweight ton 12,500 8,000 8,000
Reference speed knots 21 13 13
Reference line value g/ton.nm 12.807 15.426 15.426
Required EEDI (70 % reduction) g/ton.nm 3.8422 4.628 4.628
Attained EEDI (w/o OCCS) g/ton.nm 29.068 11.921 10.490
Suggested fCO2 – 0.1, 0.27 0.1 ~ 0.4 0.1 ~ 0.4
Suggested capture ratio % 73, 90 60 ~ 90 60 ~ 90
Max. required fCO2 – 0.074 0.214 0.320
Min. required capture ratio % 92.6 78.6 68.0

3
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Fig. 2. Methodology for estimating the attained EEDI for ships considering OCCS.

the EFFiciency (EFF) term. Finally, the correction of the ship design
efficiency according to the ship type is estimated using the correction
factors (f and fj) provided in the guideline. mcapture
fCO2 = 1 − (3)
mexhaust

∏
n ∑nME
( fj )( PME(i) × CFME(i) × SFCME(i) ) + (PAE × CFAE × SFCAE ) + PTI + EFF
(1)
j=1 i=1
EEDI (gCO2/ton.nm) =
f × Capacity × Vref

The proposed factor contributes to determining the appropriate

This study uses fCO2 to reflect the captured CO2 through the OCCS
system in the attained EEDI formula (Eq. 2). fCO2 can be calculated using
Eq. 3, where mcapture represents the mass flow rate of CO2 captured in
OCCS and mexhaust represents the mass flow rate of CO2 in the exhaust
gas. The CO2 flow captured in the OCCS system (mcapture) divided by the
CO2 flow in the exhaust gas (mexhaust) is the same as the capture ratio of
the OCCS system. As the EEDI calculation equation aims to calculate the
amount of CO2 emitted to the atmosphere from a ship during operation,
the capture ratio is subtracted from 1 in Eq. 3 to calculate the ratio of
CO2 not captured by the OCCS system. Thus, fCO2 is the ratio of CO2
emitted to the atmosphere, and the fCO2 value cannot exceed 1. By
defining fCO2 as Eq. 3, the CFME value multiplied by fCO2 in the attained
EEDI formula represents the amount of CO2 effectively emitted to an
atmosphere per ton of fuel consumed by the main engines.
design criteria for the OCCS system to satisfy the EEDI regulation.
Table 1 shows the result of calculating the minimum required capture
ratio of the OCCS system to satisfy the initial IMO strategy (70 %
reduction rate in 2050) based on the proposed equation for the cases
presented in the previous studies. Reference A presents the design results
of the OCCS system for a ro-ro cargo ship. (Luo and Wang, 2017) In this
study, the capture process was designed to capture up to 90 % of CO2
within the exhaust gas. Because the ship should capture at least 92.6 %
of the CO2 to satisfy the targets of the initial IMO strategy, additional
efforts are required to reduce emissions, such as lowering the reference
speed or changing the ship fuel from diesel to LNG. Reference B presents
the design results of the OCCS system for a general cargo ship. (Feenstra
et al., 2019) In this study, the OCCS system was designed to capture 60
%–90 % of CO2 within exhaust gases. Since capturing only about 79 %

∏
n ∑nME
( fj )( PME(i) × (CFME(i) × f CO2(i) ) × SFCME(i) ) + (PAE × CFAE × SFCAE ) + PTI + EFF
(2)
j=1 i=1
EEDI =
f × Capacity × Vref

4
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Table 2 and 68 % of CO2 in the case of diesel and LNG fuel, respectively, would
Proposed EEDI phase 3 requirements for a container ship (IMO, 2019a, 2019d). suffice for the initial IMO strategy, increasing the capture ratio to 90 % is
Ship type Starting year DWT Reduction rate possibly excessive.
10,000 DWT–14,999 DWT 15 %–30 %
15,000 DWT–39,999 DWT 30 % 2.2. Attained EEDI estimation method considering OCCS
40,000 DWT–79,999 DWT 35 %
Container ship 2022
80,000 DWT–119,999 DWT 40 % Additional aspects must be considered to estimate the attained EEDI
120,000 DWT–199,999 DWT 45 % of ships with installed OCCS systems. First, additional energy is required
Above 200,000 DWT 50 %
after installation of the OCCS system. Pumps and compressors are
needed for CO2 capture and liquefaction systems, and electric energy is
required to operate rotating machines. So that, additional axillary en­
Table 3 gine power is required. Second, the cargo space is affected by the newly
Ship specifications of WSD80 3800 (Wartsila, 2016). installed equipment. Fig. 2 shows the methodology for estimating the
Item Value Item Value attained EEDI of OCCS-equipped ships considering the above aspects.
Type Container Endurance (LNG) 7,750 nm First, the attained EEDI of the ship is estimated with fCO2 of 1 without
Feeder considering an OCCS. If the attained EEDI meets the required EEDI, the
DWT 53,200 DWT Maine engine, 18,200 kW estimation process is terminated. Otherwise, the fCO2 value for satisfying
MCR
the required EEDI is computed. Through this process, the amount of CO2
Capacity 3,840 TEU Gen. sets 3 × 1,600 + 1 × 2,770
kW
to be captured can be determined. The CO2 capture process and CO2
Reefer 674 FEU Max. speed 19.2 knots liquefaction process are designed using the required CO2 capture rate
capacity based on the fCO2 value. The ship is redesigned considering the required
Main engine 2-stroke EEDI Comply with phase 3 space of the ship by computing the equipment size and weight through
Wartsila acc. to MEPC.203 (62)
the process design. Once the ship design is completed, the attained EEDI
1 × 18,200 kW
W6 × 72DF of the ship considering the fCO2 value is recalculated. If the attained EEDI
considering the OCCS system does not satisfy the required EEDI, an
iterative process of adjusting the fCO2 value as above is triggered.

3. Case study

Based on the suggested factor and methodology, an EEDI estimation

considering OCCS was performed for the container feeder vessel. There
are two reasons for selecting a container feeder as a target ship for the
case study. The first is that the age of the feeders is comparably old, and
their replacement cycle is synced with the EEDI strengthening cycle.
Since 2018, 86 % of Panamax-class container feeders operating world­
wide are over 5 years old. (Banchero costa, 2018) Given that the average
age of ships is 30 years, feeder orders are expected to increase rather
than the ultra-large container ship orders after 2030, when EEDI regu­
lations are expected to become more stringent. In addition, as most of
the feeders were built during phase 0 or phase 1 regulation, it is expected
that innovative technology for reducing GHG emissions from ships
should be applied to meet the EEDI regulations, which will be
strengthened in the future.
Second, the EEDI reduction rate for the container ship was increased
at the 74th MEPC meeting. As a result of the recent increasing trend in
the size of container ships, 71 % of ships currently in operation already
satisfy the EEDI phase 3 regulations for 2025, even if they do not
Fig. 3. GHG emission reduction scenario for the case study.
introduce an innovative technology. (Transport and environment, 2018)
Accordingly, a proposal to adjust the EEDI reduction rate according to
the DWT of container ships and to expedite the timing of implementa­
tion from 2025 to 2022 was made at the 74th MEPC meeting; the details
are shown in Table 2. (IMO, 2019a, 2019d) As the capacity of the
Panamax containership is approximately 50,000 DWT, technology for
reducing GHG emission is urgently needed to meet the new regulations.

Fig. 4. Current status of EEDI regulation for container ships.

5
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Fig. 5. Detailed procedure for the case study.

Table 4
Technical data of the target engine from GTD.
Power BSPC BSGC BSEF tEaTm
o
% kW g/kWh kg/hr g/kWh kg/hr kg/kWh kg/hr C
100 18,200 0.8 14.56 142.8 2598 8.07 146,874 224
90 16,380 0.9 14.742 141.4 2316 8.49 139,066 213
80 14,560 0.9 13.104 140.9 2051 8.92 129,875 206
75 13,650 1 13.65 140.8 1921 9.13 124,624 205
60 10,920 1.1 12.012 141.7 1547 9.61 104,941 209
50 9,100 1.3 11.83 143.1 1302 10 91,000 214

3.1. Specifications of the target ship

Table 5
Composition of scavenge air and exhaust gas.
The 3,800 TEU container feeder designed by Wartsila was selected as
the target ship, and the specifications of the feeder vessel are summarized Scavenge air Exhaust gas

in Table 3. (Wartsila, 2016) Wartsila has already designed a ship that Component Mass fraction Mass fraction Partial pressure (kPa)
meets EEDI phase 3 requirements for 2025, but the DWT of the ship is 53, Nitrogen 0.7507 0.7393 81.3
200 DWT, which must meet the strengthened EEDI phase 3 regulations. Oxygen 0.2300 0.1660 16.0
An additional benefit is that the cold energy of LNG can also be utilized in Argon 0.0128 0.0126 1.0
the CO2 liquefaction process because of a dual fuel engine using LNG. Water 0.0059 0.0391 6.8
Carbon dioxide 0.0005 0.0430 3.0

3.2. Reduction scenario
Considering the trend of EEDI regulations and recently strengthened
EEDI phase 3 regulations, a reduction scenario was established, as
shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 4 summarizes the current EEDI regulations for
container ships. (Transport and environment, 2018) Thereafter, once
the EEDI phase was strengthened, an additional 10 % reduction was
generally required until the 74th MEPC meeting. (IMO, 2011, 2014b)
Furthermore, according to the initial strategy announced at the 72nd
MEPC meeting, the IMO pursued efforts to reduce CO2 emissions per
transport work by at least 40 % in 2030 and up to 70 % in 2050.
Reflecting the current status, three reduction scenarios were selected.
Case 1 is a scenario that requires an additional 10 % reduction compared
to the strengthened EEDI phase 3 to achieve a 45 % reduction rate from
2030. Case 2 is a scenario that requires an additional 10 % reduction
compared to Case 1 to achieve a 55 % reduction rate from 2040. Finally,
case 3 aims to achieve the level of the initial IMO strategy with a 70 %
reduction rate.
3.3. Procedure for estimating the attained EEDI in the case study
The detailed procedure used to estimate the attained EEDI consid­
ering the OCCS system design in this case study is shown in Fig. 5. Before
designing the OCCS system, it was checked whether the existing ship’s
attained EEDI was satisfied, and if not, the required fCO2 value was

6
S. Lee et al.
Fig. 6. Process flow diagram of the CO2 capture process.
estimated. To reduce the iteration process, as the attained EEDI value is
higher owing to additional power and cargo loss, the fCO2 value was set
to be 5%–10 % larger than the required fCO2 value. According to the
determined fCO2 value, a simulation of the CO2 capture process and
liquefaction process was conducted, and the size of the process equip­
ment was estimated. Thereafter, referring to the general arrangement
provided in the reference, additional space for installing the OCCS sys­
tem was reserved, and cargo loss was estimated. After the design was
completed, the attained EEDI of the designed ship was modified, and it
was confirmed whether the corresponding EEDI value satisfied the
required EEDI for each case. In the case study, it was assumed that the
particulars of the target ship, such as the draft or shape, did not change
accordingly.
3.4. Process description and simulation methodology (Step 2− 2)
Before designing the CO2 capture process, the composition of the
exhaust gas was derived using the engine data sheet of the target vessel.
The model of the dual-fuel engine mounted on the target ship was
WinGD W6 × 72DF, and technical data of the engine can be obtained
with the General Technical Data (GTD) software. Considering the target
MCR of the vessel (18,200 kW), the technical data of the engine were
obtained, as shown in Table 4. In the table, BSPC represents brake-
specific pilot oil consumption, BSGC represents brake specific gas con­
sumption, BSEF represents brake specific exhaust gas flow, and tEaTM
indicates exhaust temperature after turbo-charger. The attained EEDI
was estimated based on 75 % of the power of the MCR in the EEDI
calculation formula. The composition of the fuel used for the engine,
LNG, and pilot fuel were determined to meet the lower calorific values of
the fuels prescribed by the IMO, 48,500 kJ/kg and 42,700 kJ/kg. (Van
den Akker, 2017; Yan et al., 2014) The composition of exhaust gas ob­
tained from the engine data considering scavenge air composition and
fuel consumption rate are presented in Table 5. To reduce the load of the
capture process, only a part of the exhaust gas passed through to the
capture process, and the rest was discharged to the atmosphere.
7
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241
The chemical absorption process was used to capture CO2. Adsorp­
tion and membrane methods may be alternative methods for the CO2
capture process. However, the absorption process is the most commonly
used method in the gas industry. (Kim and Lee, 2017) Activated meth­
yldiethanolamine (MDEA), which includes MDEA as the base compo­
nent and PZ as the activator, was selected as a solvent for the CO2
capture process. Activated MDEA absorbents are already used in many
gas industries. (Alvis et al., 2012) When CO2 is captured using only
MDEA, the energy required to regenerate the absorbent solution is
reduced, but a sufficient absorption column height is required owing to
the slow reaction rate for capturing CO2. However, in the case of a ship,
it is advantageous to design the column height as low as possible because
of various limitations. Considering these aspects, a PZ activator is
required. The components the amine solution for CO2 capture were
selected by considering the partial pressure of CO2 in the exhaust gas
and to ensure that the highest CO2 solubility could be achieved. When
the partial pressure of CO2 was 3 kPa, as shown in Table 4, the
composition of the activated MDEA solution with the highest solubility
was 22 wt% MDEA with 8 wt% PZ, which was used for the simulation.
(Dash and Bandyopadhyay, 2016).
The process flow diagram (PFD) of the CO2 capture process is shown
in Fig. 6. The pressure of the exhaust gas discharged from the engine
increases as the gas passes through a blower owing to the pressure drop
the gas experiences in the absorber column before entering the absorber
column. The exhaust gas that has passed through the blower selectively
captures only CO2 in the absorber column, and the remaining compo­
nents are vented. The rich solvent that captures CO2 in the absorber
column moves to the stripper column for regeneration. Before CO2
moves to the stripper column, it exchanges heat with the lean solvent
from the reboiler at the lean-rich solvent heat exchanger. Thus, the rich
solvent does not have to be heated, thereby reducing energy costs. When
CO2 is removed from the reboiler of the stripper column, it is discharged
in a gaseous state to the upper part of the column, and the regenerated
lean solvent returns to the absorber column to capture CO2.
Aspen plus™ software was used to simulate the CO2 capture process,
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Fig. 7. Process flow diagram of the CO2 liquefaction process.

and the electrolyte non-random two-liquid model (eNRTL) was used for
Table 6
the equation of state (EOS). The CO2 capture mechanism of activated
Equipment sizing methods for the case study.
MDEA is expressed in Eq.s 4–11. The equilibrium constants and the
eNRTL parameters, such as the Henry’s law constant and dielectric Equipment Type Note

constant of each component, were obtained from the literature. (Dash Column Packed column Packing type: Structure packing
and Bandyopadhyay, 2016; Mudhasakul et al., 2013; Posey and Absorber: SulzerTM MELLAPAK
250Y
Rochelle, 1997).
Stripper: SulzerTM MELLAPAK
2H2 O ↔ K1 H3 O+ + OH− (4) 350Y
Vessel (KO drum) Vertical cylinder vessel
Water dryer Packed column Adsorption process
CO2 + 2H2 O ↔ K2
H3 O +
+ HCO−3 (5) Packing material: activated-
Alumina
HCO−3 + H2 O ↔ K3 H3 O+ + CO2−3 (6) Heat exchanger TEMA type heat Reboiler: Kettle type (AKU)
exchanger Others: Shell and tube (AFU, BEM,
etc.)
PZH+ + H2 O ↔ K4 PZ + H3 O+ (7) Pump Centrifugal
Compressor, Centrifugal
PZ + CO2 + H2 O ↔ K5 PZCOO− + H3 O+ (8) Blower
CO2 storage tank Prismatic pressure
H+ PZCOO− + H2 O ↔ K6 PZCOO− + H3 O+ (9) vessel

PZCOO− + CO2 + H2 O ↔ K7 PZ(COO− )2 + H2 O (10)
MDEA + H2 O ↔ K8 +
MDEAH + OH −
(11)
It is advantageous to store the captured CO2 within a ship as a liquid
phase with a high density considering the space efficiency. There are
two main ways to liquefy CO2: using an open system in which CO2 acts as
a refrigerant during compression and expansion of CO2 or a closed
system that liquefies using external refrigerants. According to Seo et al.
(2015), closed cycles are more economically efficient than open cycles
with respect to the life cycle cost (LCC). In this study, the process of
liquefying CO2 was designed using a closed cycle with ammonia. In
addition, the optimal conditions for CO2 liquefaction were selected
considering the cost of the storage tank. The higher the storage pressure
of CO2, the higher the saturation temperature of CO2. Therefore, it may
seem economical to use a higher storage pressure because, under such
conditions, insulation in the storage tank becomes unnecessary.
However, as the cost and weight of the storage tank that can withstand
high pressure increases, and the density of liquid CO2 increases, a
greater volume of gas needs to be stored. According to the literature,
considering these advantages and disadvantages, it is suggested that a
liquefaction pressure of 15 bar is optimal in terms of the LCC of the
process and storage tank. (Seo et al., 2016) In this study, the captured
CO2 was compressed to 15 bar and designed to liquefy and store.
The PFD of the CO2 liquefaction process is shown in Fig. 7. The
captured CO2 was compressed to 15 bar while passing through the
compressor. Because the captured CO2 was in a water-saturated state,
knock-out drums were needed to drain the condensed water in the
middle of the compression process. Compressed CO2 removes water
through a water dryer. If there is more than 50 ppm of water in the CO2
stream, solid hydrate and ice may form in the liquefied CO2, which can
cause pipeline plugging. (Aspelund and Jordal, 2007; Lee et al., 2012) As
the water concentration could not be reduced to below 1800 ppmw,

8
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Table 7 then exchanged with EG–water to reduce the temperature to − 11 ◦ C. It

Ship specifications for estimating the attained EEDI. then expanded through the Joule–Thomson valve and was conveyed to
Item Unit Value the heat exchanger where it liquefied CO2.
Size TEU 3,840
DWT (scantling) DWT 53,200 3.5. Equipment sizing (Step 2–3)
MCRME kW 18,200
PME (75% MCR) kW 13,650 To ensure the correct size of the equipment required for CO2 capture
PAE kW 2,770 and liquefaction, the methods presented in Table 6 were used. MELLPAK
Reference speed knots 17
of Sulzer™, a renowned structure packing material, was selected as the
packing material in the column. The height of the packing section was
estimated by considering the height equivalent to a theoretical plate
Table 8 (HETP), and the disengagement and sump section was designed ac­
Estimated attained EEDI and required EEDI for the target ship. cording to Agbonghae et al. (2014) and Mamudu et al. (2019). The
Attained EEDI diameter of the column was determined when the flooding factor in the
Attained EEDI (Diesel mode) 13.6430 column did not exceed 80 %. (Willson et al., 2019) In the case of the
Attained EEDI (Gas mode) 11.2605 water dryer, activated alumina with the highest water adsorption ca­
Required EEDI pacity was selected when the relative humidity approached 100 %.
Phase 3 (2025, 30 %) 13.6864
(Ribeiro et al., 2008) For the heat exchanger, the Aspen EDR software
Phase 3 (2023, 35 %) 12.7088
Case 1 (2030, 45 %) 10.7536
was used to size the shell and tube type for the heat exchanger, and the
Case 2 (2040, 55 %) 8.7984 reboiler was sized with the kettle type heat exchanger. In the case of the
Case 3 (2050, 70 %) 5.8656 pumps and compressors, models that could adjust the volumetric flow
rate and discharge pressure were selected by referring to the catalogue
provided by each manufacturer. For the CO2 storage tank, a prismatic
regardless of the amount of the drained water during the compression
pressure vessel was selected rather than cylindrical tanks to increase the
process, a dryer was added to remove H2O in the CO2 stream prior to
space efficiency. (Lee et al., 2017)
liquefaction. The CO2 stream was liquefied by exchanging heat with
ammonia, and the liquefied CO2 was stored in a storage tank. The CO2
4. Results
liquefaction process was designed to utilize the cold energy generated
from the LNG regasification process. Generally, LNG is regasified using
4.1. Attained EEDI of the target ship without OCCS (Step 1)
ethylene glycol–water (EG–water) in a ship’s LNG regasification appa­
ratus. (Choi and Park, 2019) Although it is more efficient to exchange
Before designing the OCCS, it was checked whether the attained
heat between ammonia and CO2 directly, the system is designed to ex­
EEDI value of the target ship satisfied the strengthened EEDI phase 3
change heat between cold EG–water and ammonia to recover the cold
regulation. Table 7 lists the ship specifications required to calculate the
energy of LNG by enabling the CO2 liquefaction process while main­
attained EEDI. The attained EEDI values of the diesel and gas modes, and
taining the existing regasification process in operation, which is better
the required EEDI values to be satisfied are summarized in Table 8 and
for ship operation.
Fig. 8. In both diesel and gas modes, the EEDI phase 3 determined at the
The CO2 liquefaction process was also simulated using the Aspen
62nd MEPC meeting was found to be satisfactory, while the diesel mode
Plus program. The EOS of the CO2–water mixture uses the Red­
did not satisfy the strengthened EEDI phase 3 regulation. Based on the
lich–Kwong–Soave equation, and the NRTL Equation for EG–water and
estimated EEDI values, it is assumed that the target ship operates only
ammonia. (Li and Yan, 2009; Pla-Franco et al., 2013) The storage
with LNG after 2022.
pressure and temperature of CO2 was − 30 ◦ C at 15 bar as mentioned
above. Ammonia was compressed to 15 bar through a compressor and

Fig. 8. Attained EEDI and required EEDI for the target ship.

9
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Table 9
Estimated fCO2 values for the target ship.
Original Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
(2030, 45 %) (2040, 55 %) (2050, 70 %)

fCO2 1.0 0.942 0.717 0.380

w/o OCCS
Capture ratio (mcapture/mexhaust) 0% 5.8 % 28.3 % 62.0 %
w/ OCCS fCO2 1.0 0.878 0.652 0.317
(Final) Capture ratio (mcapture/mexhaust) 0% 12.2 % 34.8 % 68.3 %

Table 10
Simulation results for the CO2 capture and liquefaction process.
1. Simulation results for the CO2 capture process

Item Unit Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

(2030, 45 %) (2040, 55 %) (2050, 70 %)

Exhaust gas flow rate kg/hr 16,281 46,518 93,035

Lean solvent flow rate kg/hr 16,000 51,000 103,000
L/G ration in the absorber mol/mol 1.14 1.26 1.27
Captured CO2 flow rate kg/hr 650 1862 3651
Capture ratio in absorber % 92.8 93.1 91.3
Energy consumption in the stripper GJ/ton CO2 3.27 3.39 3.30
Additional power kWh/ton CO2 54.7 52.9 54.9

2. Simulation results for the CO2liquefaction process

Item Unit Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
(2030, 45 %) (2040, 55 %) (2050, 70 %)
Ammonia flow rate kg/hr 175.3 502.4 985.0
Additional power kWh/ton CO2 98.0 98.0 98.0

4.2. Required fCO2 value for the target ship (Steps 2− 1 and 3) liquefaction process according to the determined fCO2 value. In the CO2
capture process, the CO2 absorption rate of the absorber column was
Table 9 shows the fCO2 value estimated before adopting the OCCS for initially set to 90 %. Because additional CO2 was to be captured during
each reduction scenario, and the fCO2 value finally determined after the the iterative process, an average of 92 % of the CO2 was expected to be
iterative process. Considering the additional electrical power for the captured in the absorber column. It was confirmed that the energy
rotating machines and cargo losses due to the OCCS system, additional consumed in the stripper column was close to the value suggested by
CO2 capture was required during the iteration compared to the initial Zhao et al. (2017), assuming that the heat energy required for the heat
capture ratio. The results shown in the subsequent sections are obtained exchanger was the waste heat of the main engine. Among the power
with the final determined fCO2 value. sources making up the total additional electric power required for the
capture process, the power consumed by the blower was highest, with an
average of 54 kW h per ton of CO2. In the CO2 liquefaction process, the
4.3. Simulation and sizing results (Steps 2− 2–2− 4) cold energy recovered from the LNG regasification process is sufficient
to liquefy CO2 in all cases. The additional energy required in the
Table 10 presents the simulation results of the CO2 capture and liquefaction process is consumed by the CO2 and ammonia compressors.
Both equipment consumed a similar level of power, with an average of
Table 11 98 kW h for liquefying a ton of CO2. A notable aspect is that the lique­
Sizing results of the column and storage tank. faction process consumes more power compared to the capture process.
Equipment Item Unit Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Table 11 shows the sizing results of the column equipment in the CO2
(2030, (2040, (2050, capture process and CO2 storage tank. Columns and storage tanks play a
45 %) 55 %) 70 %) dominant role in cargo space loss compared to other equipment. The
Diameter 1.3 2.2 3.1 total height of the columns should not be higher than that of the deck
Packing house, and the CO2 storage tank takes up the most space because it must
Absorber m 7 7 7
height
be able to store all the captured CO2 during ship operation. Because the
Total height 12.5 13 13.5
Packing packing height of the absorber column is affected more by the concen­
0.52 0.86 1.2
Column diameter tration of CO2 in the exhaust gas and the CO2 capture rate than the flow
Sump
1.3 2.2 3.1 rate of the lean solvent, the packing heights in all cases are similar.
Stripper diameter m However, as the diameter is affected by the volumetric flow rate of the
Packing
height
3.25 3.25 3.25 gas flow, the diameter increases as the CO2 capture rate increases. The
Total height 9 9.5 10 diameter of the sump in the stripper column was designed to be larger
Endurance than the diameter of the packing section. The liquid flow rate in the
nm 7,750
distance stripper column is similar to that in the absorber column, but the
CO2 storage tank Required
m3 297 852 1,668 diameter of the packing section of the stripper column is smaller than
volume
Total volume m 3
420 960 2,000 that of the absorber column. To maintain sufficient residence time in the

10
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

sump, the diameter of the sump is designed to be the same as the tank was determined by considering the dimensions of 40 feet of a
diameter of the absorber column. standard container cargo to be optimally mounted within the ship.
The volume of the CO2 storage tank was estimated based on the
endurance distance, which is the maximum distance possibly achieved
4.4. Cargo loss estimation (Steps 2− 5–2− 6)
using LNG as fuel (Wartsila, 2016), and the amount of CO2 captured. The
total storage tank volume was set to have a 15 % margin to the required
The cargo loss of the target ship was estimated considering the OCCS
capacity of the storage tank. In addition, the dimension of the storage
size estimation results. The equipment for the capture and liquefaction

Fig. 9. Approximate general arrangement for Case 1: (left) Stern view and (right) top view.

Fig. 10. Approximate general arrangement for Case 2: (left) Stern view and (right) top view.

Fig. 11. Approximate general arrangement for Case 3: (left) stern view and (right) top view.

11
S. Lee et al. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241

Table 12
Cargo loss and DWT change of the target ship.
Unit Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
(2030, 45 %) (2040, 55 %) (2050, 70 %)

Cargo loss TEU 110 154 202

(-2.9 %) (-4.1 %) (-5.3 %)
DWT change DWT 51,660 51,044 50,372

process and storage tank were placed on the stern side of the ship,
considering the exhaust gas vent line installed behind the deck house
and the trim of the ship. The space required for the system was assumed
to be aligned with the ship centerline to secure roll stability of the ship.
The approximate arrangement design results for each case are shown in
Figs. 9–11 referring to the general arrangement (GA). (Wartsila, 2016)
However, if utility-related equipment is additionally installed, it can
have a greater impact on the cargo volume and DWT of the ship. The
cargo loss and DWT change due to the OCCS system are shown in
Table 12. The DWT change considering cargo losses was estimated by
Eq. 12, where CAP indicates the total container capacity of a ship and
DWT represents the deadweight of a ship. (Abramowski et al., 2018)
DWT = 1, 317.745 + 0.00224 × (ln(CAP) )8
4.5. Adjusted EEDI value of target ship considering OCCS (Step 3)
Table 13 shows the attained EEDI value estimated by considering the
finally determined fCO2 value, additionally required power, and DWT
change. Fig. 12 graphically shows the actual EEDI reduction and capture
ratio achieved considering the OCCS system. The adjusted attained EEDI
values satisfied the required EEDI value in all cases. Compared to the
CO2 capture ratio calculated without considering the OCCS system, the
final design result revealed that additional CO2 capture is required in the
OCCS system to satisfy the required EEDI. Owing to the installation of
the OCCS system and sources of the additional energy required for CO2
capture and storage, the cargo volume decreased. In addition, as the
DWT of the ship decreased, the actual reduction ratio of the attained
EEDI was lower than that of the initial estimation, but more CO2 was
captured in the OCCS system than with the absolute EEDI reduction ratio
in all cases. Therefore, the final results reveal that, in the process of
introducing the OCCS system in a ship, an iterative process should be
used to determine an appropriate CO2 capture ratio in the OCCS system
considering the attained EEDI and the required EEDI of a ship.
(12)
5. Conclusions
This study proposed an EEDI calculation methodology that considers
the OCCS system to satisfy the upcoming GHG emission regulations for
ships. Although technological, operational, and propulsion technologies
using alternative fuels have been proposed in response to strengthened
regulations, further developments are required for actual ships in terms

Table 13
Adjusted EEDI value of the target ship considering OCCS.
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
(2030, 45 %) (2040, 55 %) (2050, 70 %)

Initial stage fCO2 0.942 0.717 0.380

(w/o OCCS) Capture ratio (mcapture/mexhaust) 5.8 % 28.3 % 62.0 %
Final stage fCO2 0.878 0.652 0.317
(w/ OCCS) Capture ratio (mcapture/mexhaust) 12.2 % 34.8 % 68.3 %
Required EEDI 10.817 8.872 5.930
Attained EEDI 10.600 (-2.0 %) 8.840 (-0.4 %) 5.925 (-0.1 %)

Fig. 12. Actual EEDI reduction and capture ratio of the target ship considering OCCS.

12
S. Lee et al.
of technological maturity and carbon neutrality. Hence, carbon capture
technology, which has already been commercialized and applied to
offshore plants, is a more suitable option for bridging the gap until more
advanced technologies for fuel and propulsion systems are developed.
However, the EEDI regulations currently proposed by the IMO do not
reflect the introduction of the OCCS system. To solve this problem, a new
factor (fCO2) and an estimation methodology considering the OCCS
system are proposed. Using the suggested methodology, a case study was
conducted on containerships that were heavily affected by the
strengthened regulations, and the corresponding CO2 capture rate to
meet the required EEDI was estimated. The reduction target of the
container feeder was presented as three (3) cases up to a reduction rate
of 70 % for 2050, referring to the initial IMO strategy. The absorption
process using activated MDEA as the solvent was selected for the CO2
capture process, and the ammonia liquefaction process using cold en­
ergy from the LNG regasification process was proposed for CO2 lique­
faction. After the process simulation, the required space and cargo loss
in the ship due to the OCCS installation was estimated through equip­
ment sizing. The attained EEDIs of the target ship were estimated by
considering the design results, and the result of each case met the
required EEDI. The results revealed that the carbon capture ratio from
the exhaust gas was higher than the EEDI reduction ratio to satisfy the
required EEDI of the target ship.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Sanghyuk Lee: Conceptualization, Investigation, Formal analysis,
Software, Data curation, Project administration, Writing - original draft,
Writing - review & editing. Seunghyeon Yoo: Investigation, Method­
ology, Validation, Visualization, Writing - review & editing. Hyunjun
Park: Formal analysis, Software, Validation, Writing - review & editing.
Junkeon Ahn: Investigation, Validation, Writing - review & editing.
Daejun Chang: Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisi­
tion, Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant from Development of Eval­
uation Model for Hydrogen Offshore Supply Chain and Test Technolo­
gies for Hydrogen Equipment.
References
Abramowski, T., Cepowski, T., Zvolenský, P., 2018. Determination of regression formulas
for key design characteristics of container ships at preliminary design stage. New
Trends in Prod. Eng. 1 (1), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.2478/ntpe-2018-0031.
Agbonghae, E.O., Hughes, K.J., Ingham, D.B., Ma, L., Pourkashanian, M., 2014. Optimal
process design of commercial-scale amine-based CO2 capture plants. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 53 (38), 14815–14829. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie5023767.
Alvis, R.S., Hatcher, N.A., Weiland, R.H., 2012. CO2 removal from syngas using
piperazine-activated MDEA and potassium dimethyl glycinate. Nitrogen+ Syngas
2012.
Aspelund, A., Jordal, K., 2007. Gas conditioning—the interface between CO2 capture
and transport. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 1 (3), 343–354. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00040-0.
Awoyomi, A., Patchigolla, K., Anthony, E.J., 2019. CO2/SO2 emission reduction in CO2
shipping infrastructure. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 88, 57–70. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.05.011.
Banchero costa, 2018. Containership Market Outlook [Online]. Available: http://www.
bancosta.com/report/september2018/RED_2018-03_Containership_outlook.pdf
[Accessed: 10 November 2020]..
Choi, J., Park, E.Y., 2019. Comparative study on fuel gas supply systems for LNG
bunkering using carbon dioxide and glycol water. J. of Marine Sci. and Eng. 7 (6),
184. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7060184.
13
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241
Dash, S.K., Bandyopadhyay, S.S., 2016. Studies on the effect of addition of piperazine
and sulfolane into aqueous solution of N-methyldiethanolamine for CO2 capture and
VLE modelling using eNRTL Equation. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 44, 227–237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.11.007.
Erto, A., Balsamo, M., Paduano, L.P., Lancia, A., Di Natale, F., 2018. Utilization of
alumina-supported K2CO3 as CO2-selective sorbent: a promising strategy to mitigate
the carbon footprint of the maritime sector. J. of CO2 Utilization 24, 139–148.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2017.12.014.
Fang, S., Xu, Y., Li, Z., 2019a. Joint generation and demand-side management for
shipboard carbon capture and storage system. In: 2019 IEEE/IAS 55th Ind. and
Commercial Power Sys. Tech. Conf. (I&CPS). IEEE, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/
10.1109/ICPS.2019.8733353.
Fang, S., Xu, Y., Li, Z., Ding, Z., Liu, L., Wang, H., 2019b. Optimal sizing of shipboard
carbon capture system for maritime greenhouse emission control. IEEE Transactions
on Ind. App. 55 (6), 5543–5553. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2019.2934088.
Feenstra, M., Monteiro, J., van den Akker, J.T., Abu-Zahra, M.R., Gilling, E.,
Goetheer, E., 2019. Ship-based carbon capture onboard of diesel or LNG-fuelled
ships. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 85, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijggc.2019.03.008.
Global CCS Institute, 2019. Global Status of Ccs 2019 Targeting Climate Change. Global
CCS Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Houghton, J.T., Jenkins, G.J., Ephraums, J.J., 1990. Climate change: the IPCC scientific
assessment. American Scientist;(United States) 80 (6).
IMO, 2011. Resolution MEPC.203(62); Amendments to the Annex of the Protocol of 1997
to Amend the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships,
1973, As Modified by the Protocol of 1978 Relating Thereto.
IMO, 2014a. Greenhouse Gas Study. Executive Summary and Final Report, London.
IMO, 2014b. Resolution MEPC.251(66); Amendments to the Annex of the Protocol of
1997 to Amend the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From
Ships, 1973, As Modified by the Protocol of 1978 Relating Thereto.
IMO, 2018a. Resolution MEPC.304(72); Initial Imo Strategy on Reduction of Ghg
Emissions From Ships.
IMO, 2018b. Resoluation MEPC.308(73); 2018 Guidelines on the Method of Calculation
of the Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (eedi) for New Ships.
IMO, 2019a. MEPC 74/5/24; Comments on the Final Report of the Correspondence
Group on EEDI Review Beyond Phase 2 (MEPC 74/5/2).
IMO, 2019b. MEPC 74/5/2; Final Report of the Correspondence Group on EEDI Review
Beyond Phase 2.
IMO, 2019c. MEPC 74/5/16; Proposal to Refine the Terms of Reference for the
Correspondence Group on EEDI Review Beyond Phase 2.
IMO, 2019d. MEPC 74/5/12; Phase 3 EEDI Standards for Containerships.
IMO, 2019e. IMO Action to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions From International
Shipping [Online]. Available: https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopi
cs/Pages/Reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-ships.aspx [Accessed: 10
November 2020]..
IMO, 2020. MEPC 75/7/15; Fourth IMO GHG Study 2020 – Final Report.
Kim, H., Lee, K.S., 2017. Energy analysis of an absorption-based CO2 capture process.
Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 56, 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijggc.2016.12.002.
Lee, U., Yang, S., Jeong, Y.S., Lim, Y., Lee, C.S., Han, C., 2012. Carbon dioxide
liquefaction process for ship transportation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51 (46),
15122–15131. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie300431z.
Lee, J., Choi, Y., Jo, C., Chang, D., 2017. Design of a prismatic pressure vessel: an
engineering solution for non-stiffened-type vessels. Ocean Eng. 142, 639–649.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.07.039.
Li, H., Yan, J., 2009. Evaluating cubic Equations of state for calculation of vapor–liquid
equilibrium of CO2 and CO2-mixtures for CO2 capture and storage processes. Acs
Appl. Energy Mater. 86 (6), 826–836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2008.05.018.
Luo, X., Wang, M., 2017. Study of solvent-based carbon capture for cargo ships through
process modelling and simulation. Acs Appl. Energy Mater. 195, 402–413. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.03.027.
Mamudu, A.O., Okonkwo, E., Okocha, S.I., Okoro, E.E., Elehinafe, F., Igwilo, K.C., 2019.
The design of an integrated crude oil distillation column with submerged
combustion technology. The Open Chemical Eng. J. 13, 7–22. https://doi.org/
10.2174/1874123101912010007.
Mudhasakul, S., Ku, H.M., Douglas, P.L., 2013. A simulation model of a CO2 absorption
process with methyldiethanolamine solvent and piperazine as an activator. Int. J. of
Greenh. Gas Control 15, 134–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.01.023.
Olivier, J.G., Schure, K.M., Peters, J.A.H.W., 2017. Trends in global CO2 and total
greenhouse gas emissions. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 5.
Pla-Franco, J., Lladosa, E., Loras, S., Montón, J.B., 2013. Phase equilibria for the ternary
systems ethanol, water+ ethylene glycol or+ glycerol at 101.3 kPa. Fluid Phase
Equilib. 341, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fluid.2012.12.022.
Posey, M.L., Rochelle, G.T., 1997. A thermodynamic model of methyldiethanolamine−
CO2− H2S− water. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36 (9), 3944–3953. https://doi.org/
10.1021/ie970140q.
Ribeiro, A.M., Sauer, T.P., Grande, C.A., Moreira, R.F., Loureiro, J.M., Rodrigues, A.E.,
2008. Adsorption equilibrium and kinetics of water vapor on different adsorbents.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47 (18), 7019–7026. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie701732x.
Seo, Y.K., You, H.L., Lee, S.H., Huh, C., Chang, D.J., 2015. Evaluation of CO2liquefaction
processes for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) in terms of life cycle cost
(LCC) considering availability. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control 35, 1–12. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.006.
S. Lee et al.
Seo, Y.K., Huh, C., Lee, S.I., Chang, D.J., 2016. Comparison of CO2 liquefaction pressures
for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) chain. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas Control
52, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.06.011.
Songhurst, B., 2016. Floating Liquefaction (FLNG): Potential for Wider Deployment.
Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
Transport & environment, 2018. Statistical Analysis of the Energy Efficiency
Performance (EEDI) of New Ships [Online]. Available: https://www.transporten
vironment.org/publications/statistical-analysis-energy-efficiency-performance-eedi-
new-ships [Accessed: 10 November 2020]..
UN, 1998. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change.
Van den Akker, J., 2017. Carbon Capture Onboard LNG-fueled Vessels: a Feasibility
Study.
Wartsila, 2016. WSD80 3800 3800TEU Container Feeder DATASHEET [Online].
Available: https://www.wartsila.com/marine/build/ship-design/merchant/
container-feeders—ship-design/wsd80-3800-df [Accessed: 10 November 2020]..
14
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 105 (2021) 103241
Willson, P., Lychnos, G., Clements, A., Michailos, S., Font-Palma, C., Diego, M.E.,
Pourkashanian, M., Howe, J., 2019. Evaluation of the performance and economic
viability of a novel low temperature carbon capture process. Int. J. of Greenh. Gas
Control 86, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.04.001.
Yan, K.L., Sun, C.Y., Chen, J., Chen, L.T., Shen, D.J., Liu, B., Jia, M.L., Niu, M., Lv, Y.N.,
Li, N., Song, Z.Y., Niu, S.S., Chen, G.J., 2014. Flow characteristics and rheological
properties of natural gas hydrate slurry in the presence of anti-agglomerant in a flow
loop apparatus. Chem. Eng. Sci. 106, 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ces.2013.11.015.
Zhao, B., Liu, F., Cui, Z., Liu, C., Yue, H., Tang, S., Liu, Y., Lu, H., Liang, B., 2017.
Enhancing the energetic efficiency of MDEA/PZ-based CO2 capture technology for a
650 MW power plant: process improvement. Acs Appl. Energy Mater. 185, 362–375.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.009.
Zhou, P., Wang, H., 2014. Carbon capture and storage—solidification and storage of
carbon dioxide captured on ships. Ocean Eng. 91, 172–180. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.09.006.