In Focus LNG - GL Group

02 I 2013 

LNG 

Straight ahead to safe LNG bunker supply

LNG – driving change in shipping 

5% 

4% 

3% 

2% 

1% 

0% 

Sulphur content limits in bunker fuels 

Global 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

Local 

2019 

2020

Introduction 

Future-proof solutions 

for greener shipping 

Stringent international regulations on emissions are forcing the shipping 

industry to rethink its fuelling options. The IMO has introduced 

emission controls, which will increasingly affect international shipping 

over the next decade. The introduction of ECAs in European, US and 

Canadian territorial waters means that shipowners must begin to consider 

alternatives to traditional heavy fuel oil. 

WWe at GL are supporting 

the industry at all levels to make 

ships more efficient and environmentally 

friendly. A key topic in 

this quest is liquefied natural gas 

(LNG) as an alternative to conventional 

fuels. Compared to oil, natural 

gas has an important advantage: 

It combines efficiency with a lower 

environmental impact. 

There are four aspects that, taken 

together, make LNG as ship fuel one 

of the most promising new technologies: 

1. Using LNG as ship fuel can reduce 

sulphur oxide (SO x ) emissions, which 

are created using fuel with a high 

sulphur content, by approximately 

90% to 95%. This reduction will 

become mandatory within the socalled 

Emission Control Areas from 

2015 on. A similar reduction will be 

enforced for worldwide shipping 

from 2020 on, pending a review at 

IMO which may move the introduction 

to 2025. 

2. Reduction of nitrogen oxide (NO x ) 

emissions down to IMO Tier III limits, 

applicable in ECAs from 2016, is possible 

for pure gas engines and fourstroke 

dual fuel engines which are 

typically used onboard ships engaged 

in short sea and coastal shipping. 

3. Due to the lower carbon content 

of LNG, a 20% to 25% reduction 

of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions 

is possible. The actual reduction depends 

on engine type and possible 

measures to reduce the partial slip 

of unused methane. 

4. The current LNG price in Europe 

and the USA suggests that LNG could 

be offered at a price comparable to 

heavy fuel oil (HFO). This means that 

LNG will certainly look commercially 

attractive against the low-sulphur 

marine gas oil (MGO), which will be 

required to be used within the ECAs 

if no other technical measures are implemented 

to reduce SO x emissions. 

GL has been involved in many national 

and international research projects 

investigating different aspects of 

LNG as ship fuel. Our experts are 

participating in the development 

of the IMO’s IGF Code for gas as 

ship fuel. We act as an advisor to 

the German Ministry of Transport, 

Building and Urban Development, 

and we have already put our in-depth 

knowledge to the test on ships now 

in service. Furthermore, we are also 

contributing to the development of 

the ISO Technical Specification on 

LNG bunkering procedures. 

The following pages are designed to 

give you an overview of regulatory 

changes, developments in the supply 

chain, trends in research, and practical 

implementation of LNG. 

02 I 2013 03

10 

06 

SECA AREA 

22 

30

Overview of existing and planned LNG 

production and terminal sites 

Existing LNG production plants 

Planned LNG production plants 

Proposed LNG production plants 

Contents 

Existing small-scale export/bunkering facilities 

Proposed small-scale export/bunkering facilities 

Existing LNG terminals 

Planned and decided LNG terminals 

Planned and not decided LNG terminals 

contents 

Introduction 

Future-proof solutions for greener shipping 

INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS – CURRENT STATUS 

08 … IGC Code – safe LNG transport 

08 … IGF Code – safety for ships using gas or low-flashpoint fuels 

09 … ISO Technical Specification – safe LNG bunkering 

09 … Reputable GL guidelines and rules 

09 … Emission Control Areas 

LNG BUNKERING – SAFE AND RELIABLE SUPPLY 

12 … Supply infrastructure improving 

13 … Main bunkering options 

14 … Focus on safety issues 

15 … BunGas – ship-to-ship bunkering solution 

16 ... EMSA study – LNG bunkering in ports 

19 … TENT-T – EU-wide LNG supply project 

20 … BMVBS study – bunkering of LNG in German ports 

LNG-FUELLED SHIPS – RESEARCH FINDINGS 

24 … GasPax – LNG for passenger ships 

25 … MariTIM – LNG passenger vessel 

26 … GL/MAN study – costs and benefits of LNG 

SUCCESS STORIES – A NEW ERA 

32 … Projects exploring LNG as ship fuel 

33 … “Bit Viking” – world’s first LNG-fuelled tanker 

34 … “STREAM” – LNG-powered container vessel 

02 I 2013 05

INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS – 

CURRENT STATUS 

Forefront 

of change 

There will be a growing number of innovative LNGfuelled 

vessels over the next years. The reason: 

new environmental regulations, which are forcing shipowners 

to either change propulsion fuel or invest 

in costly exhaust-gas cleaning systems. And this is 

in addition to the already high bunkering prices, 

which will most likely continue to rise significantly 

in future. Due to the strict IMO requirements for 

reducing pollutants to sea and air, as of 2015 LNGpowered 

ships will experience a true boom.

Germanischer Lloyd 

Safety first 

Before LNG can be used as a mainstream ship fuel, transported to refuelling facilities or bunkered – 

whether ship to ship or land to ship – a number of issues concerning safety and the environment 

have to be thoroughly considered first. As LNG becomes the fuel of choice for shipping, safe 

and environmentally sound regulatory solutions are becoming more and more important. 

IGC Code – safe 

LNG transport 

The International Code for the Construction 

and Equipment of Ships 

Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC 

Code) has specifically been laid down 

for ensuring the safety of gas carriers, 

including LNG. 

The purpose of the IGC Code is to 

provide an international standard 

for the safe transport by sea in bulk 

of liquefied gases and certain other 

substances. It prescribes the design 

and construction standards of ships 

involved in such transport as well as 

the equipment they should carry so 

as to minimise risk to the ship, its 

crew and the environment. 

According to the IGC Code, only LNG 

carriers are allowed to utilise LNG 

boil-off gas as fuel in the machinery 

space. Since 2000, a few LNG-fuelled 

vessels, which are not covered by the 

IGC Code, have come into service 

with the permission of their national 

administration. This means that these 

vessels are only allowed to sail in 

national waters or need permission 

from each port state where the ship 

wants to berth and operate. 

IGF Code – safety 

for ships using 

gas or low-flashpoint 

fuels 

Due to lack of international safety requirements 

for gas as fuel for non-LNG 

carriers, the development of an International 

Code for Gas as Ship Fuel 

(IGF Code) has been proposed to the 

IMO’s Marine Safety Committee. 

The goal of the IGF Code is to provide 

an international standard for ships 

that employ engine installations 

powered by natural gas or other 

low-flashpoint fuels. At present, the 

IMO sub-committee Bulk and Liquid 

Gases (BLG) is working on the development 

of the IGF Code, which is 

planned to come into force in 2016. 

When it is approved, 

the IGF Code will: 

•• 

provide safety measures for ships 

using gases as ship fuel, including 

liquefied gas tankers 

•• 

address other fuels, too, with low 

flashpoints such as methanol, 

ethanol, butane, hydrogen and 

propane relevant for future attachments 

•• 

cover the energy conversion systems 

of relevance (low and high 

pressure ICE, gas turbines, boilers, 

fuel cells) 

•• 

address issues not already covered 

by SOLAS and therefore serve as 

an addition to SOLAS 

•• 

supersede the interim guidelines 

and Chapter 16 of the IGC Code 

in future 

•• 

address requirements for bunker 

stations 

However, until the IGF Code is 

approved, the Interim Guideline 

MSC.285(86) specifies criteria for 

the arrangement and installation of 

LNG-fuelled machinery – with the 

aim of achieving a level of integrity 

in terms of safety, reliability and dependability 

equivalent to conventional 

oil-fuelled machinery. Subject 

to further requirements, ships built 

according to this interim guideline 

will be allowed to continue to operate 

after the IGF Code comes into 

effect. There is, therefore, no reason 

to hesitate building a gas-fuelled ship 

out of concern that interim guidelines 

may be overruled. 

08 02 I 2013

ISO Technical 

Specification – safe 

LNG bunkering 

To close the gap regarding the bunkering 

of LNG within the regulatory 

framework, a Norwegian initiative led 

to the establishment of the Working 

Group 10 (WG 10), part of the ISO’s 

Technical Committee 67 (TC 67). 

The objective of the ISO TC 67 WG 

10 is the development of international 

guidelines for the bunkering 

of gas-fuelled vessels, with a focus 

on requirements for the LNG transfer 

system, the personnel involved 

and the related risk of the entire LNG 

bunkering process. The scope of the 

standard will cover shore-to-ship, 

truck-to-ship and ship-to-ship 

transfer. 

The members of the WG 10 decided 

to develop a technical specification 

as a high-level document to be finalised 

by 2014. As experience with 

the bunkering of LNG increases, the 

WG 10 will in future be able to 

develop an international standard 

for the procedure. 

Reputable GL guidelines 

and rules 

Germanischer Lloyd (GL) has been extensively 

involved in the development of next-generation 

gas-fuelled ships and has therefore set up its 

own set of guidelines. 

The GL Guideline for the Use of Gas as Fuel for Ships 

(VI-3-1) has been in force since 1 May 2010. 

It incorporates: 

•• 

the MSC.285(86) in full 

•• 

guidance and recommendations on natural 

gas-fuelled engines 

•• 

criteria for the design arrangements and installation 

of propulsion and auxiliary machinery powered by 

natural gas 

Notes on the rules pertaining to the GL Guideline for 

the Use of Gas as Fuel for Ships (VI-3-1) were subsequently 

published in 2011. 

GL rules for LNG carriers include: 

•• 

GL Rules I-1-6 – Liquefied Gas Tankers 

•• 

GL Rules IV-6-5 – Design Requirements for LNG 

Valves, Safety Valves, QC/DC Couplings 

•• 

GL Rules VI-3-1 – Machinery Installations 

•• 

GL Rules VI-7-8 – Type Approvals 

Emission control areas 

A step-by-step introduction of restrictions will limit 

emissions of nitrogen and sulphur oxides (NO X and SO X ), 

unburnt hydrocarbons, particulate matter, as well as 

greenhouse gases. Regional Sulphur Emission Control 

Areas (SECAs) such as the North Sea and the Baltic, 

or Emission Control Areas (ECAs) already have 

stricter requirements regarding emissions. 

From 2015, the maximum sulphur content 

of fuel oil will be limited to 0.1% for all 

vessels operating in SECAs/ECAs, and 

from 2016 NO X emissions for newbuildings 

operating in ECAs will 

also be limited. 

Ocean-going vessels typically 

spend 5% to 6% of their 

operating time in ECAs. But 

this figure is growing considerably 

on a number of shipping 

routes, especially now 

that new requirements for ship 

fuel quality are in force along 

Canadian and US coastlines. In 

addition, a number of other sea areas are 

expected to introduce similar restrictions on emissions 

before 2020, the effective date of global sulphur 

limits on heavy fuel oil. 

02 I 2013 09

LNG BUNKERING – 

SAFE AND RELIABLE SUPPLY 

Availability 

is key 

The supply chain for LNG as ship fuel and bunkering 

remain issues that are currently being thoroughly 

researched and documented. LNG suppliers are slowly 

becoming convinced that this technology will take off, 

and potential LNG users are discovering that LNG will be 

made available at an attractive price and at convenient 

locations. 

SECA AREA

LNG Infrastructure 

in Northern Europe 

Overview of existing and planned LNG 

production and terminal sites 

Existing LNG production plants 

Planned LNG production plants 

Proposed LNG production plants 

Existing small-scale export/bunkering facilities 

Proposed small-scale export/bunkering facilities 

Existing LNG terminals 

Planned and decided LNG terminals 

Planned and not decided LNG terminals

Source: Bomin Linde AG 

Supply infrastructure improving 

At the end of 2012, there was as yet no full-scale supply chain for LNG as ship fuel, 

with the exception of Norwegian and Swedish coastal waters. 

However, the infrastructure 

that Norway has in place today will 

become more and more commonly 

available – especially as of 2015, 

when more LNG vessels, which depend 

on the availability of adequate 

refuelling stations in ports, will 

enter service. 

Current developments show 

that access to LNG bunkering 

is developing. 

A number of LNG ports offer or plan 

to offer LNG facilities, particularly in 

Northern Europe: 

•• 

In 2011, a new LNG terminal by 

Linde was officially opened in 

Nynäshamn, south of Stockholm. 

•• 

Vopak teamed up with Swedegas 

to develop the LNG terminal in 

Gothenborg. 

•• 

Vopak and Gasunie are developing 

an LNG Break Bulk facility in the 

Port of Rotterdam, as a spin-off 

from Gate terminal. 

•• 

The Netherlands is implementing 

four different projects along the 

Rhine to provide LNG refuelling 

stations for inland vessels. 

•• 

Gasnor will soon be making LNG 

available at the German port of 

Brunsbüttel. Initially, the company 

will supply LNG by truck and then 

possibly build a small terminal in 

the future, provided that demand 

develops accordingly. 

•• 

GL is currently working with the 

Hamburg Port Authority to explore 

options for offering LNG as ship 

fuel in Hamburg. 

•• 

An LNG bunker facility is planned 

for Singapore at the end of 2014 

to serve small-scale distribution 

in Asia. 

•• 

bremenports has announced that 

an LNG bunker station will be built 

in Bremerhaven in cooperation 

with Bomin Linde. 

12 02 I 2013


Main bunkering options 

Apart from specific LNG ports, which will only be feasible in the long term, re-export from 

existing large-scale LNG terminals or LNG bunker vessels are two viable options for 

feeding the LNG supply chain today. 

Small-scale LNG carriers 

(between approx. 10,000 m 3 and 

20,000 m 3 loading capacity), built 

for regional supply, will be the link 

between liquefaction plants or 

re-export terminals and dedicated 

bunkering locations. A number of 

small LNG carriers are already in 

service, and further newbuildings 

are under construction. 

The last step of supplying LNG to the 

end user will require LNG bunker 

vessels, which are still to be built. 

This involves the direct bunkering of 

gas-fuelled ships, using gas carriers 

or special barges for refuelling, provided 

they are properly equipped and 

are able to carry enough gas for large 

ships. At the moment, bunkering 

takes place at specially equipped gas 

terminals during dedicated refuelling 

timeslots for the limited number of 

vessels operating on LNG as fuel, and 

the vessels are taken out of service 

for bunkering. However, several bunker 

vessel designs for LNG feeder 

carriers, in accordance with the 

IGC Code requirements, have been 

published and can be built today. 

Eventually, there will be an LNG bunkering 

procedure that follows the 

same pattern as that of heavy fuel 

oil – customers will expect a similarly 

convenient bunkering, including an 

acceptable time frame and guarantees 

for the safety of crew and passengers. 

It is the upcoming challenge to develop 

an LNG bunkering system that 

covers all organisational, safety and 

technical aspects and requirements. 

Supply chain 

options for LNG 

as ship fuel 

local lng 

production plant 

small 

lng tanker 

lng 

import & 

export 

terminal 

local lng 

storage 

lng bunker vessel 

lng end user 

... Future streamlined supply option 

02 I 2013 13


Focus on safety issues 

“Throughout the LNG bunkering chain, each element should be carefully designed, 

and has dedicated safety and operational procedures executed by trained personnel.” 

TThis is the ultimate aim of all 

studies, research and development 

projects for the bunkering of LNG. 

Protecting the life of crew, the environment 

and assets is of paramount 

importance. Therefore, Germanischer 

Lloyd has also taken a close look at 

the potential risks associated with 

bunkering gas. 

Bunkering of LNG presents a number 

of safety issues due to the cryogenic 

character of LNG. At –163°C, it is 

capable of crippling steel structures 

if spilled, after which it will rapidly 

evaporate. Furthermore, this evaporation 

would produce a highly inflammable 

cloud of gas, which any nearby 

sources of ignition could cause to 

catch fire. The main focus of current 

research is, therefore, on measures 

to reduce and ultimately avoid any 

LNG spillage during bunkering. This 

includes technical measures as well 

as procedures and training for the 

personnel involved. 

One example of research that Germanischer 

Lloyd is currently undertaking 

to examine safety issues while 

bunkering LNG is the Clean North 

Sea Shipping (CNSS) project. Within 

this project, GL is analysing LNG bunkering 

processes in port and nautical 

risks for safer and more cost-efficient 

shipping in the northern waters. 

CNSS is an EU Commission-funded 

joint project for an LNG bunker 

showcase. Two main risk areas for 

LNG leakage have been identified 

and further examined: during bunkering 

and collision. Preliminary results 

of studies by GL experts have 

already provided helpful risk control 

options for carriers. These results, 

such as using defined bunkering 

areas and QD/CD and ESD couplings 

to prevent collisions and leakages, 

take the industry a step closer to 

realising cost-efficient LNG solutions 

for the future of shipping in the 

North Sea area and beyond. 

The next steps for Germanischer 

Lloyd will include measuring the 

fluctuations in the amount of 

emission levels. 

14 02 I 2013


BunGas – ship-to-ship 

bunkering solution 

To date, standards for the bunkering and the interface between land-based 

LNG supply and consumers at different locations have not been finalised. 

TTo find a solution which can compete with fuel 

oil bunkering regarding time, location and procedure, 

the BunGas project was initiated by GL in 2011 – in 

conjunction with project partners: Meyer Shipyard, 

MAN Diesel, DNV, AIDA Cruises and Linde. 

BunGas will serve as the baseline for 

safe and competitive gas refuelling 

in European ports, applicable to all 

types of gas-fuelled ships. 

So far, standards for the bunkering and the interface 

between land-based LNG supply and consumers at different 

locations have not been finalised. BunGas had 

the objective to develop technical systems which can 

compete with fuel oil bunkering regarding time, location 

and procedure. The project serves as the baseline 

for safe and competitive gas refuelling in European 

ports in such a way that it can be applied to all types 

of gas-fuelled ships. 

On the basis of these requirements, the basic design 

of a bunker vessel with a suitable transfer system will 

be developed. One major challenge of bunker system 

design is safe LNG transfer within normal port limits 

and during normal harbour operation. Up until now, 

liquefied gas transfer has been limited to gas terminals 

for gas carriers or to special locations and dedicated 

refuelling time slots for the limited number of vessels 

operating with LNG as fuel. 

The BunGas project is designed to provide the overall 

technical basis for the design and operation of safe 

bunker stations onboard gas-fuelled commercial vessels 

and of the related bunker supply vessels. 

02 I 2013 15


EMSA study – LNG 

bunkering in ports 

Because the use of LNG and research on gas fuel is growing so quickly, there is now the need to 

gain an overview of regulations and standards currently in place or in development and see where 

improvement is required. 

The European Maritime Safety 

Agency (EMSA) “Study on standards 

and rules for bunkering of gas-fuelled 

ships” focuses on an in-depth analysis 

of existing gaps in the regulatory 

framework for LNG bunkering as well 

as the different guidelines currently 

under development. 

The main objectives of 

this study are to: 

•• 

provide a detailed analysis of the 

current applicable standards and 

the ongoing regulatory development 

on LNG bunkering 

•• 

produce a draft set of a possible 

common EU-wide regulatory instrument 

in this field to assist the 

Commission in assessing whether 

the adoption of such standards 

are justified 

Port considerations 

When it comes to bunkering LNG as 

ship fuel in a port or harbour environment, 

there are several critical aspects 

to consider. However, one main consideration 

stands out above all: What 

to do in the event of a collision by 

which the integrity of the ship’s LNG 

compartment is compromised? What 

is the probability of such an event, 

its consequences and the impact on 

adjoining port areas? 

These questions make clear: a risk 

management plan is absolutely necessary. 

Measures to mitigate consequences, 

local fire-fighting security 

and emergency response solutions 

all need to be addressed carefully 

and thoroughly. Restrictions to waterways 

and safety zones are two additional 

measures that need further 

consideration. 

Requirements for ship 

connections and safety 

To avoid major risk situations during 

the bunkering of LNG, not only do 

the ship’s connections need to be 

thoroughly secured, communication 

between all parties involved is also 

a significant aspect. 

Three safety aspects for 

ship-to-ship bunkering: 

•• 

Mooring equipment – the vessels 

should be well secured and any 

forces which could act on the transfer 

system should be prevented 

•• 

Process technical connections – 

fast and simple connectors make 

bunkering easier for the crew, 

leading to a reduction in the 

number of leakages 

16 02 I 2013


•• 

Communication – monitoring systems 

(e.g. gas sensors and tank 

level monitoring pressure alarms) 

to avoid any leakage and detect 

any leakages 

In the event of an emergency, additional 

measures need to be taken. 

An emergency shutdown (ESD) 

system should be integrated into the 

connection between both ships and 

either ship should be able to activate 

it; emergency release couplings 

(ERCs), emergency release and automatic 

closing are necessary should 

forces act on the transfer system. 

Protective measures for the bunker 

station to counteract LNG leakage 

(e.g. drip tray with temperature monitoring) 

and secondary explosion 

protection, or reduction of ignition 

sources, in areas where LNG leakages 

could be expected likewise need to 

be considered. 

Requirements for crew 

and personnel 

The most advanced technology and 

strictest regulations are only as good 

as the people operating and adhering 

to them. Thus, crew and personnel 

need to be thoroughly trained to 

handle LNG as ship fuel. 

The general hazards of bunkering 

LNG, personal protective equipment 

(PPE) and emergency procedures 

need to be discussed at length and 

tested. 

The Standards of Training, Certification 

and Watchkeeping (STCW) 

should serve as the regulation, 

based on existing training requirements 

for gas carrier crews, with 

model courses to be developed. 

02 I 2013 17


18 02 I 2013


TEN-T – EU-wide LNG supply project 

Sea transport in general is an international undertaking, with various countries and waters 

around the globe playing their part. So particularly when it comes to LNG, it is essential that 

all stakeholders of the key regions are involved in supply solutions. 

For this very reason, the European 

Union established the trans- 

European transport network (TEN-T). 

This efficient group aims to break 

down the bottlenecks in the EU’s 

transport infrastructure to boost 

the future sustainability of the 

region’s intermodal networks. It 

has evolved from Europe 2020, 

the EU’s growth strategy for its 

Member States. 

In recent years, TEN-T has focused 

on supporting projects relating to 

LNG bunkering and supply within 

Europe. Just recently, it was announced 

that TEN-T will contribute 

1.2 million euros to conduct a study 

aimed at identifying and addressing 

potential barriers to the construction 

and operation of LNG-fuelled 

vessels. This is just another step 

towards realising full-scale LNG 

for the maritime industry. 

Due to its low cost compared to 

conventional ship fuels and its 

environmentally friendly nature, LNG 

is seen by the European Union as 

an attractive ship fuel of the future. 

Thus, the project will examine the 

technical requirements, regulations 

and environmental operation permits 

that need to be met to make 

the switch to LNG. Specific aspects 

related to the manufacturing, conversion, 

certification and operational 

phases of an LNG-fuelled ship will 

be analysed and the information exchanged 

with other ongoing LNGrelated 

projects as well as with EMSA. 

By involving shipowners, cargo 

owners, LNG suppliers, ports and 

marine equipment manufacturers, 

the project will: 

•• 

prepare for the LNG certification 

process for vessels and operators 

•• 

harmonise land and sea-based 

regulations and bunkering 

requirements 

•• 

select and demonstrate environmentally 

efficient solutions for 

vessels 

•• 

identify logistic solutions for 

energy efficiency 

•• 

develop safe and efficient technologies 

for LNG bunkering and 

fuelled vessels 

•• 

assess safety issues 

•• 

coordinate with other initiatives 

and exchange results 

The project is scheduled for completion 

at the end of 2014. The results 

gained will contribute toward 

further advancing LNG-related projects 

involving Germanischer Lloyd. 

02 I 2013 19


BMVBS study – BUNKERING OF LNG 

IN GERMAN PORTS 

Anticipating a growing global demand for natural gas, the German government sees LNG as 

having a promising future. Yet the infrastructure needed for LNG bunkering of ships in German 

sea and inland ports using special LNG bunkering vessels needs to be explored further. 

IIn mid-2012, GL completed a 

feasibility study commissioned by the 

German Federal Ministry of Transport, 

Building and Urban Development 

(BMVBS). 

The study investigates the existing 

LNG infrastructure in Northern Europe 

and Germany, proposes an LNG 

bunkering logistics concept, and 

examines a specific ship-to-ship bunkering 

interface design to assess the 

risks. Finally the study presents a draft 

safety concept, which accounts for 

legislative and competency considerations, 

to provide the responsible 

authorities with a basis for further 

action. 

To enable LNG bunkering in German 

ports, the country needs to build a 

supply infrastructure. One option 

would be to adopt the Norwegian 

method of distributing LNG via small- 

scale LNG carriers, with short-term 

LNG storage provided by suitable 

in-port terminals. The study includes 

an in-port LNG infrastructure concept 

using Hamburg as a reference port, 

and accounting for the relevant legal 

conditions. As a general conclusion, 

the authorities will face considerable 

challenges finding appropriate inport 

locations for a short-term storage 

terminal, the standby berth for 

the bunkering vessel and additional 

areas for maintaining and commissioning 

gas-handling systems. 

The study provides a technical concept 

for ship-to-ship bunkering of 

LNG based on an LNG bunkering 

ship designed by TGE. The concept 

reveals the basic engineering challenges 

inherent in bunkering liquefied 

gases. One of the core assumptions 

was that the system should be designed 

to allow simultaneous bunker- 

ing and cargo loading/unloading. 

An evaluation of the technical feasibility 

of LNG bunkering showed 

that the required technology as well 

as comprehensive LNG handling experience 

are already available today. 

An analysis of hazards involved in 

refuelling an LNG-powered ship from 

a bunkering vessel revealed a number 

of potential errors that could increase 

the associated risk. These mainly 

include inadequate communication 

between the two ships, personnel 

falling over board and LNG leakage 

while bunkering. A ship collision 

might cause the refuelling hose to 

break or a tank to suffer damage. 

In the event of hose breakage, the 

amount of leakage could be minimised 

effectively by a fast-acting 

safety chain that would keep the 

hazardous effects within controllable 

limits. 

20 02 I 2013


With the results of the study in mind, 

Germanischer Lloyd is now currently 

contributing to the development of 

a draft for a European directive by 

which inland waterway vessels would 

be permitted to load LNG, as well 

as a standard for the use of LNG as 

ship fuel. GL estimates that the drafts 

for both the directive and the standard 

will not be completed until after 

2015. Until then, there is discussion 

concerning handling facilities and 

bunker storage in Lübeck and Rostock, 

as well as a bunkering option for 

ships in Brunsbüttel, near Hamburg. 

In addition to that, Bomin Linde 

GmbH has announced the erection 

of small bunker storage facilities in 

Bremerhaven and Hamburg, to be 

completed in 2014. 

02 I 2013 21

LNG-FUELLED SHIPS – 

RESEARCH FINDINGS 

Research 

paves the way 

GL has taken a strong stance in support of LNG 

technology. “We believe that we can be a driving 

force in this area, and have become involved in a number 

of activities, such as research, the development 

of rules and design concepts, and some initial commercial 

applications,” says Dr Pierre C. Sames, Senior 

Vice President, Strategic Research and Development 

for Germanischer Lloyd. “It is very satisfying for us 

to contribute to this development, to truly inspire 

people to use the technology and to engage with 

us to implement it.”


GasPax – LNG for passenger ships 

LNG is not just a promising ship fuel of the future for large container vessels and similar. 

Passenger ships, too, can benefit from gas fuel. Thus, further research regarding LNG 

and its safety for these ship types is needed. 

As a response, the GasPax 

project was initiated by Meyer Werft, 

Lürssen, TGE Marine Gas Engineering 

and GL in 2009, and is funded by the 

German government. Over the course 

of four years, GasPax assessed the 

potential of gas as ship fuel for three 

specific ship types: a mega yacht, a 

cruise ship and a RoPax ferry. 

In all three of the ships, LNG is used 

as fuel for dual-fuel engines. These 

engines can be used with LNG or 

diesel to afford greater flexibility and 

redundancy. GL collaborated to develop 

Hazard Identification (HAZID) 

studies, which are used to test the 

three concepts developed for their 

viability and safety. Project teams 

identified potential failures and risks 

associated with the three different 

ship designs via Failure Mode and 

Effects Analyses (FMEA). 

Although passenger ferries are not 

yet subject to the incoming Energy 

Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) regulations, 

LNG enjoyed a significant advantage 

over fuel oil – for instance, 

the RoPax ferry attained an EEDI of 

some 26%. The extra costs of an LNG 

installation had a payback time of 

one-and-a-half to two years, and the 

reduced emissions to air saved consid- 

erable external costs compared to 

using conventional fuels – an important 

factor in an increasingly stringent 

regulatory environment. 

The cruise industry is also likely to 

move towards LNG, with newbuildings 

planned for the near future. With 

a North American Emission Control 

Area (ECA), which entered into force 

last year, LNG offers cruise lines a 

cleaner fuel both in protected marine 

environments and during port visits. 

The same can be said for the mega 

yacht. A dual-fuel system gives yacht 

owners the same flexibility and useability 

as a conventional-fuel design. 

24 02 I 2013


The Type C tanks in all of the GasPax 

project’s designs offered the important 

of being inherently safe under 

the IGC Code. The chosen Type C 

tanks have a design pressure of 8–10 

bar and could easily be able to hold 

3,500 m 3 of LNG or more. 

Most existing LNG-fuelled vessels 

typically use highly efficient vacuuminsulated 

tanks operating at 6–8 bar 

and with a typical design pressure 

of 10 bar. This is a potential solution 

for tanks up to 1,000 m 3 . 

In late 2012, Germanischer Lloyd 

presented the partners of the GasPax 

project – Flensburger Schiffbau-Gesellschaft, 

Lürssen, Meyer Werft, and 

TGE Marine Gas Engineering – with 

Approval-in-Principle Certificates, 

recognising the technical 

feasibility of the 

designs. The 

awarding 

of the 

certificates 

showed once 

again that there 

are market-ready designs available 

for owners to take the next step and 

move to LNG. 

W 

MariTIM – LNG passenger vessel 

Due to its large number of sea-going ships, the northwest area of Europe – mainly 

the Netherlands and Germany – is ideal for LNG. However, the infrastructure and 

legal framework for this area needs further exploration. 

Within the context of the German–Dutch cooperation 

project MariTIM, which is being coordinated by 

MARIKO in cooperation with the TechnologieCentrum 

Noord-Nederland (TCNN), a feasibility study is being 

worked on for conversion of the “MS Ostfriesland” ferry. 

Apart from the technical feasibility, the infrastructure and 

legal conditions for use and bunkering of LNG are being 

examined. The activities are taking place in close collaboration 

with the Dutch partners, as the topic of LNG has 

been a subject of intensive debate in the Netherlands for 

some time now. 

The aims of the MariTIM LNG Passenger Vessel project are: 

•• 

Protection of ecologically sensitive wetlands by establishing 

a sustainable marine propulsion technology 

•• 

Reinforcement of competitiveness of the passenger 

shipping industry in the German–Dutch border area 

•• 

Examination of the technical and economic feasibility 

of an LNG–electric propulsion system in passenger 

shipping 

• • Innovation leadership with regard to the development 

of LNG–electric passenger shipping 

02 I 2013 25


GL/MAN study – costs and 

benefits of LNG 

As LNG is gaining more attention, shipowners interested in LNG as ship fuel are facing a number 

of questions regarding the costs and possible benefits of using such technology. 

Therefore, in 2011, GL and 

MAN carried out a more systematic 

joint study to thoroughly assess the 

costs and benefits of LNG as ship 

fuel for container vessels. It strives 

to answer shipowners questions regarding 

whether exhaust gas treatment 

systems could be the preferred 

technical solution. At the same time, 

increasing ship efficiency with advanced 

waste heat recovery systems 

is becoming feasible. This suite of 

technologies is the focus of the 

GL/MAN joint study on container 

vessel power generation systems. 

Approach 

The study assumes costs for key technologies 

when applied to five differently 

sized container vessels and 

predicts their benefits in comparison 

to a reference vessel. The reference 

vessel uses marine fuel oil as required 

by existing and upcoming regulations 

depending on the time and location 

of its operation i.e. the reference 

vessel uses MGO when inside an ECA 

by 2015 or within EU ports. Outside 

an ECA, HFO is used and a lowsulphur 

heavy fuel oil (LSHFO) with 

max. 0.5% sulphur content by 2020. 

Costs for implementing the technologies 

are compared with expected 

benefits which are driven by fuel cost 

differences. The model assumes that 

the fuel with the lowest cost is always 

used if a choice is possible. Space 

required by the technologies is taken 

into account by reducing the benefit. 

26 02 I 2013


payback (months) 

84 

72 

60 

48 

36 

24 

12 

0 

Payback for LNG system (starting in 2015) 

• 2,500 TEU • 4,600 TEU • 8,500 TEU • 14,000 TEU • 18,000 TEU 

Larger ECA shares unlikely for larger vessels 

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 

Share of operation inside ECA 


144 

132 

120 

108 

96 

84 

72 

60 

48 

36 

24 

12 

0 


ECA operation share varies for ship size 

• 2,500 TEU 

• 4,600 TEU 

• 8,500 TEU 

• 14,000 TEU 

• 18,000 TEU 

-6 -4 -2 0 2 

Fuel price differential (LNG-HFO) in $/mmBTU 

4 6 

Four technology variants were 

investigated in the study: 

1. Exhaust gas cleaning by 

“scrubber” 

2. Scrubber plus Waste Heat 

Recovery (WHR) 

3. LNG system (bunker station, 

tank, gas preparation, gas line, 

dual-fuel engines) 

4. LNG system plus WHR 

For each technology variant, costs and 

space requirements were estimated 

and specific fuel oil consumption 

was based on current knowledge. 

Estimates were independently made 

for each selected container vessel 

size. The same measures to reduce 

NO x emissions to IMO Tier III levels 

were assumed for the reference 

vessel and each technology variant 

and, therefore, these have no effect 

on the cost differences between the 

reference vessel and the variants. 

Ship size variants and 

route profiles 

Five representative vessel sizes were 

selected for the study. Assumed design 

speeds account for the current 

trend towards lower speeds. 

Round trips were selected for three 

trades: intra-European, Europe–Latin 

America and Europe–Asia. The ECA 

exposure was used as the primary 

input parameter. 

Conclusions of the study 

Using LNG as ship fuel promises 

less emissions and, given the right 

circumstances, less fuel costs. The 

attractiveness of LNG as ship fuel 

compared to scrubber systems is 

dominated by three parameters: 

1. Share of operation inside ECA 

2. Price difference between 

LNG and HFO 

3. Investment costs for 

LNG tank system 

With 65% ECA exposure, an LNGsystem 

payback time under two 

years is predicted for the smaller 

vessel sizes (using the standard 

fuel price scenario). 


84 

72 

60 

48 

36 

24 

12 

0 


• 2,500 TEU 

ECA operation share varies for ship size 

• 4,600 TEU 

• 8,500 TEU 

• 14,000 TEU 

• 18,000 TEU 

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 

Specific cost for LNG tank system (in $/m 3 ) 

For the 2,500 TEU vessel, a comparison 

of payback times for the 

scrubber and for the LNG system, >> 

02 I 2013 27


>> 

and varying LNG prices, shows that 

the LNG system is attractive as long 

as LNG (delivered to the ship) is as 

expensive as or cheaper than HFO 

when the fuels are compared on 

their energy content. 

For larger vessels typically operating 

at smaller ECA shares, e.g. the 

14,000 TEU vessel, the LNG system 

has the shortest payback time (when 

the standard fuel price scenario is 

used), and the use of a WHR system 

further reduces the payback time. 

The price of LNG delivered to the 

ship is difficult to predict. Base LNG 

prices vary from the USA to Japan 

by a factor of four. European base 

LNG prices appear attractive at 

around 10 USD/mm BTU even with 

small-scale distribution costs added. 

An LNG price of up to 15 USD/mmBTU 

could give LNG systems a competitive 

advantage against scrubbers in terms 

of payback for the smaller vessels 

considered in this study. 

Small-scale LNG distribution is just 

starting to become available in 

Europe (outside Norway) and it 

remains to be seen which LNG-fuel 

price levels will be established. 

For a more detailed report on the 

GL/MAN study, please see: “Costs 

and benefits of LNG as ship fuel for 

container vessels. Key results from 

a GL and MAN joint study” at 

www.gl-group.com/lng 

Extension for container 

feeder vessels 

Container feeder vessels operating 

in ECAs are seen as potential early 

adopters of LNG technology. Therefore, 

just recently, an extension of 

the GL/MAN study was performed 

to assess the costs and benefits of 

both LNG and scrubber technology 

as applied to six differently sized 

feeder vessels in comparison with 

a reference vessel using marine 

fuel oil. 

The results showed that, for a 

1,250 TEU vessel using LNG or 

scrubber technology, significant 

annual cost advantages and rapid 

payback from 2015 onwards for 

ships operating exclusively inside 

28 02 I 2013


Specific additional costs for LNG installation 

ECAs could be predicted. Payback 

time is shorter for the smaller container 

vessels (900 TEU and 1,250 

TEU) since the capital investment 

needed for their LNG systems is 

smaller than for larger vessels. 

USD/kw 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

However, changes in LNG distribution 

costs will significantly affect 

payback: within ECAs, the fuel of 

choice is marine gas oil (MGO), and 

at current prices, the difference between 

MGO and LNG is significant 

enough to yield rapid payback for 

all vessel sizes. At a difference of 

6 USD/mmBTU to 8 USD/mmBTU or 

more between MGO and LNG, an 

LNG system will be more profitable 

than a scrubber system. 

mUSD 

0 

900 TEU 1,250 TEU 1,550 TEU 1,800 TEU 2,100 TEU 2,500 TEU 

Annual cost advantage for a 1,250 TEU 

container vessel compared to standard vessel 

using standard fuel 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

-2 

-4 

Invest 

Scrubber 

LNG-fuelled 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 

100% ECAs, LNG at 13 USD/mmBTU 

02 I 2013 29


The future – 

today 

As GL experts continue their scientific research 

into LNG as a ship fuel, the first successful GLsupported 

conversions and designs are starting a 

new era in shipping. These include the “Bit Viking” 

product tanker and the “STREAM” container vessel, 

just two examples of GL’s commitment to making 

LNG a reality. At the same time, GL has teamed up 

with a number of global players within the maritime 

industry to continue research on the feasibility 

of LNG as ship fuel for a number of vessel types.


Projects exploring 

LNG as ship fuel 

In collaboration with various partners, Germanischer 

Lloyd has proven to the maritime industry that LNG as 

ship fuel could well be the answer to ever-increasing 

costs for heavy fuel oil (HFO). 

DDaewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering 

(DSME) and Germanischer Lloyd (GL) proved the feasibility 

of running large container vessels on LNG in a project 

completed in 2011. In recognition of the challenges 

ahead for shipping, GL and DSME have teamed up to 

start exploring technology options and safety concepts 

for large LNG-fuelled container vessels. As a result, GL 

finished Approval in Principle of a 14,000 TEU LNGfuelled 

container vessel for DSME. 

Assessment of the safety performance of the gas supply 

system was the key aspect of GL’s contribution to 

the project. 

For the Finnish Ministry of Interior, GL has classed its 

first LNG-fuelled marine pollution prevention vessel. 

The vessel is powered by one dual-fuel main engine 

driving a controllable pitch propeller (CPP), plus two 

dual-fuel generator sets for electrical supply, which 

also serve as supply two-pod drives for propulsion. 

The harbour generator is likewise a dual-fuel engine. 

Source: DSME 

ME-GI Engine 

DF/Gas Engine Generator 

HIVAR Fuel Gas Supply System 

ACTIB LNG Tank 

Most recently, GL completed a joint development project 

with Japan-based IHI Marine United Inc. (IHIMU). 

The project focused on a concept study for a 13,000 TEU 

container vessel fuelled by LNG – in particular the LNG 

fuelling system consisting of the bunker station, tanks, 

gas preparation and gas lines. IHIMU designed the key 

structures of the system with GL providing design review, 

hazard identification, and Approval in Principle of the 

LNG fuel supply system design. 

Furthermore, the class notation includes a dynamic 

positioning system with CPPs, two podded propulsors 

and thrusters. Vessel capabilities range from oil and 

chemical recovery capacity, highest ice class and helicopter 

operations, including refuelling, to towing, fire 

fighting, crane operations and small craft operations. 

The vessel is currently being built by STX Finland and 

will be launched in 2013. 

32 02 I 2013


“Bit Viking” – world’s first 

LNG-fuelled tanker 

The “Bit Viking” is the result of GL’s participation in the conversion of an existing oil-burning 

engine into a dual-fuel one that can burn either fuel oil or gas. The project has put the GL Group 

centre stage in the development of LNG-fuelled vessels. 

Source: Tarbit Shipping AB 

Because of its broad LNG 

expertise, GL, as the ship‘s classification 

society, was also chosen for the 

classification part of the conversion. 

Furthermore, Germanischer Lloyd 

staff played a critical role in the 

processes at the shipyard: monitoring 

the manufacture and installation 

of the components, such as piping, 

valves, safety equipment and LNG 

tanks, and ensuring safe construction, 

use of suitable materials and 

application of appropriate welding 

methods. 

Official sea trial 

The two main engines were converted 

from Wärtsilä type 46 D to type 

50 DF. Upon completion of the 

pipe installation, and testing and 

calibration of the newly installed 

equipment, the “Bit Viking” was 

ready for its first bunkering of LNG. 

At the end of October 2011, the 

“Bit Viking” was finally ready for 

its official sea trial, during which 

the ship performed with no major 

discrepancies. 

Key concerns in this world premiere 

were the proper interpretation of 

class rules for safe construction, ensuring 

that the equipment manufacturers 

clearly understood the class 

rules, and anticipating how the flag 

administration would understand 

and accept the required risk analysis. 

The conversion of the “Bit Viking” 

provided a good opportunity to put 

the GL Rules for gas as ship fuel to 

the test. 

Environmental footprint 

Since conversion, the “Bit Viking” has 

proven to reduce greenhouse gases 

by 20% to 25% and NO X gases by 

90%. Sulphur output has been cut 

entirely, and particle emissions have 

been brought down by 99%. The 

owner, Sweden’s Tarbit Shipping, is 

very pleased with the environmental 

footprint of their newly converted 

vessel. The “Bit Viking” is now 

trading the extreme length of the 

Norwegian coast between Oslo and 

Kirkenes on behalf of oil major 

Statoil. 

>> 

02 I 2013 33


>> 

The latest milestone in the “Bit 

Viking” project: the first Clean 

Shipping Index (CSI) verification, 

which GL undertook. 

GL issued the vessel a Statement of 

Compliance, confirming that the 

data submitted by owner Tarbit Shipping 

meets the requirements of the 

Index, an essential step for ensuring 

the usefulness and transparency of 

the data provided for the new project. 

The CSI is a Web-based tool which 

allows ship operators to voluntarily 

submit data on the environmental 

parameters of their ships and receive 

a ranking based on the overall performance 

of the vessel. Operators 

can also choose to have this data 

verified by a third party. The Index 

takes a number of criteria into account, 

including pollutants released 

into the air – such as carbon and 

sulphur dioxides, particulate matter 

and nitrogen oxides – and into the 

water, as well as the chemicals used 

onboard and operationally. 

The CSI’s scoring system gives the 

vessel a ranking, which then gives a 

complete picture of a vessel’s impact 

on the environment. Cargo owners 

are then able to use the database 

to assess shippers in terms of their 

environmental performance – a valuable 

addition to the information 

which they can then use to select 

firms to fulfil their charters. 

“STREAM” – LNG-powered 

container vessel 

A new GL-approved design from IPP Ingenieur Partner Pool is now 

ready for the market. The concept is for a range of liner or feeder 

vessels for worldwide service. 

F 

Cargo loading 

From this range, TECHNOLOG, 

as responsible marketing partner of 

IPP, has presented an LNG-powered, 

fully cellular and hatchcoverless container 

vessel: the “STREAM 4200 

LNG”. The concept has been assessed 

by GL and given an Approval-in- 

Principle Certificate. Its 32.25-metre 

beam allows passage through the 

existing Panama Canal locks. A 

draft of 10.50 m to 12.00 m means 

the vessel can operate worldwide, 

including through the Kiel Canal 

(future dimensions) between the 

Baltic and North Sea. The layout can 

be configured to suit multiple shipping 

routes with optimal flexibility, 

as it is based on existing technology. 

The design of the vessel has been 

optimised so as to be able to handle 

the full range of container sizes in 

use today. Apart from this adaptability 

in sizing, the container stacks 

on the deck of the vessel are laid 

out to achieve higher stack weights 

and enable individual storage patterns 

and loading operations for 

each individual cell. 

Bunkering system 

The LNG fuel systems for the 

“STREAM” were developed jointly 

with TGE Marine Gas Engineering 

and include a fixed bunker tank 

34 02 I 2013


Source: iPP/Technolog 

GL Class Notation for the STREAM 

7 100 A5 CONTAINER SHIP, HATCHCOVERLESS, 

DG, IW, ERS, HLP, BWM, NAV-OC 

7 MC, AUT, RCPx/y, GF, EP 

DG Dangerous Goods 

IW In-Water Survey 

ERS Emergency Response Service 

HLP Hull Lifecycle Programme 

BWM Ballast Water Management 

NAV-OC Bridge Design One-Man Control Console – 

Ocean and Coastal Waters 

AUT Unattended Machinery Space 

RCP Refrigerated Cargo Protection 

GF Gas as Fuel 

EP Environmental Passport 

EEDI Calculations 

inside the vessel and a novel portable 

deck-mounted LNG tank system 

which can be used to provide extra 

capacity. For fuel supply, the LNG 

containers will be connected to a 

newly developed docking station. 

One of the most important factors 

of new LNG-fuelled vessels is the 

safety and reliability of LNG bunkering 

systems. There must be no spillage, 

and the “STREAM” illustrates 

that these systems are now being 

implemented. 

The entire vessel design concept is 

focused around saving energy. A 

single screw is directly driven by a 

dual-fuel, two-stroke, 22.9 MW 

engine developed specifically for 

LNG applications by MAN. The same 

gas fuel supply system is used for the 

auxiliary power generators and boilers. 

Exhaust gas boilers and waste heat 

recovery equipment are installed. 

Beyond merely saving fuel, the 

efficiency of the propulsion system 

means that a “STREAM” ship can 

operate in a wide variety of ways. 

When loaded to medium draft, the 

main engine can provide all of 

the vessel’s required electric and 

propulsive power. When needed, 

the auxiliary engines can generate 

additional power for added speed 

or to boost power in poor weather 

conditions. As a whole, the design 

and operational features result in 

a significant reduction in fuel consumption 

compared to any designs 

running on standard fuel. 

With some extra initial investment, 

the vessel can take advantage of a 

waste heat recovery system (WHRS) 

for even greater fuel efficiency. An 

exhaust gas boiler system can be 

installed that feeds a MAN Diesel & 

Turbo turbo-generator set for electric 

power generation. An optional 

“minimum fuel-controlled” power 

management system from Siemens 

can further reduce fuel consumption, 

thereby cutting overall energy costs. 

Estimates suggest that the slightly 

higher initial costs of installing such 

a system will pay off in approximately 

four to six years depending on 

ECA zone application and fuel price 

development. 

Future-proofed 

As currently configured, the “STREAM” 

already meets all of the coming 

regulations to control air emissions 

from shipping. In addition, “STREAM” 

ships boast an EEDI, based on 

preliminary calculations, that is 

significantly beneath the required 

baseline for 2025. Looking ahead to 

2020, projections suggest that when 

comparing the operation of the 

“STREAM” against a conventional 

vessel in an Emissions Control Area 

(ECA), a conservative estimate of 

fuel cost savings of around 30% 

can be achieved. 

02 I 2013 35

Germanischer Lloyd SE, Global Sales 

Brooktorkai 18 

20457 Hamburg, Germany 

Phone: +49 40 36149 6397 

www.gl-group.com 

Germanischer Lloyd SE 

Gas Technology 

Henning Pewe 

Phone: +49 40 36149-653 

ptp-gastechnology@gl-group.com 

Copenhagen 

Hamburg 

Piraeus 

Houston 

Dubai 

Shanghai 

Singapore 

Global Sales Offices 

Americas 

North / East Europe 

Middle East / Africa 

Mainland China 

Germanischer Lloyd (USA), Inc 

Germanischer Lloyd Denmark A/S 

Germanischer Lloyd SE Branch Office Dubai 

Germanischer Lloyd (China) Co., Ltd. 

1155 Dairy Ashford Rd. 

Amager Strandvej 390 

White Crown Bldg., Room No. 402 

Shanghai Central Plaza, Room 1201 

Suite 315 

2770 Kastrup 

PO Box 8015, Sheikh Zayed Road 

381, Huaihai M. Road 

Houston, TX USA 77079 

Denmark 

Dubai, United Arab Emirates 

200020 Shanghai, China 

Phone: +1 832 320 4658 

Phone: +48 91 4315302 

Phone: +971 4 3328842 200 

Phone: +86 21 233 087 61 

gs-am@gl-group.com 

gs-ne@gl-group.com 

gs-me@gl-group.com 

gs-cn@gl-group.com 

Central Europe 

Southern Europe 

Asia / Pacific 

Germanischer Lloyd SE 

Brooktorkai 18 

20457 Hamburg, Germany 

Phone: +49 40 36149 3738 

gs-ce@gl-group.com 

Germanischer Lloyd Hellas M.E.P.E 

85 Akti Miaouli 

185 38 Piraeus, Greece 

Phone: +30 210 429 0373 

gs-se@gl-group.com 

Germanischer Lloyd Singapore Pte Ltd 

180 Clemenceau Avenue #03-01 

Haw Par Centre, Singapore 239922 

Phone: +65 6835 9610 

gs-ap@gl-group.com 

0E120 · 2013-05-01 

The GL Group does not warrant or assume any kind of liability for the accuracy, completeness or quality of the information provided. Liability claims against any member of the GL 

Group in relation to any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with the use or non-use of information provided, including the use of incorrect or incomplete information, are 

excluded to the fullest extent permissible by law. All presentations of services and products may be subject to alteration and are non-binding. Each GL Group member expressly reserves 

the right without notice to change, supplement or delete parts of the pages or the entire presentation of services and products or to stop the publication temporarily or definitively.

In Focus LNG - GL Group

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?