# emma maersk



## caladhmor (Feb 23, 2012)

I just read that the container ship emma maersks engine consumes 1,660 tones of heavy oil per hour 
Thats 1165320 dollars an hour (702/ton)
How does this add up ? ?


----------



## muldonaich (Nov 19, 2005)

they must have meant litres kev.


----------



## caladhmor (Feb 23, 2012)

http://www.emma-maersk.com/engine/Wartsila_Sulzer_RTA96-C.htm

Found it on this page


----------



## muldonaich (Nov 19, 2005)

ask chadburn he is ex ch/ eng


----------



## Jeff Taylor (Oct 13, 2006)

The Queen Mary 2 doesn't consume that much HFO per DAY. Has to be a typo.


----------



## taccrington (Dec 18, 2009)

1.660 gallons/hour


----------



## spongebob (Dec 11, 2007)

If there is a grain of truth in those figures it is no wonder the shipping company is resorting to 'slow steaming'.
It is rumoured that part of the dissension at the Port of Auckland, where the waterside labour is starting a three week strike, is due to the shipping companies, Maersk in particular, slow steaming to conserve fuel and dictating the port arrival time and availability of cargo handling to suit.
Ports of Tauranga accept this scenario and have contract labour gangs to ready to meet the ship's demands and as a result ship after ship is being diverted to Tauranga.
The Auckland labour insist on adhering to set working hours that make the ship wait sometimes. It is a no win situation for all except the overseas owned shipping cos that are essential to our life's blood -exports 
Where are the old British owned "Home" boats of yesteryear, two to three weeks along side Queens wharf, several pubs within cooee, lots of seamen loving ladies, there must be a few old hands that remember this! 

Bob


----------



## Michal-S (Nov 30, 2010)

Emma Maersk consuption, at full speed, is ca.320 tonnes/24 hours. Still impressive with nearly quarter of million dollars being burnt daily.


----------



## Spurling Pipe (Feb 20, 2012)

muldonaich said:


> ask chadburn he is ex ch/ eng


You don't need to ask a Ch.Eng. You need to acquire common sense!


----------



## Didge (Jul 25, 2008)

OK guys here is the calculation:
1,660 gallons per hour = 39,840 gallons per day
39,840/42 = 948.57 Bbls per day
948.57 Bbls at a density of say 1.000 = 6.292 Bbls per m3
948.57 / 6.292 = 150.758 m3 or 150.738 Metric Tons.


----------



## muldonaich (Nov 19, 2005)

Spurling Pipe said:


> You don't need to ask a Ch.Eng. You need to acquire common sense!


dont think a lot of ch/engrs would agree with you rgd kev.


----------



## Spurling Pipe (Feb 20, 2012)

muldonaich said:


> dont think a lot of ch/engrs would agree with you rgd kev.


Wrong! I think ALL Ch.Engs would agree with me. 

1660 tph (approx 40k tpd !!!) and you counter with 1.6 tph (38.4tpd)

Think!! before you hit return!


----------



## clevewyn (May 16, 2010)

Probably the same guy who reported the 250,000 tons of oil to be pumped out of the Costa Concordia.

Never let the truth get in the way of a sensational story.


----------



## Basil (Feb 4, 2006)

Yes, sculling around the internet I found the ball-park figures to be very roughly:
Max power:
80 080 kilowatt = 107 389 horsepower [international]
80 080 kilowatt = 108 878 horsepower [metric]
when burning 3,600 US gallons (14,000 l) of heavy fuel oil per hour. (335T/day)

At economical speed, fuel consumptiom is 0.260 lbs/hp/hour (1,660gal/hour) (155T/day)

With apologies to her C/E who will, no doubt, have a giggle at this


----------



## Malky Glaister (Nov 2, 2008)

Didge,

A barrel is a volume as is a cubic meter. Good job you used a density (SG) of 1.000 or it wouldn't work out!
Never mind 9 out of 10!!!
Just being pedantic before some other guy does!!!
Ex Ch Eng with I hope comon sense too but others would differ.

regards Malky


----------



## caladhmor (Feb 23, 2012)

How much would charge a day for a container i wonder??


----------



## McCloggie (Apr 19, 2008)

It is the continental way of using a decimal point.

1.6 is often written as 1,6.

I know, it is very confusing but it is the way it is.

McC


----------



## Michal-S (Nov 30, 2010)

According to engine manufacturer's data for Wartsila Sulzer RTA96-C, as fitted on Maersk E-class, fuel consumption is 163 g/kWh (maximum efficiency power).
At 80,080 kW it means: (163x80080x24)/1000=ca.313.3 t/day.
150-160 tonnes for that vessel is unrealistic, it is a consumption for modern 5000 TEU vessel (Panamax).


----------



## Ian J. Huckin (Sep 27, 2008)

Spurling Pipe said:


> You don't need to ask a Ch.Eng. You need to acquire common sense!


Well put indeed.....and that's from a C/E!


----------



## Burntisland Ship Yard (Aug 2, 2008)

Well, well slow steaming returns.... did all that in the late 70's on vlcc's [steam ships of course !].
Have we no gone full circle??


----------



## jamesgpobog (Feb 18, 2012)

For the bean counters...

I assume that a ship, like a car or an airplane, has a speed that most econmical. Is that not the speed at which ships run? Or is there a speed that may be faster, yet delivers the best $ bottom line because of less time at sea? Since I cannot imagine that the best overall numbers crunch out with a ship running Ahead Emergency, how is a ships best running speed determined?


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

Just reading the wording on this engine give's me some concern as to it's author and his background which could reflect on it's accuracy. "I assume etc "?
As any fellow Chief's will remember fuel calculation's were checked and double checked and then checked again in the early 1970's when the fuel crisis took hold and the normal 15% reserve was down to single figure's.


----------



## Duncan112 (Dec 28, 2006)

jamesgpobog said:


> For the bean counters...
> 
> I assume that a ship, like a car or an airplane, has a speed that most econmical. Is that not the speed at which ships run? Or is there a speed that may be faster, yet delivers the best $ bottom line because of less time at sea? Since I cannot imagine that the best overall numbers crunch out with a ship running Ahead Emergency, how is a ships best running speed determined?


The calculation is quite involved, the economic speed depends on the bunker price in relation to other fixed and variable costs. Note that the most economic vessel speed may well be far removed from the most efficient engine speed. Also with the large number of end users of cargo operating a JIT system the scope for reducing passage speed may well be limited. 

Similar calculations can be done on whether to lay up a ship or operate it at a loss, although as Andrew Craig-Bennett sagely remarked in another thread "He who lays up a ship seldom takes it out of lay up"

The best basic treatise I found on the economics of ship management was "Quantitative methods in Maritime Economics" by Evans and Marlowe, published by Fairplay but no longer listed on their website. Amazon have some horrendously expensive S/H copies if you are really keen.


----------



## Malky Glaister (Nov 2, 2008)

Some business folk use container ships as storage. ie not all containers are required for immediate delivery. It is a very complex system with hundreds of interested parties not always on the same wave length.
Google Emma Maersk for some really interesting stuff

regards Malky


----------



## jamesgpobog (Feb 18, 2012)

> the most economic vessel speed may well be far removed from the most efficient engine speed.


Indeed, I think that's what I was trying to say. I never thought of the varying fuel cost too.

Thanks Duncan and Malky...


----------

