Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices

When using liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for shipping, the sulphur emissions are negligible and low NO<sub>x</sub> and particle emissions can be reached together with lower CO<sub>2</sub> emissions compared to diesel-based fuels. The drawback of LNG usage is the unburne...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kati Lehtoranta, Hannu Vesala, Niklas Flygare, Niina Kuittinen, Anni-Rosa Apilainen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-04-01
Series:Journal of Marine Science and Engineering
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/5/890
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849326997044461568
author Kati Lehtoranta
Hannu Vesala
Niklas Flygare
Niina Kuittinen
Anni-Rosa Apilainen
author_facet Kati Lehtoranta
Hannu Vesala
Niklas Flygare
Niina Kuittinen
Anni-Rosa Apilainen
author_sort Kati Lehtoranta
collection DOAJ
description When using liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for shipping, the sulphur emissions are negligible and low NO<sub>x</sub> and particle emissions can be reached together with lower CO<sub>2</sub> emissions compared to diesel-based fuels. The drawback of LNG usage is the unburned fuel, i.e., methane can be found in the exhaust. Reliable emission detection and quantification will play a key role, as methane is also becoming regulated. In this study, different methods to measure methane are studied in the engine laboratory and on board with state-of-the-art engines. Four different measurement methods are found to give similar methane results with few exceptions. Measurements performed downstream of the methane abatement catalyst show that all instruments could detect the methane conversion efficiency to be above 95%. Comparing results from onboard studies to earlier published onboard studies with similar engines indicate that the engine (46 DF) behaved rather similarly, and the measurements carried out at different occasions on board by different devices and parties gave similar results. To measure total hydrocarbons, a flame ionization detector (FID) has generally been the accepted method (e.g., in NO<sub>x</sub> Technical Code). Based on this study, other methods as reliable as FID for methane measurement exist and these methods can also be utilized on board.
format Article
id doaj-art-43a2f1fdbc6d4065ad8cddf7e5630b21
institution Kabale University
issn 2077-1312
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Journal of Marine Science and Engineering
spelling doaj-art-43a2f1fdbc6d4065ad8cddf7e5630b212025-08-20T03:48:01ZengMDPI AGJournal of Marine Science and Engineering2077-13122025-04-0113589010.3390/jmse13050890Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different DevicesKati Lehtoranta0Hannu Vesala1Niklas Flygare2Niina Kuittinen3Anni-Rosa Apilainen4VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, FI-02044 Espoo, FinlandVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, FI-02044 Espoo, FinlandVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, FI-02044 Espoo, FinlandVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, FI-02044 Espoo, FinlandVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, FI-02044 Espoo, FinlandWhen using liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for shipping, the sulphur emissions are negligible and low NO<sub>x</sub> and particle emissions can be reached together with lower CO<sub>2</sub> emissions compared to diesel-based fuels. The drawback of LNG usage is the unburned fuel, i.e., methane can be found in the exhaust. Reliable emission detection and quantification will play a key role, as methane is also becoming regulated. In this study, different methods to measure methane are studied in the engine laboratory and on board with state-of-the-art engines. Four different measurement methods are found to give similar methane results with few exceptions. Measurements performed downstream of the methane abatement catalyst show that all instruments could detect the methane conversion efficiency to be above 95%. Comparing results from onboard studies to earlier published onboard studies with similar engines indicate that the engine (46 DF) behaved rather similarly, and the measurements carried out at different occasions on board by different devices and parties gave similar results. To measure total hydrocarbons, a flame ionization detector (FID) has generally been the accepted method (e.g., in NO<sub>x</sub> Technical Code). Based on this study, other methods as reliable as FID for methane measurement exist and these methods can also be utilized on board.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/5/890methane slipLNGmarine engineemission measurement
spellingShingle Kati Lehtoranta
Hannu Vesala
Niklas Flygare
Niina Kuittinen
Anni-Rosa Apilainen
Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
Journal of Marine Science and Engineering
methane slip
LNG
marine engine
emission measurement
title Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
title_full Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
title_fullStr Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
title_full_unstemmed Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
title_short Measuring Methane Slip from LNG Engines with Different Devices
title_sort measuring methane slip from lng engines with different devices
topic methane slip
LNG
marine engine
emission measurement
url https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1312/13/5/890
work_keys_str_mv AT katilehtoranta measuringmethaneslipfromlngengineswithdifferentdevices
AT hannuvesala measuringmethaneslipfromlngengineswithdifferentdevices
AT niklasflygare measuringmethaneslipfromlngengineswithdifferentdevices
AT niinakuittinen measuringmethaneslipfromlngengineswithdifferentdevices
AT annirosaapilainen measuringmethaneslipfromlngengineswithdifferentdevices