Skip to main content

Technical Selection

Let’s consider the most common scenario: a shipowner must lessen consumption of fuel oil servicing also the goal of reducing the carbon footprint of his ship. The options given are:

  • Do nothing! - option A
  • Install (a given – preselected) WASP technology - option B
  • Install a selected non-WASP technology, such as an advance waste-heat recovery system (WHR) - option C

To assess the above options, the following criteria are considered; apparently it is not possible to get a detailed answer but the feeling and assessment of the expert using this tool is sufficient at this stage:

  • Technical
  • Space/Safety/Construction [is it possible to install this technology onboard? Is there sufficient space? Are there any visibility impairments? Does the installation impact the structural integrity of the hull?]
  • Energy Efficiency – Matching [Are the expected savings from the installation compatible and easy to match with the existing propulsion plant? Is the new system under consideration compatible with the existing propulsion and energy system?]
  • delivery logistics – yard [Does the selected yard for the retrofit support the installation of this technology? Is it possible to import the critical elements and machinery into the yard? Are there any logistics considerations, such as the timely availability of the material, dues and levies for the import, quality control and assurance in all stages?]
  • Financial
  • available financing [is financing for the retrofit, acquisition and installation secured?]
  • age of ship / investment horizon [is there sufficient time horizon for the justification of any retrofit investment?]
  • availability / request of securities [are there available and sufficient securities in place for external financing, usually debt for the retrofit?]

The above criteria are structured in the form of simple questions below; the user should only select an option, such as: strongly agree, agree, equally, disagree, strongly disagree’. The selection options are self-explained; the option ‘equally’ implies indifference.

Once the user replies to all questions the model yields the ‘relative weight’, i.e. the score per option, and the ‘absolute weights’, i.e. the ranking of every option. So, when the results are 2A, 1B, 3C and A=0.874, B=1.000 and C=0.713, then the user should read them as follows: the option B (selection of the WASP technology) is preferred over A (the do-nothing option) and C (selection of a non-WASP technology). Option B is 12.6% better than A and 28.7% than C. The model delivers results with and without dependencies. The results without dependencies assume that all criteria are independent, i.e. that they do not relate to each other (one button down – nothing happens to the rest of the buttons!). On the contrary, dependencies imply that some criteria interact or interfere other criteria (e.g. one button down – another button up!) These dependencies are the following pre-selected ones:

The Energy efficiency criterion relates to the input of:

  • age/type of the ship
  • Available financing

available securities relate to the yard logistics

Please contact the team for a detailed explanation of the model!