Cruise Vessels To Shore Power - 04.01.2018 - Bergen

Onshore Power Supply for Cruise Vessels
–
Assessment of opportunities and
limitations for connecting cruise vessels
to shore power
© Vidar Trellevik
04.01.2018
GREEN CRUISE PORT is an INTERREG V B project, part-financed by the

European Union (European Regional Development Fund and European
Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument).
ON SH ORE POW ER SUPPLY FOR CRUI SE VESSELS
Asse ssm e n t of oppor t u n it ie s a n d lim it a t ion s
for con n e ct in g cr u ise ve sse ls t o sh or e pow e r
Be r ge n og Om la n d H a vn e ve se n
Re por t N o.: 2017- 1250 Rev. 0.1

D ocu m e n t N o.: 113LJAJL- 1
D a t e : 2018- 01- 04
1
TABLE OF CON TEN TS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. 3
1 EXECUTI VE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 4
2 I NTRODUCTI ON ............................................................................................................ 6
Background 6
Abbreviat ion list 7
3 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 7
4 GENERAL ON ONSHORE POWER SUPPLY .......................................................................... 8

Syst em and t echnology descript ion 8
Shore connect ion st andards 10
5 I NTERNATI ONAL DEVELOPMENTS AND REGULATI ONS ...................................................... 11

I nt ernat ional policy and regulat ions 11
EU regulat ions and incent ives 12
6 CALCULATI ON PAPAMETERS ......................................................................................... 13

General key assum pt ions 14
Vessel t raffic and port calls 15
Capacit y dem and and energy consum pt ion 16
Marine gasoil prices ( MGO) 16
Tot al elect ricit y charges ( port ’s purchasing price) 17
Elect ricit y price for sales t o cruise ships 20
Liquefied Nat ural Gas 20
Environm ent al effect s 21
7 BUSI NESS CASE ANALYSI S .......................................................................................... 22

Shore t o grid solut ion 22
LNG- Power- Barge solut ion 24
Business case from cruise vessels’ perspect ive 27
8 SENSI TI VI TY ANALYSI S ............................................................................................... 30

I ncreased ut ilizat ion of OPS infrast ruct ure 30
I ncrease or decrease in t ot al elect ricit y charges 30
Port business case for est ablishing OPS wit h a 50 per cent reduct ion of t he capacit y
fees and reduced t axes 31
Ot her uncert aint ies 32
10 KEY I SSUES FOR A BUSI NESS PLAN FOR OPS ................................................................. 33
11 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 35
Appendix A1 Bergen Port 38
Appendix A2 Ham burg Por t 46
Appendix A3 Rost ock Port 52
Appendix A4 Tallinn Port 57
Appendix A5 Helsinki Port 63
3
1 EXECUTI VE SUM M ARY
Green Cruise Port ( GCP) is working t o reduce pollut ion from cruise act ivit ies in port s in t he Nort h and
Balt ic Sea region. Bergen Port ( Bergen og Om land Havnevesen) has engaged DNV GL t o undert ake an
assessm ent of opport unit ies and lim it at ions for connect ing cruise vessels t o power from shore on behalf
of GCP. This st udy com prises t he business cases for est ablishing onshore power supply ( OPS) for cruise
vessels. Five proj ect port part ners of t he Green Cruise Port ( GCP) are used as basis for t he business
cases. The select ed port s are Bergen, Ham burg, Rost ock, Tallinn and Helsinki.
There exist clear opport unit ies for developm ent of OPS for cruise port s and vessels, but t here are also
barriers relat ed t o high cost s st em m ing from elect ricit y prices or grid invest m ent s. The por t s face t ot al
elect ricit y charges t hat includes t axes, levies, and charges relat ed t o t he prom ot ion of renewable energy,
and in t ot al t his reduce t he possibilit y for viable business cases for OPS. The invest m ent cost s for
est ablishing OPS are very dependent on t he grid connect ion cost which varies wit h exist ing available grid
capacit y. Grid invest m ent s are st epwise in nat ure, and one st ep up t o facilit at e OPS can be prohibit ively
expensive. The use of a LNG- power- barge, can be an alt ernat ive in cases where high invest m ent cost s
for grid connect ion is t he m ain barrier. A LNG barge is also possible t o m ove and increased ut ilizat ion of
t he invest m ent can be obt ained t hrough alt ernat ive use.
Grid charges are st ruct ured in a variet y of ways wit h fixed and variable elem ent s, based on capacit y and
elect ricit y consum pt ion. Several port s face a high t ot al elect ricit y charge, largely driven by high grid
t ariffs and t ax levels. Aut horit ies appr eciat e t he benefit s of OPS, such as less noise and air pollut ion. GCP
can inform governm ent s and local aut horit ies on how t o reduce barriers t o OPS based on t he findings of
t his report .
The business cases for est ablishing OPS wit h a shore t o grid solut ion and a LNG solut ion at t he five
different port s, are present ed in t he t able below. I n t he analysis, it is assum ed t hat ship owner’s
willingness t o pay for shore power is EUR 115 per MWh. I n com parison, t he price of MGO based on
t oday’s bunk er price is EUR 125 per MWh, aft er adj ust ed for power efficiency. I t should be not ed t hat in
addit ion t o t his assum pt ion it has been necessary t o apply a line of assum pt ions t o calculat e t he business
cases. The assum pt ions are based on t he inform at ion available at t he t im e of writ ing t he report . Changes
in t he underlying assum pt ions will influence t he business case result s.
4
Ta ble 1 - 1 . Bu sin e ss ca se a n a lysis for e st a blish in g OPS w it h a sh or e t o gr id solu t ion a n d a
LN G- pow e r - ba r ge solu t ion w it h a sa le s e le ct r icit y pr ice of EUR 1 1 5 pe r M W h
Be r ge n H a m bu r g Rost ock Ta llin n H e lsin k i
LGN - LGN - LGN - LGN - LGN -
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR Gr id ba r ge Gr id ba r ge Gr id ba r ge Gr id ba r ge Gr id ba r ge
Annual ut ilizat ion of

1,730 hrs 570 hrs 1,040 hrs 1,530 hrs 510 hrs
OPS infrast ruct ure
I nt erest and loan - 16.2

- 11.2 - 16.2 - 11.0 - 16.2 - 25.6 - 16.2 - 16.8 - 13.0 - 16.2
repaym ent s
Operat ion &
- 1.6 - 1.6 - 0.5 - 0.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 2.2 - 2.2 - 0.7 - 0.7
m aint enance
Purchase of - 19.7 - 12.6
- 14.9 - 14.6 - 15.1 - 4.7 - 19.5 - 8.5 - 9.3 - 4.2
elect r icit y/ LNG
Sale of elect r icit y 21.8 21.8 7.2 7.2 13.1 13.1 19.4 19.4 6.5 6.5
Tot a l - 5 .9 - 1 0 .6 - 1 9 .4 - 1 4 .3 - 3 3 .1 - 1 2 .7 - 1 9 .2 - 1 1 .6 - 1 6 .5 - 1 4 .7
M in . in ve st m e n t
5 .9 1 0 .6 1 9 .4 1 4 .3 3 3 .1 1 2 .7 1 9 .2 1 1 .6 1 6 .5 1 4 .7
su ppor t
1) Port of Bergen has t oday a capacit y fee reduct ion of 90 percent . The business case assum es a capacit y fee reduct ion
of 50 percent t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
The analysis shows t hat all port s have a subst ant ial need for invest m ent support t o cover t he running
cost s for OPS, bot h in t he shore t o grid and LNG- pow er- barge case. I nvest m ent cost s and t ot al elect ricit y
price are t he m ain cost elem ent s of t he business case. I n Bergen Port t he t ot al elect ricit y charges are
relat ively low due t o reduced, int errupt ible grid t ariffs and a low t ax level. I n port s where t he invest m ent
cost s and t ot al elect ricit y charges are high, such as in t he Port of Rost ock, t he business case shows t hat
a LNG- power - barge is likely a bet t er alt ernat ive.
The required invest m ent cost s for OPS receival solut ion for a ship is relat ively m odest . The business case
analysis shows t hat t he profit abilit y of an OPS solut ion is highly dependent on t he hours of lay t im e in
port s. For t he ship owner shift ing t o OPS can be a profit able invest m ent if OPS is provided in enough
port s, depending on t he cost of elect ricit y.
Ta ble 1 - 2 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld w it h a sa le s pr ice of

e le ct r icit y of EUR 1 1 5 pe r M W h
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR Vik in g St a r Th e W or ld
2)
Tot al annual lay t im e in t he five t he five GCP port s 571 hrs 138 hrs
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 0.5 - 0.5

Operat ion and m aint enance - -
Energy cost s 0.6 0.2
Tot a l 0.1 - 0.3
Real rat e of ret urn 3 % <0 %

2) Annual lay t im e is based on act ual lay t im e in 2016. Tot al lay t im e is not adj ust ed for connect ion/ disconnect ion t im e.
5
2 I N TROD UCTI ON
Air and noise pollut ion is in general a problem in cit ies, and Green Cruise Port ( GCP) is working t o reduce
pollut ion from cruise act ivit ies in port s in t he Nort h and Balt ic Sea. Bergen Port ( Bergen og Om land
Havnevesen) has engaged DNV GL t o undert ake an assessm ent of opport unit ies and lim it at ions for
connect ing cruise vessels t o power from shore on behalf of GCP, and t o out line a business plan for GCP’s
furt her work on onshore power supply.
This report assesses t he business case for est ablishing shore pow er solut ions in five select ed GCP port s;
Bergen, Ham burg, Rost ock, Tallinn and Helsinki. The business case looks at t he cost and benefit s for
vessel operat or and port s relat ed t o est ablishm ent of onshore power supply. An overview of invest m ent
and operat ional cost s for bot h a shore t o grid solut ion and a LNG- Power- Bar ge solut ion is included. Tot al
elect ricit y cost s, which includes t he price of elect ricit y, grid t ariffs and nat ional t axes and levies, is an
im port ant elem ent of t he operat ional cost . This report includes an overview of t ot al elect ricit y charges in
t he select ed port s. The need for a coordinat ed init iat ive am ong several port s t o provide sufficient
incent ive for ship owners t o shift t o shore power supply is also address in t he report along wit h t he
effect s of increased capacit y ut ilizat ion of t he shore power infrast ruct ure.
Ba ck gr ou nd
Ships are am ong t he m ost efficient t ype of t ransport for large volum es or num bers of passengers over
longer dist ances, as well as a com fort able way of t raveling t o sight see various locat ions. The cruise
indust ry has been growing t he last decades and t her e has been increasing focus on lim it ing t he
environm ent al foot print of cruise act ivit ies. When a vessel is alongside in a port , it does not need t o run
t he m ain m achinery, but t he vessel st ill needs power for heat ing, light ing, general power supply,
auxiliaries et c. This power is norm ally supplied by t he vessels’ auxiliary m achinery and generat ors which
norm ally runs on diesel, and t hus produce em issions and noise. European cruise port s are oft en locat ed
in cit ies and densely populat ed areas t hat have challenges relat ed t o local air pollut ion.
Onshore power, for vessels while in port s, is one possible t echnology t o avoid air and noise pollut ion
from cruise vessels in cit ies. The first large scale onshore power syst em s in com m ercial port s were
inst alled in Got henburg ( Sweden) in 2000 and for cruise ships in Janeau ( Alaska) in 2001. DNV GL sees
a growing applicat ion of onshore power supply, and t his developm ent has been support ed by
developm ent s in t echnology and associat ed st andar ds. Ham burg is a great exam ple; I n recent years, it
has been est ablished a shore t o grid power solut ion at t he Alt ona cruise t erm inal and a LNG- power- bar ge
solut ion is supplying cruise vessels wit h shore power in HafenCit y. On 18 Sept em ber 2017, t he Germ an
Senat e indicat ed t hat a shore t o grid power syst em is also t o be est ablished in HafenCit y.
I nt ernat ionally different t erm s are used for what is called onshore power supply ( OPS) in t his report ,
including cold ironing, alt ernat ive m arit im e power, shore- side elect ricit y and high volt age shore
connect ion syst em s. All t hese t erm s are principally referring t o t he sam e act ivit y as OPS. I n t his report ,
t here is not m ade any dist inct ion bet ween t he different t erm s.
Green Cruise Port ( GCP) is a j oint proj ect of several port aut horit ies from around t he Balt ic Sea and t he
neighbouring Nort h Sea, t hat are working t oget her wit h ot her m ain cruise st akeholders t o m ake t he
region m ore sust ainable and bet t er connect ed from a cruise t ourism perspect ive. The GCP em braces 20
part ners, incl. associat ed organisat ions, which represent port aut horit ies, cruise lines, a m arit im e
research inst it ut e and a governm ent al body. This st udy is part of t he GCP effort s in preparing sust ainable
developm ent of t he cruise indust ry in t he region.
6
Abbr e via t ion list
Abbr e via t ion

Adj . Adj ust ed
Av. Average
CMS Cable m anagem ent sy st em
GCP Green Cr uise Port
hrs Hours
LNG Liquefied nat ur al gas
LV Low volt age
MGP Marine gas oil
MV Medium volt age
OPS Onshore pow er supply
The port ’s sales price of elect ricit y, i.e. t he price of elect r icit y t hat t he cr uise
Sales price of elect r icit y
operat ors are subj ect t o.
The pur chasing price of elect ricit y t hat t he port is subj ect t o. I ncludes t he price
Tot al elect ricit y charges
of elect r icit y , grid t ar iffs and nat ional t axes and lev ies.
3 M ETH OD OLOGY
The purpose of t his st udy is t o assess what t he opport unit ies and lim it at ions for connect ing cruise
vessels t o power form shore in port s in t he Nort h and Balt ic Sea region, and based on t his propose next
st eps for GCP furt her work on onshore power supply.
The st udy will be looking at opport unit ies and lim it at ions from bot h t he cruise vessels and port s
perspect ive, by const ruct ing sim plified business cases for t hese t wo part s of t he OPS value chain. Cruise
ship have large power consum pt ion, and t he st udy is focused on high volt age ( above 6kV) onshore
power supply syst em s.
To get a com plet e overview of all elem ent t hat will im pact t he specific business case for a part icular ship
or port , furt her st udies are required. The business case calculat ions and analysis are based on t he
current sit uat ion in five select ed GCP port s; Bergen, Ham burg, Rost ock, Tallinn, and Helsinki. These five
business cases and addit ional support ing docum ent at ion is used t o illust rat e t he opport unit ies and
lim it at ions for connect ing cruise vessels t o shore power.
The assessm ent requires input on cruise t raffic and port calls, and DNV GL’s st rong experience in AI S
assessm ent is applied as a basis for t his input wit h furt her support by port - logs. The cost s of OPS
syst em s onboard vessels are est ablished by cost dat a from public sources and input from port
aut horit ies and suppliers of OPS equipm ent . The cost s on t he port side is derived in a sim ilar m anner.
The m ain case is based on power supplied from t he grid and com pared wit h cases for power supply from
a LNG- power - barge syst em .
The business case for est ablishing onshore power supply depends on several elem ent s, including fut ure
vessel t raffic, t echnology cost and developm ent s as well as t he regulat ory fram ework relat ed t o t he use
of shore power and alt ernat ive fuels. I t is out side t he scope for t his st udy t o provide scenarios for t hese
developm ent s. Assum pt ions applied in t he report ar e based on current known t echnology and cost s. To
reflect t he effect of increase in ut ilizat ion of onshore power and changes in t ot al elect ricit y charges,
sensit ivit y analysis’ are included in sect ion 8.
7
4 GEN ERAL ON ON SH ORE POW ER SUPPLY
Syst e m a n d t e ch nology de scr ipt ion

This sect ion gives a gener al syst em and t echnology descript ion for OPS for ships. The descr ipt ion of t he
shore t o grid solut ion is based on t he DNV GL report ReCharge Analysis of charging- and shore power
infrast ruct ure in Norwegian port s / D53/ . The descr ipt ion of t he LNG- power- barge solut ion is based on
public inform at ion and inform at ion from suppliers.
Shore t o grid solut ion

To power vessels at bert h, addit ional infrast ruct ure onshore ( por t side) and on board ships is required as
elect rical power available from onshore grids is not adapt ed t o vessels’ requirem ent s in t erm s of volt age,
frequency and eart hing. Furt herm ore, safet y feat ures need t o be int egrat ed, all of which are
st andardized as per t he m ent ioned st andards. I n sect ion 4.1.2., a short descr ipt ion of current shore
connect ion st andards is included.
On sh or e pow e r in fr a st r u ct u r e ( por t side fa cilit y)

Transform er st at ion: An elect rical subst at ion is required t o conver t volt age and frequency of t he
elect rical grid t o t hose required by vessels and specified by relevant st andards, including elect rical
prot ect ion equipm ent . Upst ream and downst ream m edium volt age ( MV) cable connect ions from t he grid
t o t he power conversion syst em , and from t he conversion syst em t o t he connect ion point on t he vessel
are also required.
Frequency convert er: One m aj or com ponent of t he charging- and shore power syst em is t he
frequency convert er ( FC) . As per t he shore connect ion st andards a FC needs t o be supplied where t he
shore grid frequency deviat es from t he ship- board frequency. Most ships t oday operat e wit h an on-
board grid frequency of 60hz. Most European shore grids, including Norway, Finland, Est onia and
Germ any, have a frequency of 50hz, hence conversion is in m any cases needed. A FC is one of t he
m ost expensive com ponent s in an onshore power syst em .
Cable m anagem ent syst em : A cable m anagem ent syst em ( CMS) ensures safe handling of cables during
connect ion and disconnect ion procedures. The posit ion of t he CMS is also defined in t he I EC st andard:
for all vessel t ypes, ot her t han cont ainer ships, t he CMS needs t o be inst alled onshore. Cont ainer ships
are required t o have on board cable reels due t o space const raint s on t he ber t h. Anot her key area t o
consider is choice of socket s, plug and connect ors. The ship–based CMS consist of elect rical connect ors
( up t o 12kV) , flexible cables, a slipring, an opt ical fiber accum ulat or, a m ot or reducer, a cable drum , an
elect rical cont rol panel, a ret ract able hydraulic cable guide and an alarm syst em t hat m onit ors t he cable
for t ension and drift . A second alt ernat ive is sim ilar t o t he ship- based version, where t he CMS fit s inside
a st andard cargo cont ainer and st ored on board t he ship, eit her aft er or forward of t he accom m odat ion
block. As t he syst em is ent irely m odular, t he cont ainer can be m oved per vessel or loading requirem ent ’s.
For bot h syst em s, a pit t hat is inst alled int o t he quay is designed t o occupy m inim um am ount of space,
locat ions are spread out per vessel t ypes at t he quay.
On boa r d ship in fr a st r u ct u r e
Connect ion panel and cont rol syst em . On board inst allat ions include a MV connect ion swit chgear t o
m anage pow er and ground connect ions, st ep- down t ransform er t o t he vessels volt age( s) level( s) as
required; a receiving cont rol panel will include t he adapt ion of t he exist ing MV or LV ( low volt age)
swit chboard t o receive shore power and synchronizat ion t hrough t he cont rol device. I f required, a power
m anagem ent syst em is inst alled on board t he vessel t o m anage shore connect ion and disconnect ion
operat ion.
8
On board t ransform er. Where applicable ( ship volt age different from shore connect ion volt age) , an
onboard t ransform er is needed t o adapt t he high volt age supply t o t he ship’s m ain swit chboard volt age.
This t ransform er is preferably locat ed near t he m ain swit chboard in a dedicat ed room .
LNG- power- barge

A LNG- Power- barge supplies elect ricit y t o ships and local grids t hrough burning regasified LNG. The
barge is not connect ed t o t he local power grid and t hereby an independent power producer. This m eans
t hat it can be operat ed independent from t he local grid and it has t he flexibilit y t o cust om ize power
out put , frequency and volt age level t o provide elect ricit y t o different cust om er s. The barge it self is
classified as a seagoing barge and can be self- propelled.
The syst em can be divided int o t hree m ain com ponent s;
• LNG Power Barge ( St orage, Regasificat ion, Generat ors)
• Elect rical onshore dist ribut ion syst em
• On- board connect ion panel and cont rol syst em
I n t he following a short descript ion of t he different com ponent s are given. An illust rat ion of a LNG-
power- barge solut ion is included below.
Figu r e 4 - 1 . LN G- pow e r - ba r ge in t h e Por t of H a m bu r g. Sour ce : H ybr id En e r gy Por t , 2 0 1 7
LN G Pow e r Ba r ge
Even t hough t he t echnology it self is new t here exist several concept ual designs from different com panies
based on sam e principals. They all com bine st orage, regasificat ion and gener at ors on one and t he sam e
barge. St orage can eit her be a perm anent t ank t hat are refilled by t rucks or bunker ships, or t anks t hat
are rem oved and refilled elsewhere. The regasificat ion unit t ransform s t he liquefied nat ural gas int o
nat ural gas at at m ospheric pressure. The power producing unit is norm ally design wit h a num ber of
independent gas engines, t o be able t o scale bot h t he power and energy out put t o m eet dem and.
The barge can t hrough it s generat ors produce volt age at a sm all t o m edium level ( 230 v t o 11 kV) , at a
frequency of 50 or 60 Hert z. Most barges can be designed t o provide power t o m ore t han one cruise ship
9
at t he t im e i.e. capacit y above 14 MW. The operat ion is relat ively silent com pared t o a diesel engine. I t
can produce power and/ or heat wit h an efficiency close t o 40 and 46% respect ively.
The t echnical descript ion of t he first LNG barge t o be put in operat ion, “ Hum m el” , is given in t he t able
below.
Ta ble 4 - 1 Te ch n ica l de scr ipt ion of t h e LN G- Pow e r - Ba r ge " H u m m e l" . Sou r ce : Be ck e r M a r in e
Syst e m s, 2 0 1 7 .
Ele m e n t s Te ch n ica l de scr ipt ion
Barge dim ension 76 x 11,4 x 2,5 m
St orage capacit y 2 x 15 t LNG Cont ainer
Power plant 5( or 7) x 1,5 MW
Efficiency 39,7 % ( power ) and 45,4% ( heat )
Operat ion noise 60 dBA/ 10 m
Volt age 11/ 10 kV
Frequency 60/ 50 Hz
Ot her specificat ions Not self- propelled
I n fr a st r u ct u r e on sh or e / Ca ble m a n a ge m e n t syst e m
The power barge can eit her supply power t o cruise ships direct ly or t hrough an onshore dist ribut ion
syst em at t he port . This port infrast ruct ure consist s of a shore j unct ion box, cable channel and a cable
handling unit . A m edium volt age ( MV) cable connect ion from t he power barge t o t he connect ion point on
t he vessel is required.
On boa r d con n e ct ion pa n e l a n d con t r ol syst e m

On- board equipm ent follows t he sam e st andard as for an OPS solut ion supplied by t he grid, cf. sect ion
4.1.
Sh or e conn e ct ion st a nda r ds

To ensure a st andardized, qualit y assured, safe and effect ive way for ships t o connect t o shore power,
shore grids st andards hav e been developed. The int ernat ional st andardizat ion organizat ions I EC, I SO
and I EEE have collaborat ed in developing a st andar d for bot h high volt age ( HV) shore connect ion
syst em s ( I EC/ I EEE DI S 80005- 1) and low volt age ( LV) shore connect ion syst em s ( I EC/ PAS 80005- 3) .
The low volt age st andar d is, however, st ill pending final approval. The st andar dizat ion organizat ions has
also published a st andard for dat a com m unicat ion for m onit oring and cont rol of high- and low volt age
shore connect ion ( I EC/ I EEE DI S 80005- 2) / D21/ .
The HV st andard covers applicat ions where t he pow er requirem ent is exceeding 1000KVA and t he LV
st andard cov ers power requirem ent s below or equal t o 1000KVA. By st andardizing t he shore
connect ion syst em s, ships can call at m ult iple port s wit hout t he need of adj ust m ent s t o t heir inst alled
syst em s. I n addit ion t o t he before m ent ioned benefit s of efficiency and safet y, a st andardized way of
connect ing allow for m ore ut ilizat ion for t he inst alled connect ion syst em s on board and in port ,
pot ent ially im proving t he overall business case and ret urn of invest m ent . The st andards set
requirem ent s t o t he design, inst allat ion and t est ing of t he following HV and LV shore connect ion
syst em s and com ponent s:
• Shore dist ribut ion syst em s
• Shore- t o- ship connect ion and int erface equipm ent
• Transform ers/ react ors
• Sem iconduct or/ rot at ing convert ors
• Ship dist ribut ion syst em s
10
• Cont rol, m onit oring, int erlocking and power m anagem ent syst em s
However, t he st andard does not include pract ical elem ent s such as t he placem ent of t he plug connect ion
on t he ship. As t here is no st andard connect ion point for ships, m obile facilit ies in port is necessary.
Mobile facilit ies are m ore expensive t o est ablish and operat e t han a fixed facilit y, increasing t he OPS
invest m ent cost s.
5 I N TERN ATI ON AL D EVELOPM EN TS AN D REGULATI ON S

Most of t he cruise vessels operat ing in t he GCP port s also operat e int ernat ionally. Cruise com panies’
willingness t o invest in and m ake use of OPS is t hereby affect ed by int ernat ional regulat ions, t rends and
t echnological developm ent . Ships m ainly operat ing in ot her count ries t han t he GCP port s, regulat ions
and incent ives in t hese port s will det erm ine if t he cruise owners will invest in OPS. This sect ion gives a
short overview of t he regulat ory fram ework and m ain t rends int ernat ionally and at EU- level.
OPS has been used in ships at bert h for a long t im e, especially in m ilit ary vessels which t ypically spend a
long t im e at bert h. An increasing focus on reducing em issions in general has led t o an increased focus on
reducing em issions from ships, including from cruise vessels. Through t he last 15 years t here have been
several init iat ives for est ablishing high volt age OPS in port s so t hat vessels wit h a large need for energy
such as cruise ships can use OPS while at bert h. While low- volt age OPS inst allat ions for ferries and
sm aller ships are not unusual t o see, t here is current ly only one high- volt age OPS inst allat ion for cruise
ships in Europe, opened in 2015 and locat ed in Ham burg. I n t he USA and Canada t here are several port s
wit h OPS infrast ruct ure for cruise ships, bot h on t he East Cost - and West Coast .
I n t he m anufact uring indust ry, t here have been a posit ive developm ent wher e suppliers collaborat e in
delivering bert h syst em s and cabling syst em s t hat ensures a safe t ransm ission of elect ricit y, being OPS
or bat t eries in hybrid/ elect rical- ferries. ABB, GE, Cavot ec, Siem ens, Wärt sila Sam Elect ronics, Terasaki,
Pat t on & Coke and Schneider Elect ric all have inform at ion on t heir webpage and brochures covering OPS.
Several suppliers offer com ponent s for bot h high volt age and low volt age OPS syst em s. This indicat es
t hat t he m arket is becom ing m ore and m ore m at ure and t he solut ions provided is no longer a lim it at ion.
I n t e r n a t ion a l policy a nd r e gu la t ion s

There are no int ernat ional policies in place t hat direct ly enforce OPS. Most direct legal regulat ions are
nat ional. However, t here are several int ernat ional and regional init iat ives t o reduce t he em ission from
vessels. Below, a short descript ion of t he m ost im port ant init iat ives is included.
Th e M ARPOL- con ve n t ion a n d I M O

I nt ernat ionally, t he m ost im port ant fram ework for regulat ion of em issions from vessels is t he MARPOL-
convent ion. The MARPOL- convent ions obj ect ive is t he prevent ion of pollut ion of t he m arine environm ent
by ships from operat ional or accident al cause. The first MARPOL- convent ion was signed and adopt ed by
t he I nt ernat ional Marit im e Organisat ion ( I MO) in 1973. I MO is a Unit ed Nat ions specialized agency
responsible for t he safet y and securit y of shipping and t he prevent ion of m arine pollut ion by ships.
I n t he MARPOL Convent ion in 2011 t he part ies of I MO adopt ed a revised form of t he Annex VI
“ Regulat ions for t he Prevent ion of Air Pollut ion from Ships” . The Annex includes t hreshold requirem ent s
of sulphur and NOx- em issions from fuels used in ships which cont ribut e t o t echnology developm ent
t owards m ore energy efficient shipping, where OPS is gaining an increasing focus.
I n Oct ober 2016, I MO approved t he designat ion of t he Balt ic Sea and t he Nort h Sea as an em ission
cont rol area for nit rogen oxides ( NECA) . This decision m eans t hat NOx em issions in t he area are t o be
reduced by 80 per cent fr om t he present level. The regulat ion will be applicable t o new ships built aft er 1
11
January 2021 when sailing in t he Nort h and Balt ic Sea and ot her NECAs. To com ply wit h t his regulat ion
ships m ust have cat alyst convert ers inst alled or use LNG as fuel.
W or ld Por t s Clim a t e I n it ia t ive

The World Port s Clim at e I nit iat ive ( WPCI ) , was est ablished by t he I nt ernat ional Associat ion of Port s and
Harbors ( I APH) and launched in 2008 as a m echanism for assist ing t he port s t o com bat clim at e change.
I n 2009 t he WPCI st art ed an init iat ive prom ot ion OPS in order t o reduce local air pollut ion and
greenhouse gas em issions in port s. I n t his relat ion, a working group on Onshore Power Supply ( OPS)
was est ablished. The working group has since 2010 adm inist ered a web page t o prom ot e OPS. The
webpage includes inform at ion and news about OPS, in addit ion t o a sim plified cost calculat or. The cost
calculat or com pares t he annual cost of using OPS wit h t he cost of using t radit ional auxiliary engines.
Som e of t he port s part icipat ing in I APH have also developed guidelines for est ablishm ent of OPS.
Ot h e r in it ia t ive s
California is t he area t hat is t he m ost advanced when it com es t o prom ot ing OPS t hrough t he use of
regulat ion. According t o t he “ Airborne Toxic Cont rol Measure for Auxiliary Diesel Engines Operat ed on
Ocean- Going Vessels At - Bert h in a California Port ” regulat ions, adopt ed by t he California Air Resource
Board in 2007, all vessels visit ing Californian port s m ust eit her 1) t urn off auxiliary engines and connect
t he vessel t o som e ot her source of power, m ost likely grid- based shore power; or 2) use alt ernat ive
cont rol t echnology t hat achieve equivalent em ission reduct ions / D22/ .
There are also different bilat eral and regional init iat ives t o reduce em ission from m arit im e sect or t hat
also are considering OPS. An exam ple is t he Pacific Port s Clean Air Collaborat ive, an init iat ive init iat ed by
t he port of Los Angeles and t he Port of Shanghai in 2006.
EU r e gula t ions a n d ince n t ive s

The European Com m ission published in 2006 a non- binding recom m endat ion on shore- side elect ricit y for
ships at bert h in Com m unit y port s ( 2006/ 339/ EC) , where t he Mem ber St at es recom m ended t o est ablish
inst rum ent s and regulat ions t o prom ot e t he use of OPS.
The 2012 Sulphur Direct ive 1 regulat es t he use of fuels by st ipulat ing t hat t he Mem ber St at es m ust
ensure t hat m arine fuels are not used wit hin t heir t errit ory if t heir sulphur cont ent exceeds a cert ain
level. The direct ive lim it s t he sulphur cont ent t o a m axim um of 0.10 per cent . I t is however possible t o
use fuels wit h a higher sulphur cont ent s if an appropriat e exhaust cleaning syst em s is in place, for
exam ple scrubbers.
During t he 2011 revision of t he EU Direct ive on energy and elect ricit y t axat ion 2 , t he int roduct ion of a t ax
exem pt ion for elect ricit y provided t o seagoing vessels t hrough OPS syst em s was under discussion. A
proposal am ending t he Direct ive included am ongst ot her t hings, an exem pt ion from energy t axat ion for
shore- side elect ricit y provided t o ships while at bert h. The proposal was not adopt ed.
I n t he 2014 Clean Power Transport Direct ive / D02/ , EU requires all t rans- European core port s t o provide
LNG refuelling point s from 2025 as a subst it ut e t o oil. The direct ive also requires t he port s t o provide
shore- side elect ricit y. An except ion if given if it can be proven t hat t here is no dem and for shore- side
elect ricit y or t he cost s can be proven disproport ionat e t o t he benefit s. The direct ive clearly indicat es t hat
OPS is seen as an im port ant way forward t o reduce em issions from t ransport . The direct ive also requires
1 Direct iv e 2012/ 33/ EU of t he European Parliam ent and of t he Council am ending Council Dir ect ive 1999/ 32/ EC as regar ds t he sulphur cont ent of
m arine fuels.
2 Direct iv e 2003/ 96/ EC of 27 Oct ober 2003 rest ruct uring t he Com m unit y fr am ework for t he t axat ion of energy product s and elect ricit y
12
t he EU m em ber st at es t o report on t he developm ent and use of OPS. Wit h t he except ion of Bergen Port ,
all port s included in t he business case are included in t he t rans- European core port s.
The above- m ent ioned regulat ions and incent ives clearly shows t hat EU sees OPS as an im port ant
m easure t o achieve t he goal of reduce em ission in t he t ransport sect or. No dedicat ed inst rum ent t o
support t he developm ent of OPS is int roduced, but falls under t he EU inst rum ent Connect ing Europe
Facilit y ( CEF) for Transport . CEF for Transport is t he funding inst rum ent t o realise European t ransport
infrast ruct ure policy. The inst rum ent aim s at suppor t ing invest m ent s in building new t ransport
infrast ruct ure in Europe or rehabilit at ing and upgrading exist ing infrast ruct ure / D15/ . CEF Transport
support s am ongst ot her innovat ion in t he t ransport syst em t hat reduce t he environm ent al im pact of
t ransport , enhance energy efficiency and increase safet y. The t ot al budget for CEF Transpor t is €24.05
billion for t he period 2014- 2020. A horizont al priorit y of t he Connect ing Europe Facilit y ( CEF) is t he
“ Mot orways of t he Sea ( MoS) ” program . The progr am aim s t o prom ot e green, viable, at t ract ive and
efficient sea- based t ransport links int egrat ed in t he ent ire t ransport chain. Marit im e link based proj ect s
and proj ect s of wider benefit are given priorit y in t he select ion process. The pr oj ect should include at
least t wo EU port s ( t wo core ones or one core and one com prehensive) from t wo different Mem ber
St at es, one m arit im e operat or and ideally hint erland t ransport operat ors. The proj ect proponent s m ay
apply for up t o 30% co- financing. Facilit ies for shore side elect ricit y is am ongst t he infrast ruct ure t hat
are subj ect t o co- financing, given t hat t he facilit y is open t o all users.
I n addit ion t o t hese several count ries have nat ional funding pools. An exam ple is Norway where
governm ent owned ENOVA is providing financial support relat ed t o t he est ablishm ent of OPS in
Norwegian port s. Nat ional funding pool differs however from count ry t o count ry and are subj ect t o
changes.
6 CALCULATI ON PAPAM ETERS

I n t his sect ion, key input and assum pt ions t o t he business case analysis’ are present ed. A m ore det ailed
descript ion of t he port specific input is included in t he Appendix t o t he report .
The Green Cr uise Port proj ect covers nine proj ect part ner port s and several associat ed organisat ions,
shown in Figure 6- 1. I n cooperat ion wit h Bergen Port , five of t he part ner port s have been select ed and
analysed closer. This includes Bergen Port , Ham burg Port , Rost ock Port , Tallinn Port and Helsinki Port .
13
Figu r e 6 - 1 . Scope a n d Pa r t n e r sh ip of t h e Gr e e n Cr u ise Por t Pr oj e ct
Ge n e r a l k e y a ssu m pt ions
According t o t he 2012 EU Sulphur Direct ive 3 , EU Mem ber St at es have t o ensure t hat ships in t he Balt ic,
Nort h Sea and t he English Channel are using fuels wit h a sulphur cont ent of no m ore t han 0.10 percent
as of 1 January 2015. This m eans t hat vessels oper at ing in t he GCP area m ust use MGO or LNG as fuel,
unless t hey use cleaning t echnologies such as scrubbers. Convent ional oil- based fuels are expect ed t o
rem ain t he m ain fuel opt ion for m ost vessels in t he near fut ure, and t he st udy assum es t hat cruise
vessels will use MGO while at bert h. LNG t echnology is however seen as a good alt ernat ive t o m eet
exist ing and upcom ing em issions requirem ent s and several shipping com panies are already using LNG
t echnology.
The const ruct ion period for est ablishing OPS is assum ed t o be one year. The const ruct ion period is set t o
2018 for all port s and t he shore power facilit y is assum ed t o be r eady in 2019. The HafenCit y area in
Ham burg is under reconst r uct ion unt il 2021. During t his period t he t erm inal will have lim it ed capacit y. To
be able t o com pare t he business case bet ween t he different port s t he sam e calculat ion period for all
port s is applied and full capacit y at HafenCit y is assum ed t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
The calculat ion period is set t o 20 year s from t he OPS infrast ruct ure is est ablished. This is in line wit h
t he expect ed lifet im e of t he m ain onboard and shor e side com ponent s. The calculat ion period is t hus set
t o t he years 2018 t hroughout 2037. The calculat ions assum e t hat t he invest m ent cost s are financed
t hrough a 20- year annuit y wit h an annual int erest rat e of 2 percent per year. All figures are given in
fixed 2017 pr ices. The expect ed increase in t he general price level ( inflat ion) is assum ed t o be 2 percent
per year t hroughout t he calculat ion period. As int erest rat es and inflat ion is assum ed t o be t he sam e, t he
real int erest rat e is zero. I nt erest and loan repaym ent s in fixed 2017 prices will t hereby equal t he
invest m ent cost . I f t he int erest rat e should be higher t han t he inflat ion over t he calculat ion period, t he
real int erest rat e will be posit ive and t he sum of int erest and loan repaym ent s in fixed 2017 prices will
exceed t he invest m ent cost . Visa versa, if t he int erest rat e should be lower t han t he inflat ion over t he
3 Direct ive 2012/ 33/ EU of 21 Novem ber 2012 am ending Council Direct ive 1999/ 32/ EC as regards t he sulphur cont ent of m arine fuels.
14
calculat ion period, t he real cost of capit al will be negat ive and t he loan and repaym ent s in a debt - finance
business case will be lower t han t he t ot al invest m ent cost .
Loss of incom e due t o inst allat ion of onboard OPS ship infrast ruct ure is not included in t he business
case. This m eans t hat cost s relat ed t o downt im e while inst alling OPS equipm ent or reduct ion in t he
num ber of cabins as OPS equipm ent t akes up space, is left out of t he business case analysis.
Ve sse l t r a ffic a nd por t ca lls

The port business case’ focuses on a specific port area. I n Bergen t he focus is on Skolt egrunnskaien
( Skolt en) , in Ham burg t he focus is on HafenCit y area, in Rost ock on t he Warnem ünde area, in Tallinn on
t he Old Cit y Harbour area and in Helsinki t he focus is on t he Hernesaari area. The areas ar e chosen
based on input from t he respect ive port aut horit ies.
The expect ed num ber of port calls and t he average lay t im e over t he calculat ion period is based on AI S
dat a for 2016 and port logs and inform at ion from port aut horit ies in t he respect ive port s. I t is assum ed
t hat t he elect rical connect ion t o t he ship will be fully aut om at ed and connect ion and disconnect ion will be
lim it ed t o a t ot al of 30 m inut es on average. DNV GL has received feedback t hat wit h a fully aut om at ed
syst em t he connect ion and disconnect ion t im e could be reduced. On t he ot her side, DNV GL has received
feedback t hat due t o t echnical problem s, t he act ual connect ion t im e is significant ly longer. Wit h t he
increased num ber of OPS facilit ies DNV GL expect s t hat t he aut om at ed syst em will im prove and t hat
t echnical problem s will be lim it ed.
The num ber of port calls and average lay t im e is expect ed t o st ay t he sam e t hroughout t he calculat ion
period. This assum pt ion is relat ed wit h subst ant ial uncert aint y as act ual cruise t raffic for t he next 20
years is difficult t o foresee. Changes in cruise t raffic will affect t he ut ilizat ion of t he OPS infrast ruct ure
and hence t he business case. The effect of increase ut ilizat ion of shore power on t he port business case’
is included in t he sensit ivit y analysis in sect ion 8 ( scenario “ 100 % OPS share” ) .
Per 2015, t here were about 400 cruise ships operat ing globally and about 10 percent of t hese where
assum ed t o accept shore power / D40/ . Wit h increased m arine and cost al t ourism , along wit h new
building requirem ent s, t he European Ships and Marit im e Equipm ent Associat ion est im at es t hat t here will
be built six t o eight new cruise vessels per year bet ween 2015 and 2031 / D43/ . The Cruise Lines
I nt ernat ional Associat ion ( CLI A) est im at es t hat 33 new ocean cruise ships will be built in t he period
2015- 2020. Due t o increased focus on em ission reduct ion, opening of several new OPS inst allat ions is
expect ed in t he com ing years and t hereby also a gradual increase in t he num ber of vessels adapt ed for
shore power. Over t he calculat ion period, it is assum ed t hat 60 percent of t he port calls use shore power
while at bert h. The effect of increase ut ilizat ion of shore power is addressed in sect ion 8.1
I n Table 6- 1 t he applied assum pt ions and pot ent ial annual capacit y ut ilizat ion of t he OPS infrast ruct ure
in t he five port s is present ed.
15
Ta ble 6 - 1 . An n u a l ca pa cit y u t iliz a t ion of OPS in fr a st r u ct u r e
Ge n e r a l a ssu m pt ion s
Connect ion and disconnect ion t im e per ship 30 m inut es
Average share of port call t hat use OPS 60 percent
Be r ge n – H a m bu r g – Rost ock – Ta llin n – Old H e lsin k i -

Por t spe cific a ssu m pt ion s Sk olt e n H a fe n Cit y W a r n e m ü n de Cit y H a r bou r H e r n e sa a r i
Port calls per y ear 250 65 150 340 100
Port calls using OPS 150 39 90 144 60
Av. lay t im e per ship adj . for
11.5 hrs 14.5 hrs 11.5 hrs 7.5 hrs 8.5 hrs
connect ion/ disconnect ion
Tot al num ber of lay t im e 2,880 hrs 940 hrs 1,730 hrs 2,550 hrs 850 hrs
An n u a l ca pa cit y u t iliza t ion
of OPS in fr a st r u ct u r e 1 ,7 3 0 h r s 5 7 0 hrs 1 ,0 4 0 h r s 1 ,5 3 0 h r s 5 1 0 hrs
Ca pa cit y de m a n d a nd e n e r gy consu m pt ion

I nst alled capacit y in cruise ships t oday varies t ypically bet ween 6 and 18 MW, depending on size and on-
board facilit ies. While at bert h cruise ships only use part of t he inst alled capacit y. The capacit y dem and
from cruise ships operat ing in t he Nordic and Balt ic Sea is norm ally also lower t han t he capacit y dem and
for cruise operat ing in warm er areas air- condit ioning is used t o a m uch larger ext ent . A large part of t he
cruise vessels visit ing t he select ed port s are also in t he sm aller range.
A case st udy of OPS in t he Port of Helsinki from 2015 shows t hat ferries operat ing from Helsinki t o
St ockholm have an inst alled capacit y of 4 MW and use on average a capacit y dem and of around 1.8 MW
/ D38/ . Assum ing t hat cruise vessels on average use around t hree t im es t his capacit y, t his result s in a
capacit y dem and of around 5.5 MW. I n t he business case analysis, an average capacit y dem and of 5.5
MW is applied.
As t he power efficiency of MGO is relat ively low, a shift from MGO t o onshore power supply will include
an elem ent of energy efficiency. An efficiency fact or of 25 percent is assum ed when calculat ing t he
energy consum pt ion using MGO, i.e. it t akes 250 gr am MGO t o generat e 1 kWh of elect ricit y. When
calculat ing t he energy consum pt ion for t he LNG- power- barge solut ion an efficiency fact or of 39 percent
is assum ed. Table 6- 2 gives an overview of calculat ed annual energy consum pt ion using MGO and shore
power.
Ta ble 6 - 2 . An n u a l e n e r gy con su m pt ion r e la t e d t o cr u ise sh ips u se of e n e r gy a t be r t h
Ge n e r a l a ssu m pt ion s
Average capacit y dem and per cruise vessel while at bert h 5.5 MW

An n u a l e n e r gy con su m pt ion Sk olt e n H a fe n Cit y W a r n e m ü n de Cit y H a r bou r H e r n e sa a r i
MGO ( t on)
Tot al 3,950 1,300 2,370 3,500 1,170
60 % capacit y ut ilizat ion 2,370 780 1,420 2,100 700
Elect r icit y ( MWh)
Tot al 15,810 5,180 9,490 14,030 4,680
60 % capacit y ut ilizat ion 9,490 3,110 5,690 8,420 2,800
LNG ( MWh)
Tot al 40,550 13,290 23,720 25,060 11,690
60 % capacit y ut ilizat ion 24,330 7,980 14,230 21,040 7,010
M a r in e ga soil pr ice s ( M GO)

At t he end of Novem ber 2017, t he price of MGO was 14.1 USD/ m m BTU or 475 EUR/ m t / D62/ . I n t he
business case it is assum ed t hat price of MGO rem ains at t oday’s relat ively low level t hroughout t he
16
calculat ion period. Figure 6- 2 shows t he price developm ent of different gas and oil product since 1992
unt il t oday. The prices do not include supply t o t he ship.
Figu r e 6 - 2 . Pr ice de ve lopm e n t oil a n d ga s 1 9 9 2 t o 2 0 1 7 4 . Sou r ce : D N V GL, 2 0 1 7
The price of MGO is st rongly correlat ed t o t he price of crude oil ( Brent ) and has in t his period dropped
from an all t im e high of over 23 USD/ m m BTU t o at around 14 USD/ m m BTU t oday.
According t o EI A in t he USA 5 t he price of crude oil is expect ed t o st ay at around 10 USD/ m m BTU over
t he calculat ion period. Assum ing t hat t he prem ium of MGO above Brent rem ains st able t he MGO price
can also be expect ed t o st ay around 500 EUR/ m t . Given an efficiency fact or of 25 percent t he price of
MGO per MWh is EUR 125.
Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s ( por t ’s pu r cha sing pr ice )

Tot al elect ricit y charges reflect t he port s purchasing price of elect ricit y and includes t he following t hree
elem ent s; t he elect ricit y price, grid t ariffs and nat ional t axes and levies ( t axes) . Figure 6- 3 gives an
overview of average t ot al elect ricit y charges for indust rial consum ers 6 in Europe in 2016. The figure
shows t hat Germ any is am ongst t he European count ries wit h t he highest t ot al elect ricit y charges, driven
by a high t ax level, while Finland is am ongst t he count ries wit h t he lowest t ot al elect ricit y charges. I t
should be not at ed t hat t ot al elect ricit y charges also varies wit hin each count ry due t o local differences in
grid t ariffs and variat ion in elect ricit y prices in count ries wit h several price areas such as Norway.
4 Prices in t he figur es ar e y early av er age prices unt il 2014. 2014 prices ar e t he spot prices at t he beginning of t he m ont h.
5 U.S. Ener gy I nfor m at ion Adm inist rat ion
6 I ndust rial consum ers refer t o consum er s wit h an annual consum pt ion of elect ricit y bet w een 2 000 and 20 000 MWh.
17
160
140
120
100
EUR/MWh
80
60
40
20
0
Denmark
Latvia
Moldova
Portugal
Greece*
Spain
Lithuania
Hungary
Finland
Croatia
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Germany
Slovakia
Cyprus
France
Turkey
EU-28
Slovenia
Sweden
Ireland
Iceland
Montenegro
United Kingdom
Norway
Macedonia
Italy
Kosovo
Estonia
Bosnia and Herzegovina

Malta
Belgium
Romania
Luxembourg
Poland
Netherlands
Serbia
Austria
* 2015 figures Production cost of electricity Network costs Taxes and levies
Figu r e 6 - 3 . Ele ct r icit y pr ice for in du st r ia l con su m e r s w it h e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion fr om 2 0 0 0

M W h t o 2 0 0 0 0 M W h , 2 0 1 6 . Sour ce : Eu r ost a t , 2 0 1 7
While fut ure grid t ariffs and t he level of t axes are hard t o predict as t hese are dependent on local
circum st ances and nat ional legislat ions, elect ricit y price forecast s are widely used and som e are also
publicly available. The Norwegian TSO, St at net t , publishes long- t erm price forecast s / D45/ . Elect ricit y
price forecast for Sout hern Norway, Germ any and Finland based on St at net t ’s prognosis is shown in
Figure 6- 4. The price forecast for Est onia is based on an analysis conduct ed in 2014 by t he Est onian TSO,
Tallinn Universit y of Technology and Ea Energy Analysis / D60/ . The price forecast s show t hat for Norway,
Germ any and Finland t he price of elect ricit y is expect ed t o increase from t oday’s level t o around EUR 45
per MWh in 2030 and t hen rem ain relat ively st able unt il 2040. The elect ricit y price in Est onia is already
subst ant ially higher t han in t he ot her count ries and is expect ed t o increase t o around EUR 70 per MWh in
2030, and t hen increase slight ly furt her unt il 2040.
80
70
60
EUR/MWh
50
40
30
20
10
-
2 017
2 018
2 019
2 020
2 021
2 022
2 023
2 024
2 025
2 026
2 027
2 028
2 029
2 030
2 031
2 032
2 033
2 034
2 035
2 036
2 037
2 038
2 039
2 040
Souther Norway Germany Finland Estonia
Figu r e 6 - 4 . Lon g- t e r m pr ice for e ca st of pow e r pr ice s in Sou t h e r n N or w a y, Fin la n d, Est on ia a n d

Ge r m a ny. Sou r ce : St a t n e t t , 2 0 1 6 a n d Ele r in g e t a l., 2 0 1 4 . EUR/ M W h
18
I t is assum ed t hat t he elect ricit y price will develop in line wit h t he price forecast s above. Tot al elect ricit y
charges also depend on developm ent s in grid t ariffs and nat ional t axes. I t is expect ed t hat also t hese
elem ent s will develop, but it is relat ed subst ant ial uncert aint y relat ed t o t he developm ent . The elect ricit y
price, grid t ariffs and nat ional t axes can go in opposit e or t he sam e direct ion, and t he effect on t he t ot al
elect ricit y charges is uncert ain. To illust rat e t he effect of a pot ent ial increase or drop in t he t ot al
elect ricit y charges relat ive t o t he price of MGO, sensit ivit y analysis’ are included in sect ion 8 ( scenarios
“ Elect ricit y price + 20 percent ” and “ Elect ricit y price - 20 per cent ” ) .
Figure 6- 5 shows t he t ot al elect ricit y charges in t he different port s in 2019 and 2030, given t he
elect ricit y price forecast s above and current grid t ariffs and nat ional t ax levels.
250
200
EUR/MWh
150
100
50 Full grid tariff

National taxes
0 Grid tariffs
Electricity price
Hamburg - HafenCity
Rostock - Warnermünde
Hamburg - HafenCity
Tallinn - Old City Harbour

Bergen - Skolten
Bergen - Skolten
Helsinki - Harnesaari
2030
Figu r e 6 - 5 . Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s ( por t pu r cha se pr ice of e le ct r icit y)

The figure shows t hat t ot al elect ricit y prices in Bergen Port is subst ant ially lower t han in t he ot her four
port s. This can part ly be explained by t he low t ax level relat ed t o t he use of shore power 7 , but is also a
result of Bergen Port curr ent ly being subj ect t o a so called flexible t ariff. The flexible t ariff allows t he
local grid com pany t o cut t he supply of elect ricit y t o t he port in case of a const rained grid sit uat ion in
Bergen Cit y. I n com pensat ion, t he port receives a 90 percent r educt ion in t he capacit y fee. The grey,
broken lines indicat es t he effect on t he elect ricit y price of a full grid t ariff charge in Bergen. The local grid
owner, BKK Net t , has confirm ed t hat t hey can offer Bergen Port a flexible consum pt ion t ariff also aft er
t he grid sit uat ion in t he area is im proved. The local grid operat or has however com m unicat ed t hat aft er
t he grid sit uat ion is im proved t he capacit y fee reduct ion will not rem ain at 90 percent . BKK Net t cannot
say what t he capacit y fee reduct ion is likely t o be in t he fut ure. I n t he business case a capacit y fee
reduct ion of 50 percent is applied.
The Appendix includes a closer descript ion of t ot al elect ricit y charges in each port and t he different
elem ent s t hat const it ut e t ot al charges.
7 The use of OPS in Norway is subj ect t o t he m inim um level of t ax according t o EU’s t ax dir ect ive, i.e. EUR 0.5 per MWh. Elect ricit y consum ers
cost relat ed t o renewable support schem es in Nor way is also relat ively low and is expect ed t o rem ain r elat ively low in t he fut ure.
19
Ele ct r icit y pr ice for sa le s t o cr u ise sh ips
The price of elect ricit y produced by ships’ auxiliary engines based on MGO is assum ed t o be EUR 125 per
MWh. A shift from using MGO t o shore power while at bert h requires t he ship owners t o invest in on-
board OPS equipm ent on t heir cruise vessels. This involves a cost for t he ship owners and it is assum ed
t hat t he ship owners m ust be provided wit h an incent ive t o bear t hese cost s. I n t he business cases, it is
assum ed t hat ship owners need a cost reduct ion of around 10 percent t o accept shore pow er. Based on
t his, it is expect ed t hat shore power could be sold t o ships at an average price of around EUR 115 per
MWh in t he five port s.
I t m ay be t hat ship owners are willing t o accept a higher sales price of elect ricit y t han assum ed in t he
business cases. A desire t o dem onst rat e environm ent al responsibilit y or offer increased com fort t o it s
passenger in form of reduced noise and pollut ion while at bert h could be reasons for increased
willingness t o pay for shore power. I t is also likely t hat t ot al elect ricit y charges in different port s will
affect ship owners willingness t o pay for elect ricit y. I n port s wit h relat ively low t ot al elect ricit y charges it
can be expect ed t hat cruise vessels willingness t o pay is lower t han in port s t hat face higher t ot al
elect ricit y charges.
Liqu e fie d N a t ur a l Ga s
The price of LNG is closely linked t o t he price of nat ural gas. I n west ern Europe, t he m arginal cost of
nat ural gas is set by LNG. However, m ost gas im port ed t o cont inent al Europe is supplied in pipelines
from Russia and Norway.
The price of nat ural gas has dropped significant ly in Europe t he last decade. This drop can be explained
by t he build- up of a large global surplus, which has happened also in t he ot her fossil fuel m arket s i.e.
coal and oil. Many gas analyst s believe t hat t he surplus will cont inue int o 2020- 2025.
The m ain reason for t he surplus is t hat gas consum pt ion in Asia has grown far less t han previously
expect ed and a lot of new offers in t he form of LNG, m ainly from Aust ralia and t he Unit ed St at es, has
com e t o t he m arket . The shale gas revolut ion t hat has t aken place in t he US is one of t he m ain driver
behind t he global surplus. The price of gas t raded on exchanges in west ern Europe t he next decades is
expect ed t o be closely linked t o t he short - t erm cost of LNG deliveries from t he Unit ed St at es or Qat ar.
This is driven by Russia and Norway seeing LNG as com pet ing against t he piped supplies, and im port
growt h is driven by a fall in t he dom est ic gas product ion in cent ral EU count ries. The global LNG capacit y
is expect ed t o increases by approxim at ely 50 percent by 2019. Figure 6- 6 shows t he price forecast of t he
price of nat ural gas in nom inal Euro per MWh.
20
40
35
30
EUR/MWh
25
20
15
10
5
0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Natural gas, Europe Natural gas, US Natural gas LNG, japan
Figu r e 6 - 6 . Lon g t e r m pr ice for e ca st of n a t u r a l ga s in Eu r ope , Ja pa n a n d t h e US. Sou r ce :

W or ld Ba n k Com m odit y For e ca st Pr ice D a t a , Apr il 2 0 1 7
The forecast of European nat ural gas and LNG spot prices shows t hat t he price is not expect ed t o exceed
t he 2014- prices wit hin t he next decade. The price of European nat ural gas is expect ed t o be lower t han
t he Japanese price, but significant higher t han t he US.
LNG in Europe com pet es wit h pipeline gas and t her efore only t he cost s of dist ribut ion t o ship have t o be
added t o gas price. The dist ance t o t he nearest LNG source, e.g. LNG im port t erm inal, influences
dist ribut ion cost s, as well as fees at t he im port t erm inal and nat ional t axes relat ed t o t he use of LNG
/ D67/ . I n t he business cases, a LNG price of EUR 30 per MWh, equal t o t he price of LNG delivered in t he
Port of Ham burg is applied / D67/ . This price includes a relat ively high dist ribut ion cost as t he LNG needs
t o be delivered from Rot t erdam or Zeebrugge. I n locat ions wit h a LNG source nearby such as in
Rot t erdam t he price per MWh is lower.
En vir onm e n t a l e ffe ct s

As t his st udy looks at t he operat ional business case for port s and ship owners in t he form of a cash flow
analysis, socio- econom ic aspect s of OPS such as environm ent al effect s of reduced em ission are not
included. Environm ent al effect s are however t he m ost im port ant reason t o swit ch t o OPS and for EU and
nat ional regulat ors t o provide inst rum ent s t o incent ivise such invest m ent s.
Energy used in cruise vessels is t ypically produced from MGO t hat causes em issions of greenhouse gases,
local air pollut ion and noise. The use of OPS will reduce t he level of pollut ion and noise in harbours.
The European Union Em issions Trading Syst em ( EU ETS) is a European schem e t hat regulat es em ission
of greenhouse gases in all 28 EU m em ber st at es and t he EEE count ries I celand, Norway, and
Liecht enst ein. Current ly t he EU ETS covers m ore t han 11,000 heavy energy- using inst allat ions ( power
st at ions and indust rial plant s) and airlines, covering around 45% of t he EU's greenhouse gas em ission.
CO2 em issions from cruise ships are not included in t he EU ETS. A shift t o shore power t hus m eans t hat
part of t he cruise ships em issions will be covers by t he EU ETS as power st at ions is covered by EU ETS.
This m eans t hat cruise vessels’ use of shore power will not creat e addit ional em issions.
Air pollut ion from cruise ships cont ribut e t o degraded air qualit y in t he cit ies t hat t he cruise ships visit s.
Reduced air qualit y due t o em issions of part icles, sulphure dioxide and NOx increases healt h risks. Cruise
ships use of OPS while at bert h will lead t o reduced em issions and increased local air qualit y. Noise from
engines can also be a nuisance and will also be avoided by using shore power from t he grid.
21
An LNG- power- barge solut ion will also reduce em issions in port . According t o Becker Marine a LNG-
power- bar ge reduces NOx em issions by 80 percent and has no part iculat es or sulfur em issions / D63/ .
The num ber of lay t im e for cruise vessels give an indicat ion of pot ent ial societ al benefit s of OPS in t he
select ed port s. The port wit h t he highest num ber of lay t im e, i.e. Bergen cf. Table 6- 3, is assum ed t o be
t he port which will have t he largest environm ent al benefit of a shift t o OPS.
Ta ble 6 - 3 Ex pe ct e d a ve r a ge la y t im e a n d n u m be r of por t ca lls in t h e five se le ct e d GCP por t s
ba se d on AI S da t a fr om 2 0 1 6
Sk olt e n H a fe n Cit y W a r n e m ü n de Cit y H a r bou r H e r n e sa a r i
Annual capacit y ut ilizat ion
1,730 hrs 570 hrs 1,040 hrs 1,080 hrs 510 hrs
of OPS infrast r uct ure
I f t he shore power infrast ruct ure also can be used by ot her vessels in periods when t he ut ilizat ion from
cruise vessels is low, i.e. t he wint er season, t his will increase t he environm ent al effect . I n case of a
shore t o grid connect ion, port aut horit ies in t he select ed port s see very lim it ed alt ernat ive use of t he OPS
infrast ruct ure as t he t erm inals are dedicat ed for cruise ship. A possibilit y is however t o est ablish low-
volt age connect ions as part of t he high- volt age connect ion. A LNG- power- bar ge solut ion is in t his case
m ore flexible as it can be relocat ed and used for ot her ships or for elect ricit y generat ion in t he off- cruise
season.
7 BUSI N ESS CASE AN ALYSI S

I n t his sect ion, t he business case analysis from t he port and cruise vessels perspect ive is present ed.
From t he port perspect ive, bot h a st at ionary shore t o grid solut ion and a LNG fuelled power barge
solut ion is included.
Sh or e t o gr id solu t ion
Shore t o grid specific assum pt ions
I nve st m e nt cost s
Const ruct ion cost s relat ed t o a shore t o grid solut ion can be broken int o t wo m ain elem ent s; t he grid
connect ion and onshore dist ribut ion, illust rat ed in Figure 7- 1. On- board inst allat ion is expect ed t o be t he
sam e for a shore t o grid connect ion and a LNG- power- barge solut ion.
Grid connect ion Onshore facilit y Vessel
Figu r e 7 - 1 . Ove r vie w of a sh or e - t o- sh ip pow e r con n e ct ion . Sou r ce : ABB
22
Grid connect ion cost s is port specific and varies bet ween t he por t s depending on available gird capacit y
and t he num ber of connect ion point s. I n t he business case, it is assum ed an average capacit y dem and of
5.5 MW per cruise ship. The capacit y dem and varies however bet ween ships and seasons and can at
t im es exceed t he average expect ed capacit y dem and of 5.5 MW. To ensure som e flexibilit y t he business
case allows for a m axim um capacit y dem and of 7MW per cruise vessel. This is also t he basis for t he grid
connect ion cost est im at e 8 .
To est im at e t he cost of t he shore side facilit y, a general cost est im at e based on input from suppliers is
used. For Skolt en and Warnem ünde, port specific cost est im at es from t he Port of Bergen and t he Port of
Rost ock respect ively is applied have / D50/ / D52/ . The num ber of connect ion point s in each port and
invest m ent s cost is present ed in Table 7- 1.
Ta ble 7 - 1 . N u m be r of con n e ct ion poin t s a n d e st im a t e d gr id con n e ct ion cost s a n d sh or e pow e r
in st a lla t ion cost s
Ta llin n –
Be r ge n – H a m bu r g – Rost ock – Old Cit y H e lsin k i -
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, M EUR Sk olt e n H a fe n Cit y W a r n e m ü n de H a r bou r H e r n e sa a r i
No. of connect ion point 3 2 3 3 2
Grid connect ion 1.1 0.5 5.6 6.0 3.0
Shore power inst allat ions 10.2 10.5 20.0 10.8 10.2
Transform er st at ion ( incl. housing) 1.4 1.3 1.0 1.0
Frequency convert er s 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6
Cabling 2.0 3.2 3.0 3.0
Cable m anagem ent sy st em s 3.2 2.4 3.2 2.4
Tot a l 1 1 .2 1 0 .0 2 5 .6 1 6 .8 1 2 .5
The highest invest m ent cost for est ablishing OPS are t o be found in Rost ock. The cost est im at e is based
on overall power out put of t hree 12 MVA t ransform ers / D52/ . A breakdown of t he cost com ponent s for
t he shore power inst allat ion is not provided. The invest m ent cost in Tallinn is also relat ively high, due t o
higher grid connect ion cost s t han t he ot her port s. The invest m ent cost s of est ablishing in Bergen,
Ham burg and Helsinki is expect ed t o be significant ly lower t han in Rost ock and Tallinn.
I n a worst case scenario t he OPS facilit y is sim ply not used. I n t hat case, t he ent ire invest m ent cost will
be lost . I t is however considered realist ic t o assum e t hat if OPS is est ablished t he facilit ies will be used.
Ope r a t ion a l a nd m a int e n a nce cost s

I n addit ion t o t he cost of elect ricit y t here is expect ed som e operat ional cost s relat ed t o t he handling and
connect ion/ disconnect ion of t he OPS equipm ent in port . Due t o t he t hickness and weight of t he cables a
crane and a purpose- built cable drum is necessary. Even wit h a fully aut om at ed syst em t here is a need
t o plug t he cables from t he shore side t o t he cruise ship m anually. I t has been difficult t o get a good
est im at e on t he operat ional cost . I n t he business case, it is assum ed an oper at ional cost of EUR 500 per
port call.
Experience wit h exist ing shore power facilit ies show t hat m aint enance cost s are low according / D68/ . On
average t he m aint enance cost can be assum ed t o be around EUR 1,500 per year t he first 10 years. Aft er
10 years t he m aint enance cost can raise due t o som e refurbishm ent ( change of cable, m ot ors) and t he
annual m aint enance is assum ed t o be EUR 10,000 per year for t he last 10 years. A prerequisit e is t hat
t he m obile unit is st ored in a dry space during t he off season. I f t he equipm ent is st ored in open space
t he m aint enance cost will increase significant ly.
8 The Appendix includes a closer descript ion of t he gird infrast r uct ure and t he port specific grid connect ion cost s.
23
The cruise vessels m aint enance cost relat ed t o t he use of MGO is calculat ed based on running hours per
auxiliary engine in use while at birt h. The m aint enance cost is assum ed t o be EUR 1.8 per hour per
auxiliary engine. Operat ional cost relat ed t o t he use of MGO is expect ed t o be neglect able and is
t herefore not included in t he business case.
Result s
The net oper at ing cost s includes OPS invest m ent cost s, operat ion and m aint enance cost s, sales of
elect ricit y and t ot al elect ricit y charges. The t able below gives a sum m ary of t he operat ional business
case for t he five port s.
Ta ble 7 - 2 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se for a sh or e t o gr id in ve st m e n t in se le ct e d GCP por t s
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR Be r ge n 1 H a m bu r g Rost ock Ta llin n H e lsin k i
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 11.2 - 11.0 - 25.6 - 16.8 - 13.0
Operat ion & m aint enance - 1.6 - 0.5 - 1.0 - 2.2 - 0.7
Purchase of elect ricit y - 14.9 - 15.1 - 19.5 - 19.7 - 9.3
Sale of elect r icit y 21.8 7.2 13.1 19.4 6.5
Tot a l - 5 .9 - 1 9 .4 - 3 3 .1 - 1 9 .2 - 1 6 .5
1 Port of Bergen has t oday a capacit y fee reduct ion of 90 percent is applied. The business case assum es a capacit y fee reduct ion of 50 percent
t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
For all port s est ablishm ent of OPS will require net public invest m ent in t he range of EUR 8.8 m illion t o
EUR 32.2 m illion. Only in Bergen port is t he port ’s purchasing price of elect ricit y ( t ot al elect ricit y charges)
lower t han t he cruise operat ors assum ed willingness t o pay for elect ricit y ( sales price of elect ricit y of EUR
115 per MWh) . I n t he ot her four port s t he port s t ot al elect ricit y charges are higher t han t he incom e from
t he sale of elect ricit y and t he port s will t herefore need invest m ent support t o cover bot h t he financing of
int erest and repaym ent s r elat ed t o t he OPS invest m ent and t he ongoing operat ing cost s.
A cash flow analysis look as if t here is sufficient cash t o pay t he ongoing cost . Cash flow analysis of t he
five port business cases show t hat for all port s a capit al inj ect ion in year one is needed cover t he
ongoing cost s. The t able below sum m arize t he cash flow analysis for t he five port s.
Ta ble 7 - 3 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis for a sh or e t o gr id in ve st m e n t in se le ct e d GCP por t s
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR Be r ge n H a m bu r g Rost ock Ta llin n H e lsin k i
Bu sin e ss ca se - 5 .9 - 1 9 .4 - 3 3 .1 - 1 9 .2 - 1 6 .5
Ext ra liquidit y requir em ent s 5.9 19.4 33.1 19.2 16.5
M in im u m in ve st m e n t su ppor t 5 .9 1 9 .4 3 3 .1 1 9 .2 1 6 .5
Share of inv est m ent 53 % 176 % 129 % 115 % 127 %
LN G- Pow e r - Ba r ge solu t ion

LNG- Power- Barges are float ing power st at ions which produce elect ricit y from regasified LNG. The power -
barge is ideal for operat ion in rem ot e locat ions and harbours, and is an environm ent al friendly
alt ernat ive t o t he use of MGO.
The concept builds on int egrat ing LNG st orage, regasificat ion facilit y and a power plant on one and t he
sam e barge. The LNG- pow er barge t echnology is new and t here are only a few vessels in operat ion
worldwide t hat use t his t echnology. The first LNG- power Barge was put in operat ion at t he Ham burg port
in 2015.
I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he port owns t he LNG- power- barge. As t he power barge
solut ion is a st and- alone solut ion t his m eans t hat t he port will not be subj ect t o any grid connect ion
cost s or grid t ariff. Alt ernat ively, a t hird part y can own and operat e t he power- barge and t he port can
purchase elect ricit y from t he power- barge and sell t o cruise vessels.
24
I n addit ion t o supplying OPS t o cruise vessels, t he power barge can be used t o provide power t o t he local
elect ricit y and/ or heat com pany during t he wint er season or during ot her t im es when t he power barge is
not used for shore power. I n t his business case, it is only assum ed t hat t he power barge is used for OPS.
I n cont rast t o an OPS t o grid solut ion t he LNG- power- barge solut ion can easily be m oved. I t is t herefore
likely t o assum e t hat t he barge will have an alt ernat ive use t hat will increase t he ut ilizat ion of t he barge.
LNG- Power- Barge specific assum pt ions

The invest m ent cost for a LNG- power- barge can be broken int o t wo m ain com ponent s; t he power barge
and onshore dist ribut ion. Onshore dist ribut ion cost includes cable laying and m anagem ent syst em . The
invest m ent cost relat ed t o t he onshore dist ribut ion infrast ruct ure varies depending on where t he power-
barge is locat ed. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he dist ance bet ween t he power barge and
cruise ship ( i.e. t he lengt h of t he onshore dist ribut ion syst em ) are less t han 100 m et er. I f t hat isn’t t he
case, t he invest m ent cost s will increase due t o t he need of m ore civil work and cabling. I t is also a
possibilit y t o connect t he power- bar ge direct ly t o t he cruise ship. This will reduce t he cost of onshore
dist ribut ion.
LN G Pow e r Ba r ge
The barge designed is relat ive flexible wit h t he possibilit y t o vary bot h power out put , volt age and
frequency t o m eet cust om er dem and. Depending on design i.e. num ber of gas t urbines, t he power barge
can be cost um ed t o deliver power out put in t he range of 4 - 35 MW and char ge up t o t hree cruise ships at
t he sam e t im e. I n t he business case, it is assum ed a LNG- power- barge will t hat can supply t wo cruise
ship at t he sam e t im e.
The barge can eit her be self- propelled or not . The invest m ent cost is lower in a not self- propelled
const ruct ion, but t he oper at ional cost is higher due t o t he need for t ransport at ion when it ’s relocat ing. I n
our analyses, it is assum ed t hat t he barge is self- propelled.
The power barge follows int ernat ional OPS st andar ds, cf. sect ion 4.1.2, which enables cruises ships t o
connect t o t he local grid at one port and from a LNG barge at anot her.
The t echnology it self is new, wit h only a few barges in operat ion worldwide, and t he only publicly
available prices are based on pilot proj ect s. This m akes it difficult t o est im at e a new build price for an
LNG Barge solut ion. The price used in our analysis is based on input from Hybrid Port Energy and Becker
Marine relat ed t o t he LNG power barge “ Hum m el” / D64/ .
Por t fa cilit y a n d e qu ipm e n t / Ca ble m a n a ge m e n t syst e m

Depending on t he quay design, different elect rical shore dist ribut ion syst em can be opt im al. I n t hese
analyses it is assum ed t hat t he port facilit y equipm ent consist s of high volt age connect ors, shore
j unct ion box and a flexible int erlink t o connect cables t o t he cruiser. The cost of t hese com ponent is
based on input for different suppliers.
25
Tot a l in ve st m e n t cost
A sum m ary of t he invest m ent cost s relat ed t o a LNG- power- bar ge solut ion wit h t he possibilit y of t hree
connect ion point s is shown in Table 7- 4.
Ta ble 7 - 4 . I n ve st m e n t cost for a LN G- pow e r - ba r ge solu t ion
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, M EUR LN G- pow e r - ba r ge
No. of connect ion point 3
LNG- power - barge 13.0
Shore power inst allat ions 2.1

Cabling 1.2
Cable m anagem ent sy st em s 2.0
Tot a l 1 6 .2
Ope r a t iona l a n d m a int e na nce cost

The cost of cable handling at port is expect ed t o be t he sam e for t he LNG- power- barge as for a shore t o
grid solut ion, assum ed t o be 500 EUR per port call.
Operat ion and m aint enance cost relat ed t o t he use of t he power barge is influenced by t he t ype and
num ber of engines inst alled on t he Barge. I n t he report it is assum ed a annual operat ion and
m aint enance cost est im at ed of EUR 0.25 m illion.
To calculat e t he energy cost of a LNG- power- barge solut ion an efficiency fact or of 39 percent is assum ed.
Result s
I n Table 7- 5 t he operat ional business case for a LNG- power- bar ge invest m ent in t he five GCP port s is
present ed. Net operat ing cost s includes int erest and loan relat ed t o t he LNG- power- bar ge and onshore
dist ribut ion invest m ent s, operat ion and m aint enance cost s, sales of elect ricit y and purchasing of LNG.
Ta ble 7 - 5 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se for LN G- pow e r - ba r ge in ve st m e n t in se le ct e d GCP por t s

Loan repay m ent s - 16.2 - 16.2 - 16.2 - 16.2 - 16.2
Purchase of LNG - 14.6 - 4.7 - 8.5 - 12.6 - 4.2
Tot a l - 1 0 .6 - 1 4 .3 - 1 2 .7 - 1 1 .6 - 1 4 .7
M in . in ve st m e n t su ppor t 1 0 .6 1 4 .3 1 2 .7 1 1 .6 1 4 .7
For all port s est ablishm ent of OPS will require net public invest m ent in t he range of EUR 10 t o 15 m illion.
I n cont rast t o t he shore t o grid solut ion, wit h a LNG- power- bar ge all port earn a profit on t he sale of
elect ricit y t hat cont ribut es t o financing int erest and loan repaym ent s relat ed t o t he invest m ent and
operat ional cost . However, in t he case of Bergen Port and Helsinki Port t he invest m ent cost for a LNG-
power- bar ge solut ion is higher t han a shore t o grid solut ion. The business case for a shore t o grid
solut ion is t herefore a bet t er for t hese t wo port s. I n Ham burg, Rost ock and Tallinn t he shore t o grid
invest m ent cost s are higher for a shore t o grid solut ion t han t he LNG- barge alt ernat ive. This, t oget her
wit h high t ot al elect ricit y charges, cont ribut es t o t he LNG- barge being a bet t er alt ernat ive. As a LNG-
power- bar ge solut ion is m ore flexible and can be easily m oved, t his is also likely t o increase t he
ut ilizat ion of t he power barge and also t he pot ent ial profit relat ed t o t he sale of elect ricit y from t he
power barge.
26
Bu sin e ss ca se fr om cr u ise ve sse ls’ pe r spe ct ive
A shift from using MGO t o OPS while at bert h requires t he ship owners t o invest in onboard OPS
equipm ent on t heir cruise vessels. This is assum ed t o involve an addit ional cost for t he ship owner and it
is t herefore assum ed t hat t he ship owner m ust be provided wit h an incent ive in form of reduced
operat ional cost t o be willing t o swit ch t o shore power. I t m ay however be t he case t hat ship owners are
willing t o swit ch t o OPS for ot her reasons t han econom ic reasons for exam ple t o show environm ent al
responsibilit y or provide increase com fort for it s passenger in t he form of reduced noise and pollut ion.
I n t he business case, it is however assum ed t hat t he increased invest m ent cost of adapt ing t he ship for
OPS m ust be com pensat ed by reduced operat ional cost , i.e. reduced ener gy cost while at bert h.
Cruise vessels t raffic

As t he benefit from ships owners is assum ed t o com e from reduced ener gy cost s while at bert h, a cert ain
num ber of lay t im e in port s wit h OPS is required t o cover t he onboard equipm ent cost .
AI S dat a from 2016 show s t hat over 40 percent of t he cruise vessels t hat visit one or m ore of t he five
select ed GCP port s have a t ot al lay t im e of under 100 hours, while alm ost 90 percent have a lay t im e of
under 200 hours. The m aj orit y of t he cruise ships visit s t wo or m ore of t he five GCP port s, cf. Figure 7- 2.
5 Ports
> 600 1
4 Ports
500-600 1 3 Ports
2 Ports
400-500 1 Port
Lay time
300-400 2
200-300 2 3
100-200 5 7 28 1
< 100 4 12 20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Number of ships
Figu r e 7 - 2 . N u m be r of cr u ise ve sse ls in 2 0 1 6 t h a t visit s on e or m or e of t h e five se le ct e d GCP

por t s a n d t h e ir t ot a l la yt im e in t h e por t ( s) . Sou r ce : D N V GL, 2 0 1 7
To illust rat e t he business case of swit ching from MGO t o OPS from t he ship owner’s perspect ive t he
business case analysis is conduct ed for t wo different cruise vessels operat ing in t he Nort h and Balt ic Sea;
Viking St ar and The World.
Bot h Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld ope r a t e s in t e r n a t ion a lly.
Figure 7- 3 gives an overview of t he 2016 rout e for t he t wo cruise vessels. The size of t he bobbles
illust rat es t he lay t im e in each port .
27
V iking The
St a r W orld
Figu r e 7 - 3 . Ove r vie w of por t ca lls Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld, 2 0 1 6
While Viking St ar spends a large share of it s t im e in port s in t he Nort h and Balt ic sea, it also operat es in
Nort h Am erica and in t he Caribbean. Viking St ar has a relat ively high num ber of t ot al lay t im e in t he five
select ed GCP port s, 617 hours in 2016. The World covers a larger part of t he world and operat es in
Sout h Am erica, Asia, Aust ralia and t he Middle East , in addit ion t o Europe. I t follows t hat t he cruise
vessel has a significant ly lower num ber of t ot al lay t im e in t he select ed GCP port s, 138 hours in 2016.
Ta ble 7 - 6 . Ve sse l t r a ffic Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld 2 0 1 6
V e sse l t r a ffic 2 0 1 6 Vik in g St a r Th e W or ld
Tot al lay t im e 3,781 3,335
Tot al lay t im e for select ed GCP port s 617 138
Share of t ot al 16 % 4 %
Average lay t im e in select ed GCP port s 20 hrs 23 hrs
Cruise vessel specific assum pt ions

The st udy looks exclusively at t he five port s and t he business case is based on a j oint analysis of t hese.
I f OPS is available also in ot her port s, and t he cost of using OPS is lower t han t he cost of MGO, t his will
st rengt hen t he business case of swit ching t o OPS. I n t he five GCP port s it is assum ed t hat t he cruise
vessels purchasing price for elect ricit y is EUR 100 per MWh t hroughout t he business case.
I n t he business case it is solely looked at t he OPS invest m ent cost . Pot ent ial loss of incom e due t o
downt im e during inst allat ion of OPS equipm ent or loss of cabins because of OPS equipm ent is t aking up
cabin space is not included in t he business case.
Ene r gy- a nd e le ct r icit y consum pt ion

Based on t he t ot al lay t im e in t he five select ed GCP port s in 2016 t he Viking St ar’s t ot al energy
consum pt ion while at bert h is est im at ed t o 999 m t MGO, while The World’s energy consum pt ion is
est im at ed t o 474 m t MGO. The corresponding annual elect ricit y consum pt ion would be 4 GWh for Viking
St ar and 1 GWh for The World. Table 7- 7 shows t he annual lay t im e in each of t he five port s and t he
corresponding MGO and elect ricit y consum pt ion. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he cruise
vessels energy consum pt ion rem ains at t he 2016 t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
28
Ta ble 7 - 7 An n u a l la y t im e 2 0 1 6 , e n e r gy- a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion in t h e five GCP por t s,
Sou r ce : D N V GL AS
V I KI N G STAR TH E W ORLD
An n u a l An n u a l An n u a l
An n u a l An n u a l M GO e le ct r icit y la y An n u a l M GO e le ct r icit y
la y t im e con su m pt ion con su m pt ion t im e con su m pt ion con su m pt ion
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, M EUR ( h ou r s) 1 ) ( t on ) ( MW h) ( h ou r s) ( t on ) ( MW h)
Bergen 351 480 1,930 - - -
Ham burg - - - 68 90 370
Rost ock 94 130 520 - - -
Tallinn 75 100 410 38 50 210
Helsinki 51 70 280 32 40 180
Tot a l 571 780 3 140 138 180 760
1) Annual lay t im e is not adj ust ed for connect ion/ disconnect ion t im e.
I nve st m e nt , ope r a t ion a nd m a int e na nce cost s

The invest m ent cost for t he cruise vessel is est im at ed t o EUR 0.5 m illion. See sect ion 3.1.1 for a
descript ion of t he necessar y onboard ship infrast ruct ure. A general cost est im at e based on input from
suppliers of OPS equipm ent is applied t o est im at e t he onboard inst allat ion cost s.
The on- boar d OPS syst em is int egrat ed int o t he full elect rical syst em onboard. I t is t herefore assum ed
t hat t he OPS syst em will not involve any addit ional operat ion and m aint enance cost .
Result s
Net operat ing cost s includes int erest and loan relat ed t o t he onboard OPS inst allat ion and cost saving
relat ed t o t he use of energy. I n Table 7- 8 t he oper at ional business case for OPS given t he Viking St ar
and The World vessel t raffic in 2016 is present ed.
Ta ble 7 - 8 Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld w it h a n e le ct r icit y pr ice of EUR
1 1 5 pe r M W h
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR Vik in g St a r Th e W or ld
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 0.5 - 0.5
Operat ion and m aint enance - -
Energy cost s 0.6 0.2
Tot a l 0.1 - 0.3
Real rat e of ret urn 3 % <0 %
The result s of t he operat ional business case show t hat t he profit abilit y for t he ship owner depends on a
sufficient num ber of lay t im e in port s t hat provide OPS at a cheaper price t han MGO.
The t able below shows t he necessary num ber of t ot al lay t im e in port s for t he invest m ent t o generat e a
posit ive ret urn on t he invest m ent . I f ship owner has a required real rat e of ret urn of t he invest m ent of 6
and 10 per cent , t he cruise vessels m ust have a t ot al lay t im e of 790 and 1,065 hours per year
respect ively over t he 20 year calculat ion period.
Ta ble 7 - 9 . N u m be r of la y t im e ( h ou r s) for give n r a t e s of r e t u r n
Re a l r a t e of r e t u r n Re a l r a t e of r e t u r n Re a l r a t e of r e t u r n
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR 6% 8% 10 %
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s I nvest m ent - 0.5 - 0.5 - 0.5
cost
Operat ion and m aint enance - - -
Energy cost s 0.9 1.0 1.2
Tot a l 0 .4 0 .5 0 .7
La y t im e ( h ou r s) 790 925 1 ,0 6 5
29
8 SEN SI TI VI TY AN ALYSI S
To assess t he effect of a change in assum pt ions applied in t he base case scenario, t hree sensit ivit y
analyses are included in t his sect ion. I n t he sensit ivit y analysis, only one fact or is changed at a t im e, all
ot her fact ors are held const ant .
I n cr e a se d ut iliza t ion of OPS in fr a st r uct ur e

I n t he base case scenario a ut ilizat ion of t he OPS infrast ruct ure corresponding t o an average of 60
percent of t he port calls is assum ed. To reflect t he effect of an increased ut ilizat ion of t he infrast ruct ure
it is in t his case assum ed t hat all port s calls use shore power. I n t he t able below t he result from t he
sensit ivit y analysis is present ed.
Ta ble 8 - 1 . Se n sit ivit y a n a lysis 1 0 0 pe r ce n t OPS sh a r e
Purchase of LNG - 20.4 - 21.7 - 32.2 - 32.8 - 12.0
Tot a l 2 .1 - 2 1 .5 - 3 7 .6 - 2 0 .8 - 1 5 .3
For t he port of Bergen, which has a low elect ricit y price and t hereby earn a profit on t he sale of
elect ricit y, an increase in t he ut ilizat ion of shore power will provide a posit ive business case. I n t he port s
where t ot al elect ricit y charges, i.e. t he port s purchasing price of elect ricit y, is higher t han t he assum ed
sales price of EUR 115 per MWh, an increase in t he ut ilizat ion of t he OPS infrast ruct ure weakens t he
business case. The reason is t hat t he port s have t o cover t he loss relat ed t o t he addit ional num ber of
hours.
I n cr e a se or de cr e a se in t ot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s
I n t his analysis, an effect of a 20 percent increase or decrease in t ot al elect ricit y charges com pared t o
t he MGO price is analysed. Tot al elect ricit y charges consist of t hree elem ent s; t he elect ricit y price, grid
t ariffs or t ax level. An increase or decr ease in t ot al elect ricit y charges could be a result of changes in one
or several of t hese elem ent s. The result s are present ed in Table 8- 2 and Table 8- 3.
Ta ble 8 - 2 . Se n sit ivit y a n a lysis 2 0 pe r ce n t de cr e a se in e le ct r icit y pr ice r e la t ive

Purchase of LNG - 11.9 - 12.0 - 15.6 - 15.8 - 7.4
Tot a l - 2 .9 - 1 6 .4 2 9 .2 - 1 5 .3 - 1 4 .7
Ta ble 8 - 3 . Se n sit ivit y a n a lysis 2 0 pe r ce n t in cr e a se in e le ct r icit y pr ice r e la t ive

Purchase of LNG - 17.9 - 18.1 - 23.5 - 23.6 - 11.1
Tot a l - 8 .9 - 2 2 .4 - 3 7 .0 - 2 3 .2 - 1 8 .4
The result s show t hat a decrease in t he elect ricit y price of 20 percent st rengt hen t he business cases as
elect ricit y becom es relat ively cheaper com pared t o MGO. A 20 percent decrease in t he elect ricit y price is
however not enough t o pr ovide a posit ive business case for a shore t o grid connect ion in any of t he port s.
30
A 20 increase in t he elect ricit y price weakens t he business cases as t he price difference bet ween
elect ricit y and MGO becom es sm aller.
Por t busin e ss ca se for e st a blishin g OPS w it h a 5 0 pe r ce n t

r e du ct ion of t h e ca pa cit y fe e s a nd r e duce d t a x e s
I n t his analysis, t he effect of beneficial grid t ariffs and t axes is assessed. Figure 8- 1 illust rat es t he effect
on t ot al elect ricit y charges if all t he five GCP port s ar e given a 50 percent discount on t he capacit y fee,
are charged t he m inim um level of elect ricit y t ax ( EUR 0.5 per MWh) and is exem pt ed from nat ional
renewable energy fees. Tot al elect ricit y charges given full grid t ariffs and t he current t ax level is
illust rat ed in t he broken lines.
250
200
EUR/MWh
150
100
50
0
Hamburg - HafenCity
Hamburg - HafenCity
Bergen - Skolten
Bergen - Skolten

2030
Electricity price Grid tariffs

National taxes Price per MWh, adjusted for power efficency
Full electricity charges Sales price of electricity
Figu r e 8 - 1 . Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s in se le ct e d GCP por t s su bj e ct t o r e du ce d gr id t a r iffs a n d

t a x e s, a n d pr ice of M GO a n d LN G a dj u st e d for pow e r e fficie n cy, 2 0 1 9 a n d 2 0 3 0 . 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s,
EUR/ M W h .
Wit h 50 percent reduct ion of t he capacit y fee 9 and reduced t axes, t ot al elect ricit y charges fall below t he
cruise operat ors assum ed willingness t o pay for elect ricit y for all port s.
The t able below gives a sum m ary of t he cash flow analysis for t he five port s, given t he current grid
t ariffs and t axes level, cf. 7 and t he reduced purchasing price scenario. For Bergen Port t hese t wo
scenarios are t he sam e as it is assum ed t hat Bergen in t he fut ure will have a capacit y fee reduct ion of 50
percent . For Bergen Port t he business case wit h a full grid t ariff is t here included.
9 Tallinn Port only subj ect t o a consum pt ion fee. A 50 percent r educt ion in t he consum pt ion fee is t herefor e assum ed for Tallinn Port .
31
Ta ble 8 - 4 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se , ba se ca se a n d r e du ce d ca pa cit y fe e a n d t a x e s
Be r ge n H a m bu r g Rost ock Ta llin n H e lsin k i
Ba se Fu ll Ba se Re d. Ba se Re d. Ba se Re d. Ba se Re d.
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR ca se t a r iff ca se pr ice ca se pr ice ca se pr ice ca se pr ice
I nt erest and loan
- 11.2 - 11.2 - 11.0 - 11.0 - 25.6 - 25.6 - 16.8 - 16.8 - 13.0 - 13.0
repaym ent s
Operat ion &
- 1.6 - 1.6 - 0.5 - 0.5 - 1.0 - 1.0 - 2.2 - 2.2 - 0.7 - 0.7
m aint enance
Purchase of
- 14.9 - 21.1 - 15.1 - 1.3 - 19.5 - 9.2 - 19.7 - 14.4 - 9.3 - 5.4
elect r icit y
Sale of elect r icit y 21.8 19.0 7.2 6.2 13.1 11.4 19.4 16.8 6.5 5.6
Tot a l - 5 .9 - 1 4 .9 - 1 9 .4 - .6 .6 - 3 3 .1 - 2 4 .4 - 1 9 .2 - 1 6 .4 - 1 6 .5 - 1 3 .5
M in . in ve st m e n t
5 .9 1 4 .9 1 9 .4 6 .6 3 3 .1 2 4 .4 1 9 .2 1 6 .4 1 6 .5 1 3 .5
su ppor t
Share of inv est m ent 53 % 133 % 177 % 60 % 127 % 95 % 115 % 98 % 128 % 104 %
The scenario wit h reduced t ot al elect ricit y charges shows even t hough t he need for invest m ent support is
reduced significant ly t here is st ill a subst ant ial need for public funding for t he port t o pay it s ongoing
cost s relat ed t o a shore t o grid OPS invest m ent .
Ot h e r un ce r t a int ie s
To const ruct a business case analysis a line of assum pt ion has been applied. There is subst ant ial
uncert aint y relat ed t o several of t hese assum pt ion, including:
Th e n u m be r of sh ips a r r ivin g a n d u sin g sh or e pow e r : The business cases are based on

vessel t raffic in 2016 and it is assum ed t hat t he num ber of port calls and average lay t im e
rem ains const ant t hroughout t he calculat ion period. The developm ent in vessel t raffic is
uncert ain. An increase in t he num ber of port calls or lay t im e t hat use shore power will increase
t he ut ilizat ion of t he OPS facilit y. The sensit ivit y analysis in sect ion 8.1 is included t o reflect t he
effect of an increase in t he ut ilizat ion of shore power.
I n ve st m e n t cost s: The invest m ent cost s are based on input from suppliers, port aut horit ies
and grid com panies. The invest m ent cost s reflect t he current sit uat ion and could change wit h
t im e. Grid connect ion cost s are for exam ple highly dependent on available grid capacit y which
change over t im e depending on local dem and and t he need for grid reinforcem ent .
Fu e l pr ice s: There is subst ant ial uncert aint y relat ed t o t he developm ent of fuel prices. An
increase or decrease in t he price of MGO and LNG will affect t he business case result s. The
sensit ivit y analysis in sect ion 8.1 is included t o reflect t he effect of an increase or decrease in t he
price difference bet ween t ot al elect ricit y charges and t he price of MGO.
Ot h e r for m s of e n e r gy: There are ot her form s of energy t han shore power t hat can replace
fuel oil such as LNG burned direct ly on t he boat , liquid biogas, hydrogen, m et hanol and et hanol.
I n t he short er- t erm LNG and m et hanol are possible subst it ut es for shore power, while hydrogen
m ay be a com pet it ive alt ernat ive in t he longer t erm . Alt ernat ive form s of energy cont ribut e t o
uncert aint y relat ed t o t he period over which t he invest m ent in shore power can be am ort ised.
32
1 0 KEY I SSUES FOR A BUSI N ESS PLAN FOR OPS
The Green Cr uise Port ( GCP) is a proj ect consist ing of port aut horit ies from around t he Balt ic Sea and
neighbouring Nort h Sea. GCP shall work t o m ake t he Balt ic Sea Region m ore innovat ive, m ore
sust ainable and bet t er connect ed, from perspect ive of cruise t ourism . The prom ot ion of low em ission
solut ions, including OPS, is well aligned wit h t he GCP am bit ions.
Based on t he findings in t his report , t here are som e key elem ent s t hat are relevant t o follow up in GCP
as t o see bar riers t o OPS being lowered and opport unit ies being capt ured. OPS for cruise ships can be
support ed and m ore likely be achieved t hrough a com bined set of m easures for ships, port s, regulat ors
and incent ive providers. To see a large- scale developm ent and applicat ion of OPS for cruise vessels t he
business cases for vessels and port operat ors need t o be posit ive. This can be support ed by avoiding
OPS carrying cost of ot her policy init iat ives and by allowing t he cruise indust ry t o be rem unerat ed for t he
cont ribut ion t o posit ive ext ernalit ies such as reduced pollut ion and noise.
Recom m endat ion for cont inued effort on OPS for cruise vessels and port s:
1. Coope r a t ion a n d coor din a t ion be t w e e n por t s a n d sh ip ow n e r s
To facilit at e t he developm ent and use of shore power t here is a need for cooperat ion and
coordinat ion bet ween port s and ship owners t o ensure t hat t he best solut ions are prom ot ed. GCP
part nerships and arenas such as t he Green Port Day arranged by GCP in Bergen in Novem ber
2017, facilit at e discussion and sharing of experience t hat is valuable in t he work t o prom ot e OPS
a solut ion for cruise vessels. GCP should cont inue it s effort s in t his regard.
2. W or k for de ve lopm e n t of a le ga l fr a m e w or k t ha t pr om ot e t h e u se of OPS
I n t he 2014 Clean Power Transport Direct ive / D02/ , EU requires all t rans- European core port s t o
provide shore- side elect ricit y, and t he direct ive clearly indicat es t hat OPS is considered an
im port ant way forward t o reduce em issions from t ransport . GCP should work t o highlight t he
benefit s of OPS t o cont ribut e t o t he develop of legal fram eworks t hat prom ot e OPS at a nat ional
and EU level. An exam ple in t his regard is t he EU Tax Direct ive t hat allows for a m inim um t ax on
elect ricit y of EUR 0.5 per MWh for business use. Norway and Sweden have already im plem ent ed
a m inim um t ax on elect ricit y relat ed t o t he use of OPS. GCP should work t o influence nat ional
aut horit ies in ot her count ries t o do t he sam e. As long as OPS is creat ing societ al benefit s in t he
form of reduced pollut ion, it seem s less logical t hat it s im plem ent at ion is ham pered by t axat ion.
3. H a ve t h e u se of on sh or e pow e r e x e m pt e d fr om r e n e w a ble obliga t ion cost
The purpose of support schem es for prom ot ion of renewable elect ricit y is t o support a t ransit ion
t o m ore use of renewables and less use of fossil fuels. These schem es are usually financed
t hrough addit ional charges on t he use of elect ricit y. OPS is anot her way t o reduce fossil fuels,
and t hrough elect rificat ion it opens for use of renewable energy from sources such as wind, solar
and hydro power. High nat ional t axes or obligat ion paym ent s due t o renewable priorit y schem es
m akes elect ricit y m ore expensive, and likely m ore expensive t han t he use of MGO. GCP should
work t o have OPS exem pt ed from renewable obligat ion fees/ charges.
4. W or k t o se t t le u n cle a r issu e s
The int erviews wit h port s and t he discussion during t he Green Port Day conference arranged by
t he GCP showed t hat t her e are cert ain elem ent s relat ed t o t he onshore power supply st andard
t hat m ay be m isunderst ood, such as t he requirem ent relat ed t o t he size of t he t ransform er.
These are elem ent s t hat could increase t he t ot al invest m ent s cost s for est ablishing OPS. GCP
should work t o clarify quest ions and uncert aint ies wit h respect t o st andards and OPS solut ions.
33
5. Fle x ible discou n t e d gr id t a r iffs.
As illust rat ed by t he business case, Ber gen Port has relat ively low t ot al elect ricit y charges,
influenced by lower grid t ariffs. Bergen Port is subj ect t o an int errupt ible supply t ariff which
allows t he port t o m ake use of elect ricit y when t here are no capacit y const raint s in t he local grid.
I n case of capacit y const rain, t he local grid operat or can disconnect Bergen Port . I n
com pensat ion Bergen Por t is current ly given a 90 percent reduct ion in t he capacit y fee. The GCP
port should work wit h nat ional regulat ors and grid com panies t o explore sim ilar flexible grid t ariff
solut ions or ot her m echanism s which can cont ribut e t o reduce t he cost of elect ricit y for OPS.
6. W or k w it h n a t ion a l a u t h or it ie s t o fin d in st r u m e n t s t h a t pr ovide in ve st m e n t su ppor t for

OPS a s t o ove r com e ba r r ie r s a n d in it ia l t h r e sh old for OPS
The invest m ent cost s for OPS in cruise port s are subst ant ial. The environm ent al benefit of a OPS
solut ion can however be very high, especially t he local benefit in densely populat ed cit ies. GCP
should work t o highlight t he environm ent al benefit of OPS and t o have nat ional aut horit ies
capt ure such posit ive ext ernalit ies t hrough inst rum ent s t hat provide invest m ent support for OPS.
I nit ial periods of support can help t o drive t echnology developm ent s as well as a wider
applicat ion of OPS can support t he business case for t he ship operat ors.
7. Pr om ot e t h e be n e fit s of OPS t o sh ip ow n e r s
A swit ch from MGO t o OPS give ship owners an opport unit y t o act t o direct ly reduce em issions
and in t his show t o t heir passenger s and regulat ors t hat t hey support a long t erm sust ainable
cruise t raffic developm ent wit hin t he region. This m akes it easier for aut horit ies t o prom ot e
furt her developm ent of cruise indust ry, and it can be used as a m arket ing aspect t o at t ract m ore
cruise passengers. As OPS is about t o be est ablished in several port s, GCP should work wit h ship
owners t o illust rat e t he long t erm benefit s of OPS in t he relevant harbours.
8. W or k on br idgin g t h e de ve lopm e n t
The est ablishm ent of OPS has higher cost s in cert ain port s where t here are grid capacit y
const raint s or lim it at ion t o use of harbour. The use of LNG- barge t o supply OPS is an alt ernat ive
t o st at ionary OPS solut ions. Equally, working wit h suppliers t o find flexible syst em s such as
cont ainer based solut ions or easy rem odelling of ship power syst em s would help t o reduce t he
barrier t o m ake OPS being applied.
34
1 1 REFEREN CES
D01 TEN- TaNS, 2014. Case St udy Onshore Pow er Supply Facilit y at t he Cruise Term inal Alt ona in Ham burg
D02 TrainMoS I I . On Shore Pow er Supply and LNG, ht t p: / / www .ont hem osway .eu/ wp-
cont ent / uploads/ 2015/ 06/ 2- OPS- LNG- .pdf [ 17.1.2017]
D03 Kopt i, M., Ham m ar, L. and Kedo, Krist ine, 2016. Shipping t opic paper – Cent ral Balt ic
D04 European Com m ision, 2015. Periodic Repor t ing for period 1 - LoCOPS ( Low Cost Onshore Power Supply
( LoCOPS) )
D05 Helcom , 2016. Balt ic Sea Clean Shipping Guide 2016, ht t p: / / www .helcom .fi/ List s/ Publicat ions/
Balt ic% 20Sea% 20Clean% 20Shipping% 20Guide% 202016.pdf
D06 NABU, 2016. Cruise ship rank ing 2016,
D07 St em m ann- Technik , 2017. Onshore Pow er Supply for Cruise Ships
D08 CE Delft , 2016. Cost benefit calculat ion t ool onshore pow er supply
D09 CE Delft , 2016. Calculat ion t ool,
D10 HPA Ham burg Port Aut horit y, 2014. Onshore Power Supply in t he Por t of Ham burg
D11 Fat hom , 2014. Shore Power for t he Ship Operat or
D12 DNV GL, 2015. Under søkelse av m arkedsgur nnlaget for landst røm . Landst røm i norsk e havner.
D13 Official Journal of t he European Union, 2014. Dir ect iv e 2014/ 94/ EU of t he European Parliam ent and of t he
Council of 22 Oct ober 2014 on t he deploym ent of alt ernat iv e fuels infr ast ruct ure
D14 Official Journal of t he European Union, 2016. Dir ect iv e ( EU) 2016/ 802/ EU of t he European Par liam ent and of
t he Council of 11 May 2016 relat ing t o a reduct ion in t he sulphur cont ent of cert ain liquid fuels ( codificat ion)
D15 European Com m ision, 2017. CEF Transport Mot orways of t he Sea European Com m ission,
ht t ps: / / ec.europa.eu/ inea/ en/ connect ing- eur ope- facilit y/ cef- t ransport / cef- t ranspor t - m ot orways- sea
[ 10.2.2017]
D16 Official Journal of t he European Union, 2003. Council Direct ive 2003/ 96/ EC of 27 Oct ober 2003
rest r uct uring t he Com m unit y fram ework for t he t axat ion of energy product s and elect r icit y
D17 Eurost at , 2017. Elect ricit y price st at ist ics, ht t p: / / ec.europa.eu/ eurost at / st at ist icsexplained/ index .php/
Elect r icit y_pr ice_st at ist ics# Elect r icit y_indust rial_consum er s [ 10.2.2017]
D18 Eurost at , 2017. Elect ricit y price st at ist ics as of 2016s1, ht t p: / / ec.europa.eu/ eurost at / st at ist ics-
explained/ index.php?t it le= Elect ricit y_price_st at ist ics&oldid= 265168 [ 10.2.2017]
D19 Eurost at , 2017. : Conv ersion t able in euro for non- Euro Area count ries, 2016s1.
ht t p: / / ec.europa.eu/ eurost at / st at ist icsexplained/ index.php?t it le= File: Conversion_t able_in_euro_for_non-
Euro_Area_count ries,_2016s1.png&oldid= 313092 [ 10.2.2017]
D20 TS Energia OÜ, e- m ail 21.2.2017. Answer t o request relat ed t o st udy on Onshore Power Supply on behalf of
Bergen Port and t he Green Cr uise Port proj ect
D21 I nt ernat ional Organizat ion for St andardizat ion, 2017. St andards and proj ect s under t he direct responsibilit y
of I SO/ TC 8/ SC 3 Secret ariat , ht t p: / / www.iso.org/ iso/ hom e/ st ore/
cat alogue_t c/ cat alogue_t c_br owse.ht m ?com m id= 45824 [ 22.2.2017]
D22 California Envir onm ent al Prot ect ion Agency, 2017. Shore Power for Ocean‐going Vessels,
ht t ps: / / www.arb.ca.gov/ port s/ shorepow er/ shorepow er.ht m [ 22.2.2017]
D23 ABB, e- m ail 3.7.2017. I nform at ion r egarding operat ional and m aint enance cost for OPS.
D24 Ham burg Port Aut hor it y , 2017. Annex : Schedule of Port Fees and Charges t o t he General Ter m s and
Condit ions ( “ AGB” ) Applicable t o Civ il- Law Agreem ent s on t he General Use of t he Port of Ham burg
D25 Skat t edir ekt or at et , 2017. Avgift på elek t risk kraft 2017
D26 Erikcsson, P. and Fazlagic, I ., 2008. Shore- side power supply. A feasibilit y st udy and t echnical solut ion.
D27 Port of Tallinn, e- m ail 23.2.2017. Answer t o request relat ed t o st udy on Onshore Power Supply on behalf of
Bergen Port and t he Green Cr uise Port proj ect
D28 Port of Tallinn, e- m ail 23.2.2017. Port log Old Cit y Harbour 2017
35
D29 Port of Tallinn, e- m ail 23.2.2017. Port log Old Cit y Harbour m ap
D30 Port of Tallinn, e- m ail 23.2.2017. At t achem nt t o e- m ail w it h answer s t o quest ions
D31 Siem ens, 2016. Landst røm forsyning for m ilj øvennligehavner
D32 Port of Tallinn, e- m ail 23.2.2017. Addit ional infor m at ion from Port of Tallinn
D33 EU Refer ence Scenar io, 2016. Energy , t ransport and GHG em issions Trends t o 2050
D34 EU Refer ence Scenar io, 2016. Appendix t o Repor t Energy, t ranspor t and GHG em issions Trends t o 2050,
D35 Port of Ham burg, 2017. Present at ion on Onshore Pow er Supply in Ham burg
D36 Minut es of m eet ing from phone m eet ing wit h Port of Ham burg 9.3.2017
D37 Ecofys, 2015. Pot ent ial for Shore Side Elect ricit y in Europe
D38 Veij o Rant io fr om port of Helsink i, BPO Sem inar on Onshore Power, 15t h April 2015. Onshore pow er supply
Case st udy – Port of Helsinki
D39 Port of Tallinn, 2017. Port charges and fees valid from 01.01.2017
D40 Cit y & Port Developm ent , 2015. Opt ions for Est ablishing shore power for cruise ships in Port of Copenhagen
Nordhavn
D41 Tallinn Port , e- m ail 7.4.2017. I nform at ion relat ed t o t he est ablishm ent of OPS in Tallinn Port
D42 BKK and Port of Bergen. 2008. Landst røm t il skip i Bergen Havn
D43 OECD, 2016. The Ocean Econom y in 2030
D44 Byluft list en, 2013. Byluft . Luft m onit oren Fr iskere pust fra havnen?
ht t ps: / / byluft list en.files.wordpress.com / 2013/ 12/ luft m onit oren- 2013- 4- havneut gave.pdf [ 6.6.2017]
D45 St at net t , 2016. Long- Ter m Market Analysis The Nordic Region and Europe 2016–2040
D46 BKK Net t , 2017. Prisov ersikt for effekt m ålt e anlegg fra 1. j anuar 2017.
D47 BKK, 2016. Regional Kraft syst em ut redning for BKK- om rådet og indre Har dagner 2016- 2036.
D48 NVE, 2016. NVEs leverandør skift eundersøkelse, 3. kvart al 2016, ht t ps: / / www.nv e.no/ Media/ 4940/ 3-
kvart al- 2016- hovedt all- fra- nv es- lev erand% C3% B8rskift eunders% C3% B8kelse_osb.pdf [ 4.5.2017]
D49 EPGC, 2016. Elect r ic shore power in t he Port of Triest e: t he feasibilit y st udy
D50 Port of Bergen, 2017. Budsj et t Landst røm Bergen Hav n
D51 Nordpool Spot , 2017. Elect ricit y prices Nordics
D52 Port of Rost ock , e- m ail 17.11.2107. I nform at ion on invest m ent cost s for OPS
D53 DNV GL, 2017. Aanalysis of charging – and shore power infrast ruct ur e in Norwegian Por t s
D54 Eidsv ik, 2015. Gas Pow ered Hybrid Technology – a pot ent ial for Float ing Cold I roning
D55 Eidsv ik, em ail 24.8.2017. I nform at ion regar ding Elect r ic Power Supply Ship.
D56 NVE, 2017. Leverandørsk ift eunder søkelse 2. kvart al 2017
D57 BKK, e- m ail 3.6.2017. I nform at ion r egarding grid connect ion cost est im at e
D58 NDR, 2017. Auch Hafencit y soll Landst rom anlage bekom m en,
ht t p: / / www .ndr.de/ nachricht en/ ham burg/ Auch- Hafencit y soll- Landst rom anlage-
bekom m en,landst rom 140.ht m l [ 18.9.2017]
D60 Eler ing, Tallinn Univ ersit y of Technologu and Ea Energy Analyses, 2014. Est onian- Long- t er m - Energy -
Scenar ios
D61 Helen, 2017. Map of Hernesaari cruise quays
D62 DNV GL, 2017. Current pr ice developm ent oil and gas,
D63 Beck er Marine Syst em . 2017. LNG Hybr id Barge
D64 Hybrid Port Energy, 2017. Com m ent s on DNV GL draft report “ Opport unit ies and barrier s for connect ing
cruise vessels t o shore pow er supply in port s“
D65 NPD, 2017. Om regningst abell LNG Sm 3 t il kWh, ht t p: / / w ww.npd.no/ Global/ Norsk / 3-
Publikasj oner / Ressur srapport er/ Ressur srapport 2009/ Kapit ler/ Om r egningst abell.pdf [ 15.12.2017]
D66 Finansdepar t em ent et , 2017. Avgift ssat ser 2017
D67 Hybrid Port Energy, e- m ail 20.12.2017. I nform at ion regar ding est ablishm ent of onshore power .
D68 Cavot ek, e- m ail 17.11.2017. I nform at ion on operat ion and m aint enance cost for high v olt age OPS
36
APPEN D I X A BUSI N ESS CASES
A1 Be r ge n Por t
A2 H a m bur g Por t
A3 Rost ock Por t
A4 Ta llin n Por t
A5 H e lsink i Por t
37
Appe n dix A1 Be r ge n Por t
The Port of Bergen is an int erm unicipal com pany, owned by t he count ies Askøy, Aust rheim , Bergen,
Fedj e, Fj ell, Lindås, Meland, Os, Radøy, Sund
Koengen sub.
and Øygarden, t oget her wit h Hordaland count y
aut horit y. The port is used by cruise vessels,
oversea ferries, dom est ic ferries, cargo and
leisure boat s. Cruise vessels are locat ed at
Skolt egrunnskaien ( Skolt en) and in Jekt eviken,
cf. Figure. I n Bergen Port t he business case focus
on t he Skolt en area which consist s of t hree
quays; Skolt en Nort h, Skolt en Sout h and
Bont elabo 2.
I n t he Skolt en area t here is t oday one onshore

power supply connect ion point . This is a low-
volt age connect ion point ( 440V or 690V) , used
m ainly t o supply power for offshore ships. As t his Figu r e 1 . Be r ge n cr u ise por t . Sou r ce : Cr u ise
is a low- volt age connect ion point it not suit able N or w a y, 2 0 1 7
for supplying OPS t o cruise vessels. For cruise vessels t o be OPS while in bert h at Skolt en it is necessary
t o est ablish a new high- volt age inst allat ion. According t o Bergen Port , t he exist ing low- volt age
connect ions will be replaced if a high- volt age connect ion is est ablished.
Skolt en business case assum pt ions

I n t his sect ion port specific business case assum pt ions are present ed in t his sect ion. For key input and
assum pt ion relevant for all business cases cf. sect ion 6.

I n 2016, 71 cruise ships called at t he t hree quays in t he Skolt en area ( Skolt en Nort h, Skolt en Sout h and
Bont elabo 2) . The t ot al num ber of port calls was 249 and t he average lay t im e for cruise vessels were 12
hours. Based on input from Bergen Port , it is assum ed t hat t he num ber of port calls will rem ain st able at
around 250 over t he calculat ion period.
During t he cruise season, all t hree quays in t he Skolt en area are in use. Assum ing an average, individual
capacit y dem and of 5.5 MW per vessel, t he annual elect ricit y consum pt ion pot ent ial is est im at ed t o 15.8
GWh in 2016. The corresponding annual MGO consum pt ion is 3,950 m t . The annual energy consum pt ion
is based on 250 port calls a year and an average lay t im e of 12 hours. These assum pt ions are applied
t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
On average over t he calculat ion period, it is assum ed t hat 60 percent of t he port calls will use OPS while
at bert h. This represent an annual elect ricit y consum pt ion of 9.5 GWh. The corresponding annual MGO
consum pt ion is 2,370 m t .
38
Ta ble 1 . An n u a l M GO a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion Be r ge n Por t - Sk olt e n
Assu m pt ion s
Port Calls: 250 per year
Average Lay Tim e: 12 hours
Connect ion/ Disconnect ion Tim e 30 m inut es
Average capacit y dem and: 5.5 MW per ship
Share of OPS: Average of 60 % over t he calculat ion per iod
Con su m pt ion M GO OPS

Tot al annual energy consum pt ion 3,950 m t 15,810 MWh
60 percent of annual energy consum pt ion 2,370 m t 9,490 MWh
Wit hout addit ional invest m ent s, it is not expect ed any alt ernat ive use of t he OPS infrast ruct ure in t he
off- cruise season. Bergen port has however inform ed t hat t he port has plans t o also est ablish new low -
volt age connect ions point s so t hat t he high- volt age OPS connect ion for cruise vessels can be used for
offshore and ot her vessels in t he off- cruise season. This will increase t he ut ilizat ion of t he OPS
inst allat ion. I n t he business case, it is not assum ed any alt ernat ive use of t he OPS infrast ruct ure in t he
off- cruise season.
I nvest m ent cost s can be split int o grid connect ion cost s and shore power inst allat ions, including
connect ion equipm ent on t he quay. This sect ion includes a descript ion of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he
Skolt en area and t he necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at Skolt en.
Gr id con n e ct ion
Transm ission of elect ricit y in Norway is officially divided int o t hree net work levels; t he cent ral grid, t he
regional grid and t he dist ribut ion grid. The dist ribut ion grid is again divided int o t wo levels; high volt age
dist ribut ion level and low volt age dist ribut ion level. An overview of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he Bergen
area is given in Figure 2. The grid connect ion point for t he shore power facilit y will be at t he high volt age
level in t he dist ribut ion grid.
420/ 300kV 132/ 66/ 45kV 22/ 11/ 7. 5kV 0. 4/ 0. 23kV
Ge n e ra t io n Ce n t ra l g rid Re g io n a l g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid

Hig h vo lt a g e Lo w vo lt a g e
Figu r e 2 . Gr id in fr a st r u ct u r e in t h e Be r ge n a r e a ( N O5 ) 1 0
The calculat ed capacit y for cruise ships is relat ively high. The Bergen area has t wo exchange point wit h
t he cent ral grid. The capacit y need from cruise ships in Bergen Port is lim it ed in t he wint er period when
ot her load on t he grid and t he capacit y dem and is at it s largest . The largest capacit y need from cruise
vessel will arise in t he spring, sum m er and aut um n period when t he elect ricit y product ion in t he area is
high. Since t he cruise season coincide wit h t he period when t he elect ricit y product ion in t he areas is high,
t he capacit y dem and from OPS is not expect ed t o be lim it ed by t he const raint s in t he regional or cent ral
grid.
Bergen cit y, including Bergen Port , is current ly supplied by a 45 kV t ransm ission line. Available capacit y
in t he regional grid is sufficient for est ablishing OPS in Bergen Port . However, due t o an increase in
10 One 300 kV t ransm ission line from Fana t o Kollsnes is part of t he regional grid, but is ex pect ed t o be t ransfer red t o St at net t and part of t he
cent ral grid during 2018.
39
capacit y dem and in t he cit y area, driven by OPS am ong ot her t hings, t he grid owner BKK Net t AS will
replace t he 45 kV t ransm ission line wit h a new 132 kV line and new 132kV/ 11kV t ransform ers. The
upgrade of t he t ransm ission line is expect ed t o be com plet ed by 2025. The upgrade will increase t he
capacit y in t he cit y area.
I f OPS for cruise vessels shall be est ablished at Skolt en, t he incom ing subst at ion supplying t he local area
( Koengen subst at ion) m ust be expanded as well as t he local grid in t o t he Skolt en area. The necessar y
invest m ent s include expanding t he incom ing subst at ion wit h a 31.5 MVA t ransform er and t he laying of
new 11 kV high- volt age cables from t he subst at ion t o t he Skolt en area. Bergen Port ’s invest m ent cost s
relat ed t o t he expansion of t he subst at ion is est im at ed t o be in t he range of EUR 0.8- 1.0 m illion and t he
laying of cables is est im at ed t o around EUR 0.2- 0.3 m illion / D58/ . Based on t his inform at ion provided it
is assum ed in t he business case a grid connect ion cost of EUR 1.1 m illion.
Sh or e pow e r in st a lla t ion s

Bergen Port has provided port specific inform at ion relat ed t o t he cost of est ablishing OPS at Skolt en and
t hese est im at es are applied in t he business case. The cost est im at e includes t hree connect ion point s, one
at each of t he t hree quays at Skolt en. Necessary equipm ent includes a new subst at ion wit h t ransform ers,
frequency convert ers and cable culvert s and cables.
Su m m a r y of con st r u ct ion cost s

Table 2 sum m aries invest m ent cost s applied in t he business case for est ablishing OPS t hree connect ion
point s at Skolt en. The cost est im at es do not include planning or cont ingencies.
Ta ble 2 . I n ve st m e n t cost t h r e e sh or e - t o- sh ip con n e ct ion poin t s in Be r ge n Por t - Sk olt e n 1 1
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, M EUR
Grid connect ion Expansion of subst at ion and new 11 kV cables 1.1
Shore power inst allat ions Transform er st at ion ( incl. housing) 10.2
Frequency convert er s 1.4
Cabling 3.6
Cable m anagem ent sy st em s 2.0
Tot a l in ve st m e n t cost s 1 1 .2
Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s
The cost of elect ricit y can be split int o t hree elem ent s; price of elect ricit y, grid t ariffs and t axes and
levies. This sect ion gives a descript ion of t he elem ent s t hat m akes up t he t ot al elect ricit y price in Bergen
Port . The t ot al charge will develop over t he calculat ion period, depending on m arket developm ent s and
regulat ions. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t he elect ricit y price will develop according t o St at net t ’s
long t erm price forecast . Grid t ariffs and t axes and levies are held const ant t hroughout t he calculat ion
period.
Ele ct r icit y pr ice

The price for elect ricit y in Norway is m ainly det erm ined by supply and dem and of elect ricit y in t he Nordic
elect ricit y m arket . Grid congest ions ( capacit y const rains) also effect t he elect r icit y price. Norway is
divided int o five price areas t o reflect grid congest ions. Bergen Port lies in t he West - Norw ay price area
( NO5) . Figure 3 shows t he average m ont hly syst em price 12 and t he spot price in t he Bergen area from
11 I nvest m ent cost s originally given in NOK. An ex change rat e of 9,0 have been applied.
12 The syst em price is t he unconst rained m arket r eference price calculat ed wit hout any congest ion r est rict ions.
40
January 2013 t o August 2017. The elect ricit y price in Bergen follows t he syst em price closely, but is in
general a bit lower t han t he syst em price.
60
50
40
EUR/MWh
30
20
10
0
Nov
Nov
Nov
Nov
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
Mar
May
May
May
May
May
Sep
Sep
Sep
Sep
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
13 14 15 16 17
System Price (SYS) Area price Bergen (NO5)
Figu r e 3 . Ave r a ge m on t h ly syst e m pr ice ( SYS) a n d spot pr ice in t h e Be r ge n a r e a ( N O5 ) , Ja n -

2 0 1 3 t o Au g- 2 0 1 7 . Cu r r e n t pr ice s, EUR/ M W h . Sou r ce : N or dpool, 2 0 1 7
The elect ricit y price is lower in t he sum m er m ont hs and higher in t he wint er m ont hs. The average price
in t he Bergen area in t he cruise season ( April t o Oct ober) in t he period 2013 t o 2017 was EUR 23.45 per
MWh, while t he average price in t he 2016 cruise season was EUR 23.35 MWh. The price level in 2016 is
considered t o best reflect t he current pr ice level. The average 2016 elect ricit y price during t he cruise
season is t herefore applied as a reference for t he current price, t oget her wit h St at net t ’s long- t erm price
forecast for Norway t o est im at e t he fut ure elect ricit y price, cf. sect ion 6.5.
Gr id t a r iffs
I n Norway, like in ot her places in Europe, t he m axim um allowed revenue of t he local grid owners ( DSO)
is regulat ed. However, t he m et hod in which a DSO calculat es it s t ariffs is for a large part t o be
det erm ined by t he DSO – as long as t he m et hod is considered fair, t ransparent , and non- discrim inat ory,
and t he t ot al revenue is not higher t han what t he regulat or allows, t he DSO is allowed t o set it s own
t ariffs. I n pract ice, t his m eans large differences are observed bet w een DSOs wit h regards t o how t he grid
t ariff is calculat ed.
The local grid owner in t he Bergen area is BKK Net t AS. BKK Net t uses several elem ent s in it s calculat ion
of grid t ariff. An overview of t he current st at ed t ariffs for connect ion at t he nearby 11- 22kV subst at ion
per 1 July 2017 is provided in t he t able below. As t he cruise season is m ainly in t he sum m er period
sum m er rat es are applied in t he business case.
41
Ta ble 3 . Gr id t a r iffs, e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion 1 1 k V – 2 2 k V su bst a t ion 1 3 . Sou r ce : BKK N e t t ,
2017
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, EUR Or igin a l fe e Fle x ible con su m pt ion fe e
Fix ed fee ( m ont hly ) - EUR - EUR
Capacit y fee ( m ont hly )

- sum m er 3.71 EUR/ kW 0.37 EUR/ kW
- wint er 5.14 EUR/ kW 0.51 EUR/ kW
Consum pt ion fee ( per kWh) 14

- sum m er 0.0021 EUR/ kWh 0.0021 EUR/ kWh
- wint er 0.0023 EUR/ kWh 0.0023 EUR/ kWh
Due t o a const rained grid sit uat ion in t he port area in Bergen, Bergen Port has t oday a grid t ariff for
flexible consum pt ion. This m eans t hat t he grid owner can cut t he supply of elect ricit y t o t he port if
needed. I n com pensat ion, t he port is given a 90 percent reduct ion in t he capacit y fee. The grid owner
has confirm ed t hat t hey can, under t he current regulat ion, offer Bergen Port a grid t ariff for flexible
consum pt ion also aft er t he grid sit uat ion in t he area is im proved. They have however st at ed t hat t he
capacit y fee reduct ion in t he fut ure will not be as high as it is now. I n t he business case, it is assum ed
t hat Bergen Port will only be charged 50 percent of t he capacit y fee t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
Ta x e s a n d le vie s
I n Norway, elect ricit y consum pt ion used for OPS is current ly subj ect t o t he following t axes and levies:
- Elect ricit y t ax: A t ax on t he use of elect ricit y. From 1 January 2016, com m er cial vessels are
subj ect t o t he m inim um t ariff of 0.5 EUR/ MWh 15 .
- Renewable elect ricit y fee: End users subj ect t o elect ricit y t ax m ust cont ribut e t o t he
financing of t he elect ricit y cert ificat e schem e. The elect ricit y cert ificat e schem e is a support
schem e for developm ent of new elect ricit y based on renewable energy sources. All end m ust
each year purchase a cert ain about of elect ricit y cert ificat es, corresponding t o a specific
percent age of t heir elect ricit y consum pt ion. The specific percent age is for 2017 set t o 13.7
percent and will increase t o around 19.5 percent in 2020, before it is reduced t owards 2035.
To calculat e t he elect ricit y cert ificat e cost SKM 16 spot and forward prices for elect ricit y
cert ificat e and t he annual quot a obligat ion are applied.
- Enova fee: Non- household consum ers are charged a fee of 89 EUR per year 17 t hat
cont ribut es t o t he financing of Enova. Enova is a st at e- owned ent erprise wit h t he obj ect ive t o
prom ot e a shift t o m ore environm ent ally friendly consum pt ion and product ion, as well as
developm ent of energy and clim at e t echnology.
I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he elect ricit y t ax and Enova fee rem ains at t he current level
t hroughout t he calculat ion period. I n line wit h t he current polit ical consensus it is assum ed t hat no new
renewable support schem e is int roduced aft er 2021, when new renewable elect ricit y product ion is no
longer ent it led t o support under t he elcert ificat e schem e.
13 Sum m er is t he period 1 April t o 30 Sept em ber and wint er t he period 1 Oct ober t o 31 Mar ch.
14 The consum pt ion fee for connect ion t o a salve st at ion is connect ion specific. The curr ent st at ed fee for a general connect ion t o t he 11kV- 22kV
net wor k is t herefore used.
15 Minim um t ariff according t o Ener gy Tax Direct ive, set t o 0,48 NOK/ kWh.
16 SKM – Svensk Kr aft m äkling is t he largest t rader of elect ricit y cert ificat es. For war d prices are provided for t he y ear s unt il 2022. From 2023 and
onwar ds we hav e assum ed t he cert ificat e price t o be equal t o t he 2022 forward price.
17 The annual Enova fee for business consum er s is 800 NOK/ year . A NOK/ EUR ex change rat e of 9.0 is applied.
42
Nat ional and port specific regulat ions and incent ives
The Norwegian parliam ent want t o see policies t hat prom ot e and facilit at e an increase use of OPS in
Norwegian port s / D23/ . I n line wit h t his int ent ion, t he Governm ent has int roduced t ax reduct ions and
different inst rum ent s t o prom ot e t he developm ent and use of OPS:
- Reduced t ax on elect ricit y. From 1 January 2016 com m ercial vessels are subj ect t o t he m inim um
t ariff of 0.5 EUR/ MWh 18 . The general elect ricit y t ax in Norway is current ly 18.1 EUR/ MWh 19 .
- Enova invest m ent support for est ablishm ent of OPS. Governm ent owned ENOVA 20 is providing
financial support relat ed t o t he est ablishm ent of OPS in Norwegian port s / D08/ . Port s or ot her
part ies t hat want t o est ablish OPS in Norwegian port s are eligible for support . Allocat ion of
support is provided based on an applicat ion process. A precondit ion for support is t hat OPS is
est ablished according t o t he current OPS st andards and m ust be operat ed for at least t hree
years. The support is lim it ed t o 80 per cent of proj ect cost s. Enova also gives financial support t o
ships t hat invest in clim at e friendly solut ions and which have t heir m ain share of operat ions in
t he Norwegian econom ic zone or call on a fixed basis in Norwegian port s. The support is lim it ed
t o 30 percent of t he addit ional cost of t he clim at e friendly solut ion com pared t o t radit ional
alt ernat ives.
- The NOx- fund. The obj ect ive of t he fund is t o reduce NOx- em issions. The fund provides support
t o OPS relat ed invest m ent s in ships and port s t hat gives an act ual reduct ion in NOx- em issions.
The suppor t is grant ed according t o report ed reduct ion in NOx- em issions t hat can be allocat ed t o
t he invest m ent . The current support is approxim at ely EUR 27 per kg reduced NOx ( 250 NOK/ kg) .
The suppor t is lim it ed t o 80 percent of t he invest m ent cost s. I nvest m ent s t hat are fully or part ly
financed wit h ot her form s of governm ent al support , for exam ple from Enova, do not qualify for
support from t he NOx- fund.
I n addit ion t o t he nat ional incent ives, Bergen Port gives an “ Environm ent al discount ” on port charges for
vessels regist ered wit h t he Environm ent al Ship I ndex ( ESI ) , int roduced by t he World Port s Clim at e
I nit iat ive. The discount includes a 20 percent reduct ion on t he port - charge for vessels t hat can docum ent
t hat t hey have an ESI score over 30 and a 50 percent reduct ion for vessels wit h an ESI score over 50.
The discount is calculat ed based on charges payable aft er t he deduct ion of any liner reduct ions.
Environm ent al discount incent ives given by t he port st rengt hens t he business case for t he cruise vessels.
At t he sam e t im e, it increases t he cost for t he port s as it represent s a loss in pot ent ial port charges.
Result s
The operat ion of t he OPS syst em can be financed by a public com pany t aking a loan t o cover t he
invest m ent cost s, aft er which incom e from t he sale of elect ricit y will cont ribut e t o finance t he ongoing
cost s including int erest and loan repaym ent s. Alt ernat ively, t he com pany can receive public invest m ent
support t o cover t he necessary invest m ent cost s. A com binat ion of public invest m ent suppor t and loan
financing is also possible.
The calculat ions assum e t he invest m ent cost s are financed t hrough a 20- year annuit y wit h an annual
int erest rat e of 2 percent per year. All figures are given in fixed 2017 prices. The expect ed increase in
t he general price level ( inflat ion) is assum ed t o be 2 percent per year over t he calculat ion period. As
18 Minim um t ariff according t o Ener gy Tax Direct ive, set t o 0,48 NOK/ kWh.
19 The general elect ricit y t ax for 2017 is 16,32 NOK/ kWh. A NOK/ EUR exchange rat e of 9.0 is applied.
20 Enova is financed part ly by elect ricit y levy and part ly by st at e funding,
43
int erest rat es are t he sam e as expect ed inflat ion, t he real int erest rat e is zero percent and t he cost of
int erest and repaym ent s in 2017 prices will be t he sam e as t he act ual invest m ent cost . I f t he int erest
rat e is higher t han t he inflat ion, t his will give a posit ive real int erest rat e and t he direct financed
business case would have a bet t er result t han t he debt - financed business case. Visa versa, if t he int erest
rat e is lower t han t he inflat ion t he debt - finance business case would com e bet t er out as t he real int erest
rat e will be negat ive.
From 2019 t he onshore power facilit y will be in operat ion. I t is assum ed t hat t he port will not pay
int erest or inst alm ent s during t he const ruct ion period. A present at ion of t he cash flow in t he operat ional
period is present ed in t he figure below.
1 600
1 400
1 200
1 000
800
600
400
200
kEUR
-
(200) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
(400)
(600)
(800)
(1 000)
(1 200)
(1 400)
(1 600)
Sale of electricity Purchase of electricity Interest loan
Installment loan Increased O&M costs Annual liquidity requirement
Figu r e 4 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis OPS in Be r ge n Por t – Sk olt e n . Ope r a t ion a l pe r iod 2 0 1 9 t o 2 0 3 8 ,

k EUR 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s.
The port ’s incom e pot ent ial t hrough sale of elect ricit y is calculat ed based on a sales price of elect ricit y of
EUR 115 per MWh. The port ’s cost of purchasing elect ricit y ( t ot al elect ricit y charges) is given by t he light
blue area, while t he dark blue area shows t he port s annual int erest and loan repaym ent . The grey
colum n illust rat es t he port ’s increased operat ion and m aint enance relat ed t o t he OPS facilit y. The red,
hat ched area indicat es t he port ’s annual need for liquidit y t o cover it s ongoing cost s.
As t he cost of elect ricit y in Bergen is low er t han t he cost of using MGO, cruise vessels are expect ed t o be
willing t o accept an elect ricit y price t hat is higher t han t he port ’s purchasing price, and t he port will
receive a profit from t he sale of elect ricit y. The profit will cont ribut e t o recover part of t he cost of t he
OPS invest m ent . The oper at ional business case calculat ions for Bergen Port wit h a debt - financed
invest m ent is present ed in Table 4.
44
Ta ble 4 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se for OPS in ve st m e n t in Be r ge n Por t
I nst alm ent s and int erest ( loan repaym ent s) - 11.2
Operat ion and m aint enance - 1.6
Purchase of elect ricit y - 14.9
Sale of elect r icit y 21.8
Tot a l - 5 .9
M in im u m in ve st m e n t su ppor t 5 .9
The alt ernat ive t o finance t he invest m ent t hrough a loan, is t hat t he invest m ent cost is financed direct ly.
The advant age of t his is t hat t he risk t hat t here will not be sufficient cash t o pay t he ongoing loan
repaym ent for t he OPS invest m ent is elim inat ed. The result is t he sam e as for a debt - financed
invest m ent since t he int erest rat e and inflat ion is assum ed t o be t he sam e t hroughout t he calculat ion
period.
To assess t he effect of changes in som e of t he assum pt ions applied in t he business case t hree sensit ivit y
analyses are included in sect ion 8.
45
Appe n dix A2 H a m bur g Por t
Ham burg Por t Aut horit y is responsible for
developm ent and m aint enance of t he port
infrast ruct ure in t he Port of Ham burg. The
port is t he largest port in Germ any and
t he leading foreign t rade hub. Ham burg is
also a m aj or cruise dest inat ion. The port is
one of Europe's largest port s of call for H CC- Alt ona
cruise passengers t raveling t he At lant ic,

H CC- H a fe nCit y
Norwegian and/ or Balt ic Seas. The port
has t hree passenger t erm inals for cruise
ships; Ham burg Cruise Cit y Cent re Alt ona
( HCC- Alt ona) , Ham burg Cruise Cit y Cent re
( HCC- HafenCit y) and Ham burg Cruise H CC- St e inw e rde r
Cent er St einwerder ( HCC- St einwerder) . Figu r e 5 . Ove r vie w of H a m bu r g Por t
HCC- Alt ona, locat ed west of Ham burg cit y and has a shore t o grid OPS syst em in place. Haft enCit y is
locat ed close t o t he cit y cent re and has a LNG- power- barge solut ion in place t hat supply shore power t o
cruise vessels during sum m er. HCC- St einwerder is locat ed on t he sout h side of Elbe, opposit e of
Ham burg cit y cent re. St einwerder was est ablished as a t em porary cruise t erm inal in June 2015 and is
int ended t o be used only for 15 years.
As t he HCC- Alt ona t erm inal already have an OPS syst em in place and HCC- St einwerder is a t em porary
t erm inal, t he business case focus’ on t he HafenCit y t erm inal. On 18 Sept em ber 2017 t he Germ an Senat e
indicat ed t hat an OPS syst em will be est ablished in HafenCit y / D59/ .
HafenCit y business case assum pt ions

I n t his sect ion, port specific business case assum pt ions are present ed. For key input and assum pt ion
relevant for all business cases cf. sect ion 6.
Ene r gy a nd e le ct r icit y consum pt ion

I n 2016, 25 cruise ships called at t he HafenCit y t erm inal. The t ot al num ber of t erm inal calls was 65 and
t he average lay t im e for cruise ships was 15 hours.
HafenCit y t erm inal will be under reconst ruct ed in t he period 2017- 2021. During t his period, t here will
only be one bert h available for cruise vessels. To be able t o com pare t he business case for HafenCit y
wit h t he ot her port s t he sam e calculat ion period is applied and it is assum ed full capacit y during t he
whole period.
Assum ing an average, individual capacit y dem and of 5.5 MW per vessel, t he annual elect ricit y
consum pt ion pot ent ial is est im at ed t o 5.2 GWh in 2016. The est im at ed elect ricit y consum pt ion is based
on 65 port calls a year and an average lay t im e of 15 hours. The corresponding annual energy
consum pt ion based on MGO is 1,300 m t . These assum pt ions are applied t hroughout t he calculat ion
period. As t he t erm inal is a dedicat ed cruise t erm inal is it not expect ed any alt ernat ive use of t he OPS
infrast ruct ure in t he off- cruise season.
A gradual increase in t he num ber of vessels adapt ed for OPS during t he calculat ion period is expect ed.
consum pt ion is 780 m t .
46
Ta ble 5 . An n u a l M GO a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion H a m bu r g Por t - H a fe n Cit y
Assu m pt ion s
Port Calls: 65
Average capacit y dem and: 5.5 MW per cr uise vessel
Connect ion/ Disconnect ion Tim e: 30 m inut es
Share of OPS: 60 percent over t he calculat ion period

Annual energy consum pt ion 1,300 m t 5,180 MWh
60 percent of annual energy consum pt ion 780 m t 3,110 MWh
The invest m ent cost s break down int o grid connect ion cost s and shore power inst allat ions, including
HafenCit y area and t he necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at HafenCit y Term inal.
Transm ission of elect ricit y in Germ any is officially divided int o t wo net work levels; t he t ransm ission grid
and t he dist ribut ion grid. The dist ribut ion grid is again divided int o different volt age levels. The grid
infrast ruct ure set up is illust rat ed in t he figure below.
380/ 220 kV 110 kV 20/ 10 kV
Ge n e ra t io n Tra n smissio n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid
Hig h vo lt a g e Me d iu m vo lt a g e Lo w vo lt a g e
Figu r e 6 . Gr id in fr a st r u ct u r e in t h e H a m bu r g a r e a
A lot of infrast ruct ure and bot h t he cruise and cargo port s are locat ed in t he cent re of Ham burg. The
dem and for elect ricit y in t he area is very high, wit h m ost of t he supply covered by t wo nearby coal fired
power plant s. The local grid in Ham burg is designed t o handle t he high dem and wit h a m eshed grid wit h
a t ot al of 53 subst at ions.
The local 10 kV t ransm ission line, as well as 110 kV dist ribut ion grid, in Ham burg is owned and operat ed
by “ St rom net z Ham burg Gm bH” . The port and surrounding area are supplied by t he 110/ 10 kV
subst at ion “ HafenCit y” . The subst at ion was com m issioned in June 2013 and w as designed wit h a 30 MVA
overcapacit y t o m eet fut ure dem and from connect ion of an OPS facilit y at HafenCit y cruise port .
Assum ing an elect rical load per cruise ship of around 7 MW t he inst allat ion of up t o t wo OPS syst em s at
HafenCit y port is considered feasible.
The linear dist ance from t he cruise ship t erm inal t o t he nearest connect ion point ( 110/ 10 kV subst at ion
HafenCit y) is approxim at ely 0.9 km . The cost of laying and inst alling cables is est im at ed t o be
300 EUR/ m et er, considering t he difficult soil condit ions in t he area ( cit y area, surrounding wat er) .
Mult iplying t he dist ance wit h a fact or of 1.5 for nonlinear rout ing gives an approxim at ely cable dist ance
of 1.5 km and a cable cost of EUR 0.45 m illion. An addit ional cost s of EUR 50,000 relat ed t o planning
and perm it , result s in a rough grid connect ion cost of EUR 0.5 m illion.
Sh or e pow e r fa cilit y
For Ham burg Port , t he general cost est im at e for a shore power facilit y, which is based on input from
suppliers is, applied.
47
Su m m a r y con st r u ct ion cost s
Table 66 sum m aries t he invest m ent cost s for est ablishing OPS at t wo quays at HafenCit y t erm inal. The
cost est im at e of est ablishing OPS at HafenCit y is around EUR 10 m illion. This is in line wit h our cost
est im at e. The cost est im at es do not include planning or cont ingencies.
Ta ble 6 . I n ve st m e n t cost for t w o sh or e - t o- sh ip pow e r con ne ct ion in H a m bu r g Por t - H a fe n Cit y
Grid connect ion Grid invest m ent 0.5
Port facilit y and equipm ent Transform er st at ion ( incl. housing) 1.3
Frequency convert er 3.6
Cabling 3.2
Cable m anagem ent sy st em 2.4
This sect ion gives a descr ipt ion of t he different elem ent s t hat const it ut e t he elect ricit y price in Ham burg
Port . The price of elect ricit y over t he calculat ion period will however vary depending on m arket
developm ent s and regulat ions. The t ot al charge will develop over t he calculat ion period, depending on
m arket developm ent s and regulat ions. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t he elect ricit y price will
develop according t o St at net t ’s long t erm price forecast . Grid t ariffs and t axes and levies are held
const ant t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
Pr ice of e le ct r icit y
Germ any consist of only of one price area. This m eans t hat t he spot price of elect ricit y is t he sam e
t hroughout Germ any. End consum ers in Germ any are free t o choose t heir power supplier. Sm aller end
consum er norm ally purchase power from a power supplier, while larger end consum er oft en purchase
power direct ly in t he wholesale m arket . Figure 7 shows t he product ion price of elect ricit y in Germ any
from 2013 t o 2016. The average price of elect ricit y has in t his period been reduced wit h over 40 per cent ,
from EUR 60 per MWh in 2013 t o EUR 42 per MWh in 2016.
70
60
50
EUR/MWh
40
30
20
10
0
2013 2014 2015 2016
Price of electricity
Figu r e 7 . Ave r a ge a n n ua l pr ice of e le ct r icit y for in du st r ia l con su m e r s w it h e le ct r icit y

con su m pt ion 2 0 0 0 M W h t o 2 0 0 0 0 M W h , Ge r m a n y 2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 6 . Cur r e nt pr ice s, EUR/ M W h .
Sou r ce : Eu r ost a t , 2 0 1 7
48
According t o Ham burg Por t , t he port purchase elect ricit y from t he local power com pany St rom net z
Ham burg Gm bH and current ly have a fixed price cont ract wit h a durat ion of t wo years. I n t he business
case, t he current spot price on elect ricit y is used as a reference and St at net t ’s long- t erm price forecast
for Germ any t o est im at e t he expect ed elect ricit y price over t he calculat ion period.
Gr id t a r iffs
The m axim um allowed revenue of t he local grid owners in Germ any is regulat ed, as is t he case in m any
ot her places in Europe. I n Germ any, t he regulat or set s a revenue cap for a t im e period of five years for
each grid operat or. Based on t he value set by t he regulat or, t he grid operat or s det erm ine t heir grid
t ariffs. An overview of t he current annual t ariff for elect ricit y consum pt ion at a volt age level of 10 kV is
provided in t able 7.
Ta ble 7 . Gr id t a r iff, e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion a t 1 0 k V < 2 5 0 0 h / a in H a m bu r g. Sour ce :

St r om n e t z H a m bu r g, 2 0 1 7
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, EUR
Fix ed fee ( annual) - EUR
Capacit y fee ( annual) 23,360 EUR/ MW
Consum pt ion fee ( annual) 27.40 EUR/ MWh
Ta x e s a n d fe e s
I n Germ an, elect ricit y consum pt ion used for OPS is current ly subj ect t o t he following t axes and levies:
- Elect ricit y t ax: A t ax on t he use of elect ricit y. The t ax is fixed by law and is EUR 20.5 per
Mwh ( 2.05 Ct / kWh) for indust ry end consum er
- Renewable energy source fee ( RES fee) : All end users m ust cont ribut e t o t he financing of t he
int egrat ion of renewable energy. The value for t he RES fee will be changed year by year
depending on t he com pensat ion of RES and is set by t he m inist ry. I n 2017 t he RES fee is
EUR 68.80 per MWh ( 6.88 Ct / kWh) .
- Concession fee: Levy t o m unicipalit y for t he right of usage official road for laying and
operat ion of power lines. The value is EUR 1.10 per MWh ( 0.11 Ct / kWh) for consum ers wit h
a dem and of m ore t han 30,000 kWh per year.
Nat ional or port specific regulat ions and incent ives

There are no current nat ional support schem es for OPS syst em s in Germ any. However, wit hin t he “ Diesel
Gipfel” – a Germ an gover nm ent al conference for fulfilm ent of t he European lim it s for t he em ission of
diesel engines – t he m inist ry announced an upcom ing support program for OPS pilot proj ect s. I t is
possible t o receive support for developm ent of OPS from t he so called “ Um welt innovat ionsprogram m
( UI P) ” from t he Federal Minist ry for t he Environm ent , Nat ure Conservat ion and Nuclear Safet y ( BMUB) .
According t o t he “ General t erm s and condit ions for Ham burg Port ” , Ham burg Port as of 1 January 2017
gives a port discount for ships t hat m ost ly use shore power while at bert h. The discount rat e is 15
percent of t he port fee, lim it ed t o 2 000 EUR. As for Bergen, ships solely powered by LNG is given t he
sam e discount . The discount relat ed t o t he use of LNG is however lim it ed t o 31 Decem ber 2018.
Environm ent al discount incent ives given by t he port st rengt hens t he business case for t he cruise vessels.
At t he sam e t im e, it increases t he cost for t he port s as it represent s a loss in pot ent ial port charges.
Result s
invest m ent cost s, aft er which incom e from t he sale of elect ricit y will cont ribut e t o finance int erest and
49
repaym ent s. Alt ernat ively, t he com pany can receive public invest m ent support t o cover t he necessary
invest m ent cost s. A com binat ion of public invest m ent support and loan financing is also possible.
int erest rat es are t he sam e as expect ed inflat ion, t he real int erest rat e is zero percent and t he cost of
period is present ed in t he figure below.
1 600
1 400
1 200
1 000
800
600
400
200
kEUR
-
(200) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
(400)
(600)
(800)
(1 000)
(1 200)
(1 400)
(1 600) Sale of electricity Purchase of electricity
Interest loan Installment loan
Increased O&M costs Annual liquidity requirement
Figu r e 8 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis H a m bur g Por t – H a fe n Cit y. Ope r a t ion a l pe r iod 2 0 1 9 t o 2 0 3 8 ,

k EUR 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s
Cruise vessels are expect ed t o be willing t o accept an elect ricit y price of EUR 115 per MWh. This is lower
t han t he port ’s purchasing price for elect ricit y, and t he port will have a loss on t he sales of elect ricit y.
This m eans t hat t he port will need financial support t o also it s t ot al elect ricit y charges and t he need for
invest m ent support increases. The oper at ional business case calculat ions for Ham burg Port wit h a debt -
financed invest m ent is present ed in Table 8.
50
Ta ble 8 . Bu sin e ss ca se a n a lysis for OPS in ve st m e n t a t H a m bu r g Por t - H a fe n Cit y
2 0 1 7 pr ice s, M EUR
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 11.0
I ncom e pot ent ial from sale of elect r icit y 7.2
Tot a l - 1 9 .4
M in im u m in ve st m e n t su ppor t 1 9 .4
repaym ent for t he OPS invest m ent is elim inat ed. The result is t he sam e as for a debt - financed
invest m ent , since t he int erest rat e and inflat ion is assum ed t o be t he sam e t hroughout t he calculat ion
period.
51
Appe n dix A3 Rost ock Por t
The Port of Rost ock is owned by The Federal St at e of Mecklenburg- West ern Pom erania and t he Hanseat ic
Cit y of Rost ock. The cruise cent re in Rost ock Port is locat ed nort h of Rost ock cit y cent re, in t he dist rict of
Warnem ünde, direct ly on t he Balt ic Sea cost . Warnem ünde harbour is one of Europe’s busiest cruise
port s m easur ed in num ber of passenger s. The ot her harbours in Rost ock port is locat ed sout h of t he cit y
cent re.
I n t he business case for Rost ock t he focused is on t he Warnem ünde area and t he t wo quays designat ed
for larger cruise vessels ( P7 and P8) , see t he m ap below
Figu r e 9 . Ove r vie w of Rost ock - W a r n e m ü n de .
Warnem ünde business case assum pt ions

This sect ion includes port specific business case assum pt ion. For general input and assum pt ion cf.
sect ion 6. This sect ion gives a descript ion of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he Warnem ünde area and t he
necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at Warnem ünde Term inal.

I n 2016, 31 cruise ships called at t he Warnem ünde Term inal. The t ot al num ber of port calls was 150 and
t he average lay t im e for cruise vessels was 12 hours. I n 2017, t he num ber of call is expect ed t o increase
t o 192 port calls by 38 vessels.
Warnem ünde Term inal has t hree bert hs. Assum ing an average, individual capacit y dem and of 5.5 MW
per vessel, t he annual elect ricit y consum pt ion pot ent ial is calculat ed t o 9.5 GWh. I t is assum ed t hat
t here are 190 port calls a year, an average lay t im e of 12 hours. The corresponding annual energy
consum pt ion based on MGO is 2,370 m t . As t he cruise t erm inals are dedicat ed for cruise vessels t here is
not expect ed any alt ernat ive use of t he OPS infrast ruct ure in t he off- cruise season.
consum pt ion is 1,420 m t .
52
Ta ble 9 . An n u a l M GO a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion Rost ock Por t – W a r n e m ü n de
Assu m pt ion s
Port Calls: 150
Average capacit y dem and: 5.5 MW

The invest m ent cost s break down int o grid connect ion cost s and shore power inst allat ions, including
connect ion equipm ent on t he quay. This sect ion gives a descript ion of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he
Warnem ünde area and t he necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS for cruise vessels at Warnem ünde
Term inal.
Transm ission of elect ricit y in Germ any is officially divided int o t wo net work levels; t he t ransm ission grid
and t he dist ribut ion grid. The dist ribut ion grid is again divided int o different volt age levels; high volt age,
m edium volt age and low volt age. The grid infrast ruct ure set - up is illust rat ed in t he figure below.
380/ 220 kV 110 kV 20/ 10 kV
Ge n e ra t io n Tra n smissio n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid
Hig h vo lt a g e Me d iu m vo lt a g e Lo w vo lt a g e
Figu r e 1 0 . Gr id in fr a st r u ct u r e in t h e Rost ock - a r e a
The local 20 kV m edium - volt age dist ribut ion grid in Warnem ünde area is owned and operat ed by
“ St adt werke Rost ock Net zgesellschaft Gm bH” . I t is supplied upst ream t hrough a subst at ion t o a 110 kV
high- volt age dist ribut ion grid which is operat ed by t he dist ribut ion net work operat or “ E.DI S AG” . The
110/ 20 kV subst at ion in Warnem ünde has a t ot al inst alled t ransform er capacit y of 63 MVA, which allows
a supply of 31.5 MVA in case of single cont ingency.
The elect rical load for a cruise ship is assum ed t o be around 5.5 MW on average. Rost ock cit y, including
Warnem ünde Port , is current ly supplied by a 20 kV dist ribut ion grid. The com m on cable sizes in t he 20kV
grids of Germ an cit ies are 150 m m ² - 240 m m ² , which m eet s a t ransport capacit y of around 10 MW t ill
14 MW. The local grid operat or has confirm ed t hat it is possible t o supply t he needed capacit y of around
7 MW t o est ablish one OPS by t he exist ing grid. To est ablish OPS at m ore t han one quay, it will be
necessary t o upgrade t he dist ribut ion grid t o increase t he capacit y in t he port area. According t o t he Por t
of Rost ock, t he est im at ed invest m ent cost of relat ed t o est ablishing t hree connect ion point s is EUR 5.6
m illion and t he cost for onshore dist ribut ion is est im at ed t o EUR 20 m illion. A breakdown of t hese cost s
are not provided.
For t he Rost ock Port t he general cost est im at ed which based on input from suppliers is applied.
53
Su m m a r y of in ve st m e n t cost s
The t able below sum m aries t he invest m ent cost s for est ablishing OPS at t he t wo quays at Warnem ünde.
Ta ble 1 0 . Con st r u ct ion cost of t w o sh or e - t o- ship pow e r con n e ct ion poin t s a t Rost ock por t –
W a r n e m ü nde
Port facilit y and equipm ent 20.0

This sect ion gives a descr ipt ion of t he different elem ent s t hat const it ut e t he elect ricit y price in Ham burg
Port . The price of elect ricit y over t he calculat ion period will however vary depending on m arket
developm ent s and regulat ions. The t ot al charge will develop over t he calculat ion period, depending on
Pr ice of e le ct r icit y
Germ any consist of only of one price area. This m eans t hat t he spot price of elect ricit y is t he sam e
t hroughout Germ any. The price of elect ricit y is t herefore t he sam e in Rost ock and Ham burg. The average
price of elect ricit y in t he period 2007 t o 2016 was EUR 71.56 per MWh, falling from above 80 EUR/ MWh
in 2008 t o below 50 EUR/ MWh in 2016, cf. sect ion 6.2.1.2 for m ore det ailed descript ion of elect ricit y
prices in Germ any. I n t he business case, t he current spot price on elect ricit y is applied as a reference
point and used St at net t ’s long- t erm price forecast for Germ any t o est im at e t he elect ricit y price over t he
calculat ion period.
Gr id t a r iffs
I n Germ any, like m any ot her count ries in Europe, t he m axim um allowed revenue of t he local grid owners
is regulat ed. The regulat or in Germ any set s a revenue cap for a t im e period of five years for each grid
operat or. Based on t he value set by t he regulat or, t he grid operat ors det erm ine t heir grid t ariffs. The
local grid operat or in Rost ock is St adt werke Rost ock Net zgesellschaft Gm bH.
An overview of t he current st at ed t ariff for power consum pt ion at a volt age level of 20 kV is provided
below.
Ta ble 1 1 . Gr id t a r iff, pow e r con sum pt ion a t 2 0 k V < 2 5 0 0 h / a ( m e diu m volt a ge ) . Sou r ce :
St a dt w e r k e Rost ock N e t z ge se llsch a ft Gm bH , 2 0 1 7
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, EUR
Fix ed fee ( annual) - EUR
Capacit y fee ( annual) 2,530 EUR/ MW
Consum pt ion fee ( annual) 34.80 EUR/ MWh
I n Germ an, elect ricit y consum pt ion used for OPS is current ly subj ect t o t he following t axes and levies:
- Elect ricit y t ax: A t ax on t he use of elect ricit y. The t ax is fixed by law and is EUR 20.5 per
Mwh ( 2.05 Ct / kWh) for indust ry end consum er
- Renewable energy source fee ( RES fee) : All end users m ust cont ribut e t o t he financing of t he
int egrat ion of renewable energy. The value for t he RES fee will be changed year by year
54
depending on t he com pensat ion of RES and is set by t he m inist ry. I n 2017 t he RES fee is
EUR 68.80 per MWh ( 6.88 Ct / kWh) .
- Concession fee: Levy t o m unicipalit y for t he right of usage official road for laying and
operat ion of power lines. The value is EUR 1.10 per MWh ( 0.11 Ct / kWh) for consum ers wit h
a dem and of m ore t han 30,000 kWh per year.

There are no current nat ional support schem es exist ing for OPS syst em s in Germ any. However, wit hin
t he “ Diesel Gipfel” – a Germ an governm ent al conference for fulfilm ent of t he European lim it s for t he
em ission of diesel engines – t he m inist ry announced an upcom ing support program for OPS pilot proj ect s.
Rost ock port gives a discount on port charges for vessels regist ered wit h t he Environm ent al Ship I ndex
( ESI ) , int roduced by t he World Port s Clim at e I nit iat ive. The discount includes a 5 percent reduct ion on
t he port - char ge for vessels t hat can docum ent t hat t hey have an ESI score over 40, a 7.5 percent
discount for vessels wit h an ESI score over 50 and 10 percent discount for vessels wit h and ESI score
over 60. Environm ent al discount incent ives given by t he port st rengt hens t he business case for t he
cruise vessels. At t he sam e t im e, it increases t he cost for t he port s as it represent s a loss in pot ent ial
port charges.
Result s
int erest rat es are t he sam e as expect ed inflat ion, t he real int erest rat e is 0 percent and t he cost of
period is present ed in figure below.
55
3 000
2 600
2 200
1 800
1 400
1 000
600
kEUR
200
(200)
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
(600)
(1 000)
(1 400)
(1 800)
(2 200)
(2 600)
(3 000) Sale of electricity Purchase of electricity
Interest loan Installment loan
Increased O&M costs Annual liquidity requirement
Figu r e 1 1 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis of ba se ca se sce n a r io, Rost ock Por t – W a r n e r m ü n de .

Ope r a t ion a l pe r iod 2 0 1 9 t o 2 0 3 8 , k EUR 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s.
invest m ent support increases. The oper at ional business case calculat ions for t he Port of Rost ock wit h a
debt - financed invest m ent is present ed in t able 12.
Ta ble 1 2 . Bu sin e ss ca se a n a lysis for OPS in ve st m e n t a t Rost ock Por t - W a r n e m ü n de
I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 25.6
I ncom e pot ent ial from sale of elect r icit y 13.1
Tot a l - 3 3 .1
repaym ent relat ed t o t he OPS invest m ent is elim inat ed. The result is t he sam e as a debt - financed
period.
56
Appe n dix A4 Ta llin n Por t
The port of Tallinn is t he biggest port on t he shore of t he Balt ic sea in bot h cargo and passenger t raffic.
I t consist s of five harbours; Old Cit y Harbour ( inc. Old Cit y Marina) , Muuga Harbour, Paldiski Sout h
Harbour, Palj assaare Harbour and Saarem aa Harbour. The port is operat ed by t he st at e- ow ned com pany
Tallinn Port . The Port of Tallinn is used bot h by cruise ships, oversea ferries, dom est ic ferries, cargo and
leisure boat s. There are t w o harbours designed for cruise ships, t he Old Cit y Harbour and Saarem a
Harbour, wit h five and t wo quays respect ively reserved for cruise ships. I n t he analysis, t he focus is on
t he Old Cit y Harbour, quays 24 ,25 ,26 and 27, as t hese can share t he sam e OPS infrast ruct ure.
Figu r e 1 21 .- 1Ove
:. r vie w of Old Cit y H a r bou r , Ta llin n por t
Business case assum pt ions

This sect ion includes port specific business case assum pt ion. For key input and assum pt ion cf. sect ion
6.This sect ion gives a descript ion of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he area t hat supply t he Old Cit y harbour
area and t he necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at The Old Cit y harbour.
Ene r gy a nd e le ct r icit y consum pt ion

I n 2016, 62 cruise ships called at t he Old Cit y harbour while t he t ot al num ber of port calls was 271 and
t he average lay t im e for t he ships was 8 hours. According t o inform at ion from t he Port of Tallinn t he
num ber of port calls in 2017 was 311 and is expect ed t o increase t o 335 in 2018. I n t he business case it
is assum ed on average 340 port calls per year over t he calculat ion period.
57
During t he cruise season, all four quays in t he Old Cit y harbour are in use. Wit h an OPS share of 60
percent it is a likely case t hat OPS is only est ablished at t hree of t he four quays. Assum ing an average,
individual capacit y dem and of 7 MW per vessel, t he annual elect ricit y consum pt ion pot ent ial is est im at ed
t o 9.9 GWh. I t is assum ed t hat is no alt ernat ive use of t he OPS infrast ruct ure in t he off- cruise. These
assum pt ions are applied t hroughout t he calculat ion period. The corresponding annual energy
consum pt ion based on MGO is 2,480 m t .
Over t he period, it is assum ed t hat OPS will be use for 60 percent of t he port calls. The share of OPS
const it ut es an annual elect ricit y consum pt ion of 5.9 GWh. Table 13 gives an overview of annual MGO
and elect ricit y dem and.
Ta ble 1 3 . An n u a l M GO a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion , Ta llin n – Old Cit y h a r bou r

Assu m pt ion s
Port Calls: 340
Average Lay Tim e: 8 h

I nvest m ent cost s break down int o grid connect ion cost s and shore power inst allat ions, including
Old Cit y Harbour area and t he necessar y invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at Old Cit y Harbour.
Transm ission of elect ricit y in Est onia is officially divided int o t wo net work levels; t he t ransm ission grid
and t he dist ribut ion grid. The dist ribut ion grid is again divided int o t wo different volt age levels, shown in
figure 13.
330/ 220/ 110 kV 35/ 20/ 10 kV 0. 4 kV
Ge n e ra t io n Tra n smissio n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid Dist rib u t io n g rid

Me d iu m vo lt a g e Lo w vo lt a g e
Figu r e 1 3 . Gr id in fr a st r u ct u r e in Est on ia
The t ransm ission syst em operat or ( TSO) Elering AS is responsible for t he high volt age t ransm ission grid.
TS Energia UÖ is one of around 27 dist ribut ion net work operat ors ( DNO) in Est onia and owns and
operat es t he grid in Tallinn port . The com pany is a 100% subsidiary of t he port of Tallinn. The port of
Tallinn is current ly supplied by a 6 kV and 10 kV dist ribut ion grid.
The grid capacit y in Tallinn Port is lim it ed and it is assum ed t hat t he exist ing 10 kV grid in t he port is not
sufficient t o supply up t o t hree cruise ships wit h elect ricit y. Est ablishm ent of OPS in t he port will
t herefore require subst ant ial invest m ent s in t he local grid t hrough ext ending t he current grid and
building new lines t o t he 110kV t ransm ission grid. According t o t he Port of Tallinn t his is est im at ed t o
cost around EUR 5- 7 m illion. I n t he business case, it is assum ed a grid invest m ent cost of EUR 6 m illion.
58
For t he shore power facilit y, t he general cost est im at ed based on input from suppliers is applied.
Table 14 sum m aries t he invest m ent cost s for est ablishing OPS at t he t hree quays at old cit y harbour.
Ta ble 1 4 . Con st r u ct ion cost t h r e e sh or e - t o- sh ip con n e ct ion poin t s a t Old Cit y H a r bou r
Cabling 3.0
Tot a l in ve st m e n t cost 1 6 .8
This sect ion gives a descr ipt ion of t he different elem ent s t hat const it ut e t he elect ricit y price in Bergen
Port . The price of elect ricit y will vary over t he calculat ion period, depending on t he m arket developm ent
and regulat ions. The t ot al charge will develop over t he calculat ion period, depending on m arket
developm ent s and regulat ions. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t he elect ricit y price will develop
according t o t he Est onia’s TSO et al. long t erm price forecast . Grid t ariffs and t axes and levies are held

Est onia is part of t he int egrat ed elect ricit y wholesale m arket of t he Nordic count ries ( Nord Pool) , The
price of elect ricit y in Est onia is m ainly det erm ined by t he supply and dem and of elect ricit y in t he Nordic
elect ricit y m arket .
Est onia consist s of one price area which m eans t hat t he price of elect ricit y is t he sam e in all of Est onia.
Figure 14 shows t he average m ont hly syst em price 21 and price in Est onia from January 2013 t o August
2017. The elect ricit y price in Est onia is in general higher t han t he syst em price.
59
60
50
40
EUR/MWh
30
20
10
0
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Nov
Nov
Nov
Nov
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Sep
Sep
Sep
Sep
13 14 15 16 17
System Price (SYS) Estonia
Figu r e 1 4 . Ave r a ge m ont h ly syst e m pr ice ( SYS) a n d spot pr ice in Est on ia , Ja n - 2 0 1 3 t o Au g-

2 0 1 7 . Sou r ce : N or dpool, 2 0 1 7
End users in Est onia are free t o choose t heir power supplier. Sm aller end users norm ally purchase power
from a power supplier, while larger end users oft en purchase pow er direct ly in t he wholesale m arket . The
local grid operat or, TS Energia UÖ, is a 100 percent owned subsidiary of Tallinn Port . For consum pt ion of
elect ricit y t he com pany current ly charge a price of elect ricit y of EUR 50.88 per MWh, t his is slight ly
higher t han t he current spot price which is EUR 47 per MWh. I n t he business case, t he current spot price
on elect ricit y is used as a reference and Elering et al. long- t erm price forecast for Est onia from 2014 t o
est im at e t he expect ed elect ricit y price over t he calculat ion period.
Gr id t a r iffs
TS Energia UÖ current ly m ain t ariff relat ed t o net work services is EUR 36.08 per MWh. The rat e during
t he day rat e and t he night rat e is bot h scient ifically higher t han t he m ain t ariff. An overview of t he
current st at ed t ariffs for net work services is provided below. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he
port is charge grid t ariffs according t o t he m ain rat e.
Ta ble 1 5 . Gr id t a r iff in Ta llin n por t . Sou r ce : TS En e r gia UÖ, 2 0 1 7
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, EUR
Grid t ar iff
- Main t ar iff 36.08 EUR/ MWh
- Day rat e 69.18 EUR/ MWh
- Night rat e 47.08 EUR/ MWh
Ta x e s a n d le vie s
I n Est onia, elect ricit y consum pt ion used for OPS is subj ect t o t he following t axes and levies:
- Elect ricit y t ax: A t ax on t he use of elect ricit y. Com m ercial vessels are subj ect an elect ricit y
t ax of EUR 4.47 per MWh ( 0.447 ct / kWh) .
- Renewable elect ricit y fee: End users subj ect t o elect ricit y t ax m ust cont ribut e t o t he
financing of t he renewable energy sources. The subsidy for renewable energy sources is EUR
9.60 per MWh ( 0.96 Ct / kWh) .
60
There are no known am bit ions t o im plem ent support schem es for OPS- syst em s in Est onian port s.
However, t here m ight be t he chance t o get funding from t he nat ional “ at m osphere air prot ect ion
program m e” .
Result s
The calculat ions assum e t hat t he invest m ent cost s are financed t hrough a 20- year annuit y wit h an
annual int erest rat e of 2 percent per year. All figures are given in fixed 2017 pr ices. The expect ed
increase in t he general price level ( inflat ion) is assum ed t o be 2 percent per year over t he calculat ion
period. As int erest rat es ar e t he sam e as expect ed inflat ion, t he real int erest rat e is 0 percent and t he
cost of int erest and repay m ent s in 2017 prices will be t he sam e as t he act ual invest m ent cost . I f t he
int erest rat e is higher t han t he inflat ion, t his will give a posit ive real int erest rat e and t he direct financed
2 200
1 800
1 400
1 000
600
kEUR
200
(200) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
(600)
(1 000)
(1 400)
(1 800)
(2 200)

Installment loan Increased O&M costs Annual liquidity requirement
Figu r e 1 5 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis OPS in ve st m e n t Ta llin n Por t – Old Cit y H a r bou r . Ope r a t ion a l
pe r iod 2 0 1 9 t o 2 0 3 8 , k EUR 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s.
61
Cruise vessels are expect ed t o be willing t o accept an elect ricit y price of EUR 115 per MWh. This is j ust
below t han t he port ’s pur chasing price for elect ricit y, and t he port will have a loss on t he sales of
elect ricit y. This m eans t hat t he port will need financial support t o cover also it s t ot al elect ricit y charges,
and t he need for t ot al invest m ent support increases. The operat ional business case calculat ions for
Ham burg Por t wit h a debt - financed invest m ent is present ed in Table 8. The operat ional business case
calculat ions for Tallinn Port wit h a debt - financed invest m ent is present ed in below.
Ta ble 1 6 . Bu sin e ss ca se a n a lysis for OPS in ve st m e n t in Ta llin n Por t - Old Cit y H a r bou r
Tot a l - 1 9 .2
repaym ent relat ed t o t he OPS invest m ent is elim inat ed. The result is t he sam e as a debt - financed
period.
62
Appe n dix A5 H e lsin k i Por t
The Port of Helsinki is Finland’s m ain port and is owned by t he Cit y of Helsinki. The Port is used for bot h
cruise ships, oversea ferries, dom est ic ferries, cargo and leisure boat s. The port has t hree harbours t hat
host s int ernat ional cruise ships; Sout h Harbour & Kat aj anokka, West harbour and Hernesaar i. The figure
below shows an overview of cruise quays in Helsinki. The Sout h Harbour & Kat aj anokka serves sm aller
int ernat ional cruise ships and t he Kat aj anokka harbour has since 2012 had one low- volt age onshore
power supply connect ion t hat serves ferries operat ing from Helsinki t o St ockholm .
According t o t he Port of Helsinki, Munkkisaari Quay ( quay 1 and 2) locat ed in t he Hernesaari area and
Valt am eri Quay ( quay 3) locat ed in t he West harbour area, are bet t er suit ed for OPS wit h regards t o grid
infrast ruct ure. I n t he business case, t he focus is on Munkkisaari Quay in t he Hernessari area.
Munkkisaari
Quay
Figu r e 1 6 . M a p of Cr u ise Qu a ys in H e lsin k i ( Sou r ce : Por t of H e lsin k i)
Hernesaari business case assum pt ion

This sect ion includes port specific business case assum pt ion. For key input and assum pt ion cf. sect ion 5.
This sect ion gives a descr ipt ion of t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he area t hat supply t he Hernessari area and
t he necessar y invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at Munkkisaari Quay.

I n 2016, 24 cruise ships called at t he Munkkisaari Quay. The t ot al num ber of t erm inal calls was 98 and
t he average lay t im e for t he cruise ships was 9 hours. I n t he business case, it is assum ed t hat t he
num ber of port call will rem ain st able, at 100 t hroughout t he calculat ion period and t hat t he average lay
t im e will be as in 2016.
Assum ing an average, individual capacit y dem and of 5.5 MW per vessel, t he annual elect ricit y
consum pt ion pot ent ial is est im at ed t o 4.7 GWh in 2016. I t is assum ed t here is no alt ernat ive use of t he
63
OPS infrast ruct ure in t he off- cruise season. These assum pt ions are applied t hroughout t he calculat ion
period. The corresponding annual energy consum pt ion based on MGO is 1,170 m t .
Over t he period, it is assum ed t hat OPS will be use for 60 percent of t he port calls. The share of OPS
const it ut es an annual elect ricit y consum pt ion of 2.8 GWh. The t able below gives an overview of annual
MGO and elect ricit y dem and.
Ta ble 1 7 . An n u a l M GO a n d e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion H e lsin k i Por t – H e r n e sa a r i

Assu m pt ion s
Port Calls: 100
Average Lay Tim e: 9 h

60 percent of annual energy consum pt ion 700 m t 2,800 MWh
I nvest m ent cost s break down int o grid connect ion cost s and shore power inst allat ions, including
Hernessari area and t he necessary invest m ent t o est ablish OPS at Munkkisaari Quay.
Transm ission of elect ricit y in Finland is officially divided int o t hree net work levels; t he t ransm ission grid,
t he regional net work and dist ribut ion net work. The dist ribut ion grid is again divided int o t wo volt age
levels; m edium volt age and low volt age.
400/ 220/ 110 kV 110 kV 1- 20 kV 0,4 kV
Generat ion Transm ission grid Regional Net w ork Dist r ibut ion grid Dist r ibut ion grid
Medium volt age Low volt age
Figu r e 1 7 . Ele ct r icit y sy st e m in Fin la n d
The local grid operat or Helen Sähköverkko operat es t he grid infrast ruct ure in t he Hernesaari area. The
area is current ly supplied by a 10 kV dist ribut ion net work. Wit h t he current gr id set - up t he net work
owner can supply t he quay wit h a 10 MVA connect ion. For a higher capacit y a connect ion t o t he high
volt age 110 kV net work is necessary. According t o net work oper at or, a connect ion of over 10 MVA has
an est im at ed connect ion cost of EUR 3 m illion / D61/ . The connect ion cost includes cabling and swit ching
devices in t he nearby subst at ion Kam ppi.
For est ablishing shore pow er connect ion at Munkkisaari Quay t he general cost est im at ed, based on input
from suppliers, is applied.

Table 18 sum m aries t he invest m ent cost s for est ablishing t wo OPS connect ion point s in t he Hernesaari
area.
64
Ta ble 1 8 . Con st r u ct ion cost for t w o sh or e - t o- sh ip con n e ct ion poin t s in H e lsin k i Por t -
H e r ne sa a r i
Cabling 3.0
This sect ion gives a descr ipt ion of t he different elem ent s t hat const it ut e t he elect ricit y price in t he port of
Helsinki. The price of elect ricit y will vary over t he calculat ion period, depending on t he m arket
developm ent and regulat ions. The t ot al charge will develop over t he calculat ion period, depending on

The price of elect ricit y in Finland is m ainly det erm ined by supply and dem and in t he Nordic, Balt ic and
Russian elect ricit y m arket s. Grid congest ions ( capacit y const rains) also effect t he elect ricit y price.
Finland consist s of one price area t o reflect grid congest ions. The t able below shows t he average m ont hly
syst em price 22 and t he aver age m ont hly spot price in t he Finland from January 2013 t o August 2017.
The figure shows t hat t he elect ricit y price in Finland is in general higher t han t he syst em pr ice.
60
50
40
EUR/MWh
30
20
10
0
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Jan
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Mar
May
Nov
Nov
Nov
Nov
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Sep
Sep
Sep
Sep
13 14 15 16 17
Finland System Price (SYS)
Figu r e 1 8 . Ave r a ge m ont h ly syst e m pr ice ( SYS) a n d spot pr ice in Fin la n d, Ja n - 2 0 1 3 t o Au g-

2 0 1 7 . Sou r ce : N or dpool, 2 0 1 7
I n t he business case t he current spot price on elect ricit y as a reference point and St at net t ’s long- t erm
price forecast for Finland t o est im at e t he elect ricit y price over t he calculat ion period are used
65
Gr id t a r iffs
I n Finland, like m any ot her count ries in Europe, are t he m axim um allowed revenue of t he local grid
owners ( DNO) regulat ed. The local grid operat or in Helsinki is Helen Säkhöverkko and in t he analysis
t heir dist ribut ion t ariffs per 1 July 2017 is used t o calculat e t he grid connect ion cost s.
An overview of t he current st at ed t ariff for power consum pt ion at a m edium - volt age level is provided
below in 12.
Ta ble 1 9 . Gr id t a r iff, pow e r con sum pt ion a t m e diu m - volt a ge pow e r dist r ibu t ion . Sou r ce : H e le n
Eln ä t AB
2 0 1 7 - pr ice s, EUR
Basic charge 175 EUR/ m ont h
Capacit y fee 3.35 EUR/ kW
Consum pt ion fee ( Sum m er season) 0.94 Ct / kWh
I n Finland, elect ricit y consum pt ion used for OPS is current ly subj ect t o t he following t axes and levies:
- Elect ricit y Tax: Elect ricit y t ax is levied on all elect ric energy dist ribut ed t o cust om ers t hrough
t he dist ribut ion net work. The excise t ax on elect ricit y and st rat egic st ockpile fee 23 are
included in t he elect ricit y t ax charge. The general elect ricit y t ax ( t ax class I ) is current ly EUR
22.53 per MWh ( 2.253 ct / kWh) . Elect ricit y consum pt ion used for product ion purposes, dat a
cent er services or professional greenhouse cult ivat ion m ay regist er for a reduced rat e of EUR
7.03 per MWh ( 0.703 ct / k Wh) . I t is assum e t hat t he consum pt ion of elect ricit y for OPS is
subj ect t o t he general elect ricit y t ax ( t ax class I ) .

There are no known am bit ions t o im plem ent support schem es for OPS- syst em s in Finnish port s.
Result s
int erest rat es are t he sam e as expect ed inflat ion, t he real int erest rat e is 0 percent and t he cost of
23 The st ock pile fee is levied on liquid fuels, elect ricit y, coal and nat ural gas t o cover expenses as a r esult of com plying wit h int ernat ional
st ockpiling obligat ion.
66
1 200
1 000
800
600
400
200
kEUR
-
(200) 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038
(400)
(600)
(800)
(1 000)
(1 200)
Installment loan Profit / Liquidity requirement Increased O&M costs
Figu r e 1 9 . Ca sh flow a n a lysis OPS in ve st m e n t H e lsin k i Por t – H e r n e sa a r i. Ope r a t ion a l pe r iod

2 0 1 9 t o 2 0 3 8 , k EUR 2 0 1 7 - pr ice s.
The port ’s incom e pot ent ial t hrough sale of elect ricit y is calculat ed based on t he price of MGO, and
illust rat ed by t he green, hat ched area in t he figure above. The port ’s cost of purchasing elect ricit y is
given by t he light blue area, while t he dark blue area shows t he port s annual loan repaym ent ( int erest 24
and inst alm ent s) . The grey colum n illust rat es t he port ’s increased operat ion and m aint enance relat ed t o
t he OPS facilit y. The red, hat ched area indicat es t he port ’s liquidit y requirem ent , i.e. t he port ’s annual
short fall.
invest m ent support increases. A cash flow analysis wit h a debt - financed invest m ent at Hernesaari is
present ed in t he t able below
Ta ble 2 0 . Bu sin e ss ca se for OPS inve st m e n t in H e lsin k i Por t - H e r n e sa a r i
Tot a l - 1 6 .5
repaym ent for t he OPS invest m ent is elim inat ed. The result is t he sam e as a debt - financed invest m ent ,
since t he int erest rat e and inflat ion is assum ed t o be t he sam e t hroughout t he calculat ion period.
24 As t he nom inal int erest rat e and t he inflat ion is each 2 per cent , t he r eal int erest rat e is 0 per cent and t he loan repaym ent s equals t he act ual
invest m ent cost of EUR 13.4 m illion
67
About D N V GL
Driven by our purpose of safeguarding life, propert y and t he environm ent , DNV GL enables organizat ions
t o advance t he safet y and sust ainabilit y of t heir business. We provide classificat ion and t echnical
assurance along wit h soft ware and independent expert advisory services t o t he m arit im e, oil & gas and
energy indust ries. We also provide cert ificat ion services t o cust om ers across a wide range of indust ries.
Operat ing in m ore t han 100 count ries, our professionals are dedicat ed t o helping our cust om ers m ake
t he world safer, sm art er and greener.
68

Cruise Vessels To Shore Power - 04.01.2018 - Bergen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cruise Vessels To Shore Power - 04.01.2018 - Bergen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Onshore Power Supply for Cruise Vessels

GREEN CRUISE PORT is an INTERREG V B project, part-financed by the

Re por t N o.: 2017- 1250 Rev. 0.1

1 EXECUTI VE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 4

4 GENERAL ON ONSHORE POWER SUPPLY .......................................................................... 8

5 I NTERNATI ONAL DEVELOPMENTS AND REGULATI ONS ...................................................... 11

6 CALCULATI ON PAPAMETERS ......................................................................................... 13

7 BUSI NESS CASE ANALYSI S .......................................................................................... 22

8 SENSI TI VI TY ANALYSI S ............................................................................................... 30

10 KEY I SSUES FOR A BUSI NESS PLAN FOR OPS ................................................................. 33

Annual ut ilizat ion of

I nt erest and loan - 16.2

Ta ble 1 - 2 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld w it h a sa le s pr ice of

I nt erest and loan repaym ent s - 0.5 - 0.5

Real rat e of ret urn 3 % <0 %

Abbr e via t ion

Syst e m a n d t e ch nology de scr ipt ion

Shore t o grid solut ion

On sh or e pow e r in fr a st r u ct u r e ( por t side fa cilit y)

LNG- power- barge

Figu r e 4 - 1 . LN G- pow e r - ba r ge in t h e Por t of H a m bu r g. Sour ce : H ybr id En e r gy Por t , 2 0 1 7

On boa r d con n e ct ion pa n e l a n d con t r ol syst e m

Sh or e conn e ct ion st a nda r ds

5 I N TERN ATI ON AL D EVELOPM EN TS AN D REGULATI ON S

I n t e r n a t ion a l policy a nd r e gu la t ion s

Th e M ARPOL- con ve n t ion a n d I M O

W or ld Por t s Clim a t e I n it ia t ive

EU r e gula t ions a n d ince n t ive s

6 CALCULATI ON PAPAM ETERS

Ve sse l t r a ffic a nd por t ca lls

Be r ge n – H a m bu r g – Rost ock – Ta llin n – Old H e lsin k i -

Ca pa cit y de m a n d a nd e n e r gy consu m pt ion

Be r ge n – H a m bu r g – Rost ock – Ta llin n – Old H e lsin k i -

M a r in e ga soil pr ice s ( M GO)

Figu r e 6 - 2 . Pr ice de ve lopm e n t oil a n d ga s 1 9 9 2 t o 2 0 1 7 4 . Sou r ce : D N V GL, 2 0 1 7

Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s ( por t ’s pu r cha sing pr ice )

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Figu r e 6 - 3 . Ele ct r icit y pr ice for in du st r ia l con su m e r s w it h e le ct r icit y con su m pt ion fr om 2 0 0 0

Souther Norway Germany Finland Estonia

Figu r e 6 - 4 . Lon g- t e r m pr ice for e ca st of pow e r pr ice s in Sou t h e r n N or w a y, Fin la n d, Est on ia a n d

50 Full grid tariff

Tallinn - Old City Harbour

Figu r e 6 - 5 . Tot a l e le ct r icit y ch a r ge s ( por t pu r cha se pr ice of e le ct r icit y)

Natural gas, Europe Natural gas, US Natural gas LNG, japan

Figu r e 6 - 6 . Lon g t e r m pr ice for e ca st of n a t u r a l ga s in Eu r ope , Ja pa n a n d t h e US. Sou r ce :

En vir onm e n t a l e ffe ct s

7 BUSI N ESS CASE AN ALYSI S

Grid connect ion Onshore facilit y Vessel

Figu r e 7 - 1 . Ove r vie w of a sh or e - t o- sh ip pow e r con n e ct ion . Sou r ce : ABB

Grid connect ion 1.1 0.5 5.6 6.0 3.0

Ope r a t ion a l a nd m a int e n a nce cost s

LN G- Pow e r - Ba r ge solu t ion

LNG- Power- Barge specific assum pt ions

Por t fa cilit y a n d e qu ipm e n t / Ca ble m a n a ge m e n t syst e m

LNG- power - barge 13.0

Shore power inst allat ions 2.1

Ope r a t iona l a n d m a int e na nce cost

Ta ble 7 - 5 . Ope r a t ion a l bu sin e ss ca se for LN G- pow e r - ba r ge in ve st m e n t in se le ct e d GCP por t s

Cruise vessels t raffic

Figu r e 7 - 2 . N u m be r of cr u ise ve sse ls in 2 0 1 6 t h a t visit s on e or m or e of t h e five se le ct e d GCP

Figu r e 7 - 3 . Ove r vie w of por t ca lls Vik in g St a r a n d Th e W or ld, 2 0 1 6

Cruise vessel specific assum pt ions