WSF) Is the Largest Producer of GHG Emissions in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Accounting for 67% of the Total Emissions [2]

Home , EMD 710, LB (car ferries), Lithium titanate

Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PREPARED BY Elliott Bay Design Group 5305 Shilshole Ave. NW, Ste. 100 Seattle, WA 98107

GENERAL NOTES 1. Professional Engineering stamps on the previous sheet are applicable as shown in the following table:

Signee Applicable Sections Taylor Herinckx, Naval Architect Sections 5-7, Appendix D, Appendix E Executive Summary, Sections 1-5, 8-12, Will Ayers, Electrical Engineer

Appendix F, Appendix G, Appendix H

REVISIONS REV DESCRIPTION DATE APPROVED

0 Preliminary issue 12/21/17

- Initial issue 2/8/18 WNA 40918 TMH 48360 A Revised to correct Figure 22, row with description 1/17/20 WNA "Energy, kWh/year", subsequent rows, Appendix G 40918 and references to both in other parts of the report. In TMH Appendix G, factored in 2.87% periodic diesel usage 48360 into utility energy charges.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: i Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions for state agencies are codified in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW 70.235). Set in 2008 by the state legislature, limits were determined for milestone years of 2020, 2035, and 2050 for percent reductions as compared to a baseline year. The first milestone year is fast approaching in 2020, when emissions are required to meet baseline levels. An extra 25% reduction to the baseline is required in 2035 and another 50% reduction in 2050. However, in 2016 the Washington State Department of Ecology released a recommendation to strengthen the GHG reduction limits by increasing the 2035 and 2050 milestones.

On a nationwide level, transportation related carbon emissions have risen above the electric power sector for the first time in recent history [1], highlighting the need for alternative fuels. On a statewide level, Washington State Ferries (WSF) is the largest producer of GHG emissions in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), accounting for 67% of the total emissions [2]. Carbon emissions, included in the GHG category, are directly proportional to consumed diesel fuel. At 460 ft x 90 ft x 17 ft, the Jumbo Mark II Class are the largest vessels in the WSF fleet, largest consumers of diesel fuel, and thus, the largest emitters of carbon emissions. The three vessels of the Jumbo Mark II Class consume 26% of the fuel in the WSF fleet. By installing lithium-ion batteries and converting the Jumbo Mark IIs to all electric propulsion, carbon emissions would be drastically reduced. This study further reviews the impact of a conversion to hybrid technology for the Jumbo Mark II Class. This project by itself could accomplish a huge share of the 2020 emission reduction targets for WSDOT.

The first vessel in the class, the M/V TACOMA, entered service in 1997. The M/V WENATCHEE and M/V PUYALLUP followed shortly after in 1998 and 1999 respectively. Typically, the TACOMA and WENATCHEE perform the Seattle-Bainbridge route and the PUYALLUP performs the Edmonds-Kingston route. All vessels currently utilize a medium voltage (4,160 V) diesel-electric propulsion system. At a high level, the system consists of four 3,000 kW propulsion diesel generators and four 4,475 kW electric propulsion motors (two per shaft). A hybrid conversion is made easier with the existing diesel-electric system.

Shortly after the vessels entered service, the propulsion control system was rendered obsolete. An effort is currently underway to plan for the modernization of this system. Performing the hybridization in parallel to the existing effort would result in fairly significant cost savings as compared to completely separate efforts. Significant modifications to the control system would be required for a hybrid propulsion system. Incorporating these modifications into the existing effort would prevent a great deal of future rework.

To validate the economic feasibility of hybridizing the Jumbo Mark II Class, life cycle cost analyses (LCCA) were performed in detail. The LCCA pits the unstable and often volatile price of diesel fuel against the stable price of electricity and rapidly falling lithium-ion battery prices. Two diesel price projections were considered in the LCCA – a U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reference case and a conservative case with a linear annual increase from the current price that WSF pays.

Washington produces some of the cleanest electricity in the country, resulting in prices far below the national average. Home to the largest hydroelectric power plant in the United States,

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: ii Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Washington is the top producer of hydroelectric power in the country. A recent surge in production of wind farms is improving the mix of renewably sourced power even further.

While the majority of this study considers a full implementation of three hybrid vessels (TACOMA, WENATCHEE, and PUYALLUP) and four docks with shore power charging capabilities (Seattle, Bainbridge, Edmonds, and Kingston), an incremental approach was also taken in the LCCA. The tables below summarize the three scenarios considered in the LCCA and present the results. Based on WSDOT LCCA best practices by which to inform such a transportation decision, five of the six comparisons show this project in the best interest of the state financially.

LCCA Scenario Summary LCCA Scenario Vessels Route TACOMA Edmonds-Kingston Three Vessels, Four Docks WENATCHEE Seattle-Bainbridge PUYALLUP TACOMA Three Vessels, Two Docks WENATCHEE Seattle-Bainbridge PUYALLUP TACOMA Two Vessels, Two Docks Seattle-Bainbridge WENATCHEE

LCCA Results – Three Vessels, Four Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $271,034,715 $271,034,715 Not Hybridizing $324,121,623 $267,705,961 Savings $53,086,909 -$3,328,754 Savings, % 16.4% -1.2%

LCCA Results – Three Vessels, Two Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $215,523,956 $215,523,956 Not Hybridizing $277,232,452 $229,126,355 Savings $61,708,496 $13,602,399 Savings, % 22.3% 5.9%

LCCA Results – Two Vessels, Two Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $169,949,605 $169,949,605 Not Hybridizing $224,493,460 $185,304,172 Savings $54,543,856 $15,354,567 Savings, % 24.3% 8.3%

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: iii Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

To validate the physical feasibility of the hybridization, energy requirements were calculated at an average of 2,200 kWh for the more demanding Seattle-Bainbridge route. Using the most common lithium-ion battery chemistry in the marine industry, a 35% depth of discharge metric was used to size the battery bank at 6.3 MWh. The Shaft Alleys, and if necessary the Voids, at both ends of the vessel could be repurposed as battery rooms. Possible arrangements of various battery types are provided in Appendix D.

Safety regulations for lithium-ion batteries have improved in recent years. Three classification societies, DNV GL, Bureau Veritas, and the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), have published rules for vessels with large battery installations used in propulsion systems within the last three years. Special safety testing for the lithium-ion batteries are now typically required to ensure a thermal runaway (fire) will not spread from cell-to-cell or module-to-module. Recent failures of lithium-ion battery systems, including the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and Campbell Foss hybrid tugboat, involved thermal runaways and propagation of the fire between adjacent cells inside a single battery module. With the additional required safety testing, the possibility of such an event has decreased significantly. Lithium-ion battery safety has advanced rapidly, similar to the technology itself, in recent years.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: iv Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Introduction 1 2 Definitions 1 3 Route Power and Energy Requirements 2 3.1 Methods of Measurement 3 3.2 Crossing Energy and Power Results 3 3.3 Docking Power and Duration Results 5 3.4 Ship Service Loads 6 3.5 Emergency Generator Capacity 7 3.6 Cycloconverter Power Factor 7 4 Hybrid System Architecture 7 4.1 Battery System 7 4.1.1 Battery Chemistries 7 4.1.2 Battery Pack Sizing 9 4.1.3 Battery Safety and Standards 9 4.1.4 Battery Manufacturers 11 4.1.5 Survey of Significant Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries 14 4.2 Hybrid One-Line 15 4.3 Redundancy 16 5 Hybrid System Arrangements 18 5.1 Battery Room Arrangements 18 5.2 Engine Room Arrangements 19 5.3 Auxiliary Systems Impacts 19 5.3.1 Alarm and Monitoring 19 5.3.2 Cooling Systems 20 5.3.3 Fire Suppression System 20 5.3.4 Ventilation 20 5.3.5 Accommodation Heating 20 5.3.6 Fuel System 21 6 Weight Estimate 21 7 Stability Assessment 22 8 Regulatory Review 23 8.1 DNV GL 24 8.2 Bureau Veritas 24 8.3 American Bureau of Shipping 24 8.4 Comparison 24 9 Life Cycle Cost Analysis 25 9.1 Diesel 25 9.2 Electricity 32 9.3 Lithium-Ion Batteries 35 9.4 Vessel Installation Costs 38

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: v Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

9.5 Vessel Maintenance Costs 39 9.6 Shore Power Installation Costs 41 9.7 Terminal Installation Costs 41 9.8 Utility Upgrade Costs 41 9.9 Results/Summary 42 10 Emissions and Environmental Impact 43 11 Areas of Future Work 46 12 Conclusion 47 13 References 49 Appendix A 54 TACOMA Datalog 55 Appendix B 58 Spear Power Systems 59 Plan B Energy Storage 61 Corvus Energy 67 Leclanché 73 Electric Power Systems 76 Appendix C 77 Hybrid One-Line 78 Appendix D 79 Battery Room Arrangements 80 Machinery Room Arrangements 83 Appendix E 87 Weight Estimate Summaries 88 Appendix F 104 Regulatory Review Comparison 105 Appendix G 107 Life Cycle Cost Analysis – Summary 108 Life Cycle Cost Analysis – Calculations 109 Three Vessels and Four Docks 109 Three Vessels and Two Docks 113 Two Vessels and Two Docks 117 Conversion Cost Estimate Per Vessel 119 Appendix H 120 Significant Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries 121

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: vi Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to further review the impact of a conversion to hybrid technology for the Jumbo Mark II Class of ferries. At 460 ft x 90 ft x 17 ft 3 in, the vessels in the Jumbo Mark II Class are the largest in the Washington State Ferries fleet. The first vessel in the class, the M/V TACOMA, entered service in 1997. The M/V WENATCHEE and M/V PUYALLUP followed shortly after in 1998 and 1999 respectively. Typically, the TACOMA and WENATCHEE perform the Seattle to Bainbridge (Winslow) route and the PUYALLUP performs the Edmonds to Kingston route.

All vessels currently utilize a medium voltage (4,160 V) diesel-electric propulsion system. The system consists of four 3,000 kW propulsion diesel generators and four 4,475 kW electric propulsion motors (two per shaft). A hybrid conversion is made easier with the existing diesel- electric system.

This study discusses the initial power and energy requirements of both possible routes, the sizing of the battery banks, new arrangements, impacts to existing systems, and a life cycle cost analysis.

2 DEFINITIONS AC Alternating Current; a system in which current oscillates directions within the system machines and cabling, typically 60 times per second in the United States. C-Rate A measure of the rate at which a battery is charged or discharged as a multiple of complete charge or discharge in one hour. Cell The fundamental unit of energy storage within a battery installation, typically consisting of a pouch of electrolyte with electrode connections. Converter An electrical device that converts electrical energy from one form to another, whether AC to DC, DC to AC, AC to AC, or DC to DC. Cycle Life Number of complete charge/discharge cycles of a battery before the capacity drops to 80% of its original capacity. DC Direct Current; a system in which current travels in one direction within the system machines and cabling at all times. Depth of Discharge Battery capacity that has been discharged as a percentage of maximum (DOD) capacity. Energy A measure of power generated or discharged over time. Energy Density A measure of battery energy per unit volume. Inverter A semiconductor based device which converts DC current to AC current.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 1 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Module A battery assembly consisting of several cells built into a case, with associated electrical connections, cooling arrangements, and monitoring and control components. Per Unit A measure of system quantities as a fraction of a defined base unit quantity; in this study actual power from the propulsion generators as a fraction of the generator nameplate power. Power Amount of electricity generated or discharged at a given moment; the rate of energy movement. Power Density A measure of maximum available power per unit volume. Rack A structure on which multiple batteries are installed. State of Charge (SOC) A measure of present battery capacity as a percentage of maximum capacity. Specific Energy A measure of battery energy per unit weight. Specific Power A measure of battery power per unit weight. Transformer An electro-magnetic device which accepts AC input at one voltage, and creates AC output at another voltage. A step up transformer creates higher output voltage than input voltage, and a step down transformer creates lower output voltage than input voltage.

3 ROUTE POWER AND ENERGY REQUIREMENTS The Siemens Symadin D propulsion control system monitors a variety of different parameters from the propulsion machinery. These data are recorded by iba data logging systems. WSF provided the recorded data from April 13, 2017, to October 9, 2017 for the TACOMA and PUYALLUP. The ibaAnalyzer program, Version 6.9.5, was used to analyze the crossing energy, peak crossing power, time at each dock, and average docking power. The Seattle-Bainbridge route of the TACOMA was found to be the most demanding in terms of crossing energy. Plots of the iba measured actual power from each generator for selected days, are provided in Appendix A.

Generator power recorded by the iba data logger was used to calculate the route power and energy. Figure 1 shows a sample of the iba data for two crossings of the TACOMA. Per unit values of power are plotted against time. Generally, the crossings periods consist of an increase of power to accelerate until the vessel is at speed. A fairly level load is applied until the opposite dock is reached, where a decrease of power and maneuvering occur until the vessel is docked. The docking periods are quite easy to determine as there is a constant low power requirement of the pushing and hotel loads.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 2 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Docking Peak Power Docking

Crossing Crossing

Figure 1: Sample iba data for Generator #1 Actual Power on September 12, 2017 – shown with time on the horizontal axis and per unit power on the vertical axis As the iba data use per unit values of power, the generator nameplate rating of 3,000 kW was used as a base value to normalize the power. Only three of the four onboard generators are supplying power during almost all of the crossings, so only the values from the three online generators were included. Using the built-in ibaAnalyzer functions and mathematical expressions, the quantities of power, energy, and time were measured for each crossing.

Until recently, the Jumbo Mark IIs ran only two generators during transit and brought a third online just before docking as a spinning reserve to maintain power in case of a generator failure. A crankshaft failure was originally attributed to the high start/stop count of the generators. Subsequently, three generators have been online for all crossings resulting in under loaded and inefficient operation.

3.1 Methods of Measurement Peak crossing power was measured with the maximum function. Figure 1 demonstrates a typical peak power requirement. As the true maximum and not an averaged maximum, this is a conservative method of measurement. All of the selected electrical equipment, discussed in later sections, can withstand momentary periods of overload.

Power was integrated over the crossing time to measure the crossing energy. Maneuvering periods at the beginning and end of each crossing were included in the energy calculation.

The docking period was measured as a unit of time. As demonstrated in Figure 1, the steady state period of power in between power bursts of maneuvering was considered to be docking period.

Docking power was measured as an average in the steady state docking period. This power consists of pushing and hotel loads.

3.2 Crossing Energy and Power Results More consideration was given to the TACOMA on the Seattle to Bainbridge route as the most demanding in terms of crossing energy. Eighteen days were analyzed for the TACOMA, whereas only two were analyzed for the PUYALLUP.

Table 1 and Table 2 provide an overview of the daily average crossing energy and peak power. To capture any variations in the daily service a variety of days were analyzed, including typical

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 3 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

weekdays, summer weekends, holiday weekends, relatively windy days, and a Seahawks home game.

Table 1: Average Transit Energy and Power – Seattle to Bainbridge Energy Power Energy Power Date Date (kWh) (kW) (kWh) (kW) Thursday, 4/13 2,310 7,065 Friday, 6/303 2,250 7,520 Friday, 4/14 2,345 6,590 Thursday, 7/13 2,150 7,110 Friday, 5/51 2,230 6,970 Wednesday, 7/19 2,170 6,930 Friday, 5/262 2,200 6,725 Monday, 8/21 2,180 7,090 Monday, 5/292 2,200 6,790 Thursday, 8/314 2,190 6,770 Wednesday, 6/7 2,200 7,020 Tuesday, 9/12 2,240 6,440 Thursday, 6/15 2,150 7,075 Sunday, 9/175 2,290 7,135 Wednesday, 6/28 2,150 7,250 Thursday, 10/5 2,230 6,600 Thursday, 6/293 2,180 7,340 Friday 10/61 2,400 7,540 1. Windy Days 2. Memorial Day Weekend 3. Fourth of July Weekend 4. Labor Day Weekend 5. Seahawks Home Game

Table 2: Average Transit Energy and Power – Edmonds to Kingston Energy Power Date (kWh) (kW) Friday, 5/5 1,685 6,930 Friday, 10/6 1,430 6,800

Typical crossings for the selected days averaged an energy requirement of 2,220 kWh and a power requirement of 7,000 kW. Values of 2,200 kWh and 7,200 kW were chosen for hybrid propulsion system sizing. Days with the potential of higher loads were selected for this analysis. Some exceptions demonstrating higher power or energy requirements are evident in red text in Table 1. The higher crossing energy averages are likely a result of the ferry falling behind schedule and attempting to make up time throughout the day. Typical durations for a 2,220 kWh crossing are about 33 minutes. These higher energy crossings are completed in 29-30 minutes and exhibit slightly higher peak powers.

Figure 2 demonstrates an example of this trend on April 13th. The crossings within the red box have significantly higher energy and power requirements than those in the bordering green boxes. The average energy on April 13th was 2,310 kWh. If the five highest crossings in Figure 2 are disregarded, the average energy drops to 2,190 kWh. With the assumption that a generator will be in reserve for periods of higher energy and power requirements, the hybrid system can be designed for a typical crossing rather than a worst-case scenario.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 4 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 2: Sample iba data for TACOMA Generator #3 Actual Power on April 13, 2017 demonstrating higher than average crossing energy Figure 3 demonstrates six crossings, five of which exhibit higher than average peak powers. The red line across the top at a 0.8 per unit value corresponds to a single generator value of 2,400 kW. While this plot is for a single generator, the other two online generators exhibit identical power plots. All power values shown in Figure 3 are referencing the total vessel power. A constraint with the chosen method of power measurement is the momentary peaks. As evidenced by the second, fourth, fifth, and sixth crossings, the power is only briefly greater than 7,200 kW. The electrical equipment can handle brief periods of overload, but a reserve generator would need to come on for crossings similar to the third.

7,200 kW

6,260 kW 7,560 kW 9,320 kW 7,940 kW 7,720 kW 7,620 kW

Figure 3: Sample iba data for TACOMA Generator #3 Actual Power on October 6, 2017 demonstrating higher than average crossing power (shown values are for all generators) Rather than increasing the capacity of the battery installation and related power conditioning equipment for worst case scenarios, it is assumed that the remaining onboard generators will supplement the batteries when such conditions arise. The power and energy requirements for battery and power conditioning equipment sizing are given in Table 3.

Table 3: Average Crossing Energy and Power Results Crossing Energy 2,200 kWh Crossing Power 7,200 kW

3.3 Docking Power and Duration Results Table 4 and Table 5 provide an overview of the daily average docking power and duration. The docking power is an average of the steady state period demonstrated in Figure 1, rather than a peak power as measured during the crossing period.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 5 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 4: Average Docking Power and Duration – Seattle-Bainbridge Power Duration Power Duration Date Date (kW) (min) (kW) (min) Thursday, 4/13 1,250 19.0 Friday, 6/303 1,020 20.4 Friday, 4/14 970 19.0 Thursday, 7/13 1,010 19.8 Friday, 5/51 1,130 19.9 Wednesday, 7/19 1,000 19.2 Friday, 5/262 1,070 17.9 Monday, 8/21 1,140 18.0 Monday, 5/292 1,140 20.2 Thursday, 8/314 1,050 18.7 Wednesday, 6/7 1,120 17.9 Tuesday, 9/12 1,240 20.4 Thursday, 6/15 1,060 20.2 Sunday, 9/175 1,150 19.4 Wednesday, 6/28 1,100 20.7 Thursday, 10/5 1,020 19.8 Thursday, 6/293 990 21.0 Friday 10/61 1,400 18.9 1. Windy Days 2. Memorial Day Weekend 3. Fourth of July Weekend 4. Labor Day Weekend 5. Seahawks Home Game

Table 5: Average Docking Power and Duration – Edmonds- Kingston Power Duration Date (kW) (min) Friday, 5/5 1,040 21.0 Friday, 10/6 1,020 21.9

The docking power measured from the iba data is the sum of the pushing power and the ship service loads. The iba data logger also records ship service transformer and motor generator set actual power. Typically the vessel has about 350 kW of ship service transformer power and 150 kW of motor generator set power, yielding a total load of about 500 kW of ship service power. The difference between the docking power and ship service power yields an average pushing load of approximately 600 kW.

3.4 Ship Service Loads To determine the effects of hybridization on the ship service loads, a quick review of the loads analysis [3] was completed. Table 6 identifies several loads that would likely no longer operate at the same load while the batteries provide propulsive power.

Table 6: Ship Service Load Reduction Equipment Quantity Load With Hybridization Engine Heat Recovery Pumps 4 20 HP Off Engine Sea Water Cooling Pumps 4 10 HP Off Engine Room Supply Fans 4 15/8.44 HP Reduced Engine Room Exhaust Fans 2 7.5/3.3 HP Reduced Machinery Sea Water Cooling Pumps 4 25 HP VFD Machinery Fresh Water Cooling Pumps 4 15 HP VFD

Engine heat recovery and seawater cooling pumps would not need to operate without any online generators. The heat recovery pumps serve to heat the accommodations spaces, but will not have any heat to recover without the waste heat from the engines. The diesel boiler will need to provide the accommodations heating when required. Engine Room supply and exhaust fans will remain operational to account for heat rejection, but at a much lower load. Machinery seawater and fresh water cooling pumps would still be required to supply cooling for the propulsion

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 6 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

motors, but variable frequency drives (VFD) could be installed to create a more efficient operation.

The potential total ship service load reduction is 355 HP, or 300 kWe. With a more conservative assumption that 67% of the fans and machinery cooling pumps loads are reduced, 240 HP or 200 kWe could still be substantially eliminated from the ship service loads in typical operation. With this significant reduction, the ship service loads total about 300 kW.

Potential new loads associated with the hybridization include battery room ventilation, additional cooling pumps, and additional control, alarm, and monitoring systems. Even with these loads, the result should yield a net decrease in required ship service power.

3.5 Emergency Generator Capacity According to the propulsion one-line diagram [4], each vessel has a 455 kW emergency generator. The electrical loads analysis [3] shows a calculated connected load of 337 kW. A capacity of about 100 kW should be available for any additional loads that qualify as an emergency load.

3.6 Cycloconverter Power Factor The cycloconverter power factor during transit was estimated by two methods. The first involved watching the power factor meter while on a recent sea trial of the PUYALLUP. While the vessel was at a speed relatively close to a typical transit speed, the power factor meter averaged 0.8.

Generator power and current iba data sets were also used to calculate a power factor. This calculation agreed with the 0.8 power factor from the previous method. Thus, a 0.8 power factor for the cycloconverter at significant load was assumed for all following calculations.

4 HYBRID SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE The foundation of a hybrid propulsion system lies in adding batteries to replace and augment the diesel generator sets. The batteries will be charged primarily from shore-based sources. To accommodate the additional inverters and transformers, two propulsion generators were assumed removed.

4.1 Battery System 4.1.1 Battery Chemistries Lithium-ion batteries initially became popular with Lithium Cobalt Oxide (LCO) chemistry in the portable electronics industry. This chemistry has a high energy density, but also releases high levels of energy in thermal runaway situations and is relatively unstable. It has been primarily the automotive market that has forced a change to a different chemistry, Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide (NMC). Automotive chemistries are generally designed to more stringent impact requirements, such as side impacts and rollover collisions. It is the automotive industry, rather than the portable electronics industry, that has helped advance the safety of lithium-ion batteries.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 7 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Two leading lithium-ion battery chemistries were considered in this study. As discussed previously, NMC is by far the most widely used lithium-ion chemistry in the marine and automotive markets today. Installed first on the car ferry MF AMPERE in 2015, NMC batteries have been proven time and time again in marine environments. Lithium Titanium Oxide (LTO) has not achieved near the penetration in either market, but has seen limited usage in vessel propulsion applications. LTO chemistry has certain attributes that could be better suited to this application.

The radar plots in Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the key difference in characteristics between NMC and LTO chemistries. It should be noted that the following general comparisons are based upon individual cell characteristics. When the cells are packed into a complete battery system, the relative characteristics may vary somewhat.

Figure 4: NMC Battery Characteristics [5] Figure 5: LTO Battery Characteristics [5]

For the same cell weight, NMC batteries can provide potentially twice the energy as LTO batteries because of their inherent higher specific energy (Wh/kg). As weight is a key factor in the marine environment and the Jumbo Mark II route profile is energy rather than power limited, specific energy is an important metric to consider when selecting a chemistry. This also holds true for energy density (Wh/liter) with LTO typically possessing just under half that of NMC. For LTO and NMC battery banks of equal capacity, the LTO will typically require twice the volume.

The life span metric in the radar plots corresponds to the cycle life rating. Generally, a cycle is one complete charge and discharge of the battery. For example, a battery with a stated cycle life of 15,000 cycles at 100% depth of discharge (DOD) should be able to complete 15,000 full charge-discharge cycles. Some manufacturers state cycle lives at lower DODs in data sheets, so it is important to confirm the assumed DOD. A lower DOD results in a higher cycle life, so the battery in the previous example would have a longer cycle life at 80% DOD. This is an important characteristic for battery installations in high cycle count environments, such as the Jumbo Mark II application. Oversizing the battery bank relative to the required energy will result in a longer expected life. However, vastly oversizing the battery bank to extend the lifespan is not practical; a balance has to be met between cycle life and DOD.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 8 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

LTO can typically achieve at least double the cycle life of NMC chemistry. In fact, data sheets from Toshiba and Xalt, two top cell manufacturers, indicate LTO cycle lives higher than 40,000 cycles [6] [7]. As a comparison, NMC cycle lives are often lower than 10,000 in data sheets from similar manufacturers.

LTO can also typically achieve higher C rates than NMC, especially during charging where it often doubles the rate. For example, assuming LTO and NMC battery banks of equal capacity, the LTO bank could potentially charge in half the time.

Also important to note is the vanadium redox battery. It is a recent development and a popular choice in grid energy storage applications due to its almost unlimited scalable capacity and very long life span. However, the energy density and specific energy of the battery are much lower than either of the aforementioned lithium ion chemistries. Additionally, the charge and discharge rate is on the order of 0.25C, meaning four hours would be required to charge the battery from completely discharged to completely charged. The much higher relative weight and size of the battery, and its low charge and discharge rates make it infeasible for an onboard application.

4.1.2 Battery Pack Sizing This report will consider both NMC and LTO chemistries with a two to one approach in sizing to obtain installations of similar physical volume. LTO will be required to perform at half the kilowatt-hour capacity as NMC. As a result, it will have to supply the required energy and power levels on the vessel at twice the depth of discharge (DOD) and twice the C-rate. Double the DOD will require LTO to tap into its roughly doubled cycle life. Both chemistries should still be able to reach a similar life span with this approach. As the energy density of LTO is about half that of NMC, the two installations should require roughly the same amount of space in a battery room.

The NMC battery bank will be sized at 6,286 kWh and the LTO at 3,143 kWh. To attain a four- year replacement cycle, a 35% depth of discharge was selected. This depth of discharge was selected based on input from lithium-ion battery manufacturers, analysis of publicly available data sheets from the investigated manufacturers or their cell suppliers, and Elliott Bay Design Group (EBDG) experience with this subject over the last seven years.

4.1.3 Battery Safety and Standards A discussion on lithium-ion batteries would not be complete without addressing previous failures. The CAMPBELL FOSS hybrid tug is offered as an anecdote [8]. The tug entered service in California in January 2012 with an installation of lithium batteries. A software error led to repeated overcharging of a single battery module over a three-month period. In August 2012, cells in the battery module burst and expelled flammable gasses into the battery compartment. The ensuing fire melted the PVC ducting between the battery compartment and engine room. The engine room FM200 system successfully extinguished this fire preventing a further loss in the engine room. This event was a near catastrophe, fortunately only one crew member was briefly hospitalized for smoke inhalation.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 9 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 6: CAMPBELL FOSS Failed Battery Module and Overhead A probable cause was determined by Foss Maritime, Corvus Energy (the battery manufacturer), and AKA (the integrator) as a software failure related to cell protection from over voltage and over temperature. A lack of understanding of the alarm and monitoring system, numerous nuisance alarms, and miscommunication between the operators and the manufacturers resulted in the crew ignoring relevant alarms for three months. As the first major failure situation on a relatively novel concept in a marine application, there were many takeaways and lessons learned.

Another notable lithium-ion battery fire occurred on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, resulting in the grounding of all Boeing 787 planes. The specific cause of the fire was not determined, but the investigation faulted the battery manufacturer with poor manufacturing processes and Boeing with failing to account for catastrophic scenarios. Battery manufacturers have since introduced safety systems to prevent, and/or mitigate, any further catastrophic events.

Some of the safety systems introduced by battery manufacturers include prevention of thermal runaway via a battery management system (BMS), remote monitoring with automatic high temperature shutdown, safety gas venting system, and active air or water-cooling. Active-air cooling is preferable to indirect air-cooling through the surface of the battery module; however active-water cooling is more effective in keeping the temperature of the battery lower. An indirect air-cooling system was installed in both the Boeing 787 and CAMPBELL FOSS applications. This helps to minimize the rise in temperature from a high rate charge or discharge and best prevents heat transfer during a thermal runaway event. Additionally, it maximizes the battery life. A system not integral to the batteries, but just as relevant is a fire suppression system. Systems with combinations of gas, foam, and water can be used in the event of a thermal runaway, putting out the initial thermal event and cooling the batteries to prevent re- ignition or propagation to other cells.

The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is a leading standards organization with relevant regulations for battery systems. Specifically IEC 62619 and 62620 include the safety and testing standards for batteries, including cell-to-cell propagation testing that is required by DNV GL and the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) for Marine Type Approvals. The Norwegian Maritime Authority (NMA) published a circular in 2016, RSV 12-2016, with guidelines for installations of batteries over 20 kWh. While a vessel operating in the United

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 10 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

States would not fall under NMA jurisdiction, Norway is at the forefront of marine battery propulsion systems and the USCG is expected to include similar requirements in future regulations. The RSV 12-2016 circular includes module-to-module propagation tests and gas and explosion analyses. Lithium-ion battery manufacturers interested in the marine market are already pursuing approvals from NMA.

4.1.4 Battery Manufacturers Five potential manufacturers were considered in this study.

• Spear Power Systems designs and manufactures lithium-ion battery systems in Lee's Summit, Missouri. The founders of Spear were members of the original founding team of Kokam America, a successful lithium cell and battery developer. Spear is a 'cell agnostic' integrator and can design the battery system around any type of cell. Spear has experience with marine battery installations. • Plan B Energy Storage (PBES) designs and manufactures lithium-ion battery systems in Vancouver, British Columbia and Norway. PBES uses exclusively Xalt NMC cells in the battery modules. Xalt, a product of a merger between Dow Kokam and Kokam America, designs and manufactures lithium-ion cells in Midland, Michigan. PBES has experience with marine battery installations and all-electric ferries. • Corvus Energy designs and manufactures lithium-ion battery systems in Richmond, British Columbia. As of 2016, Corvus uses LG Chem NMC cells for their most popular battery option. LG Chem is a large lithium-ion cell manufacturer headquartered in South Korea. Corvus has experience with marine battery installations and all-electric ferries. • Leclanché designs and manufactures lithium-ion cells and battery systems in Switzerland. Unlike the other battery system manufacturers, Leclanché manufactures the LTO cells used in the battery systems. Leclanché has experience with marine battery systems. • Electric Power (EP) Systems designs and manufactures lithium-ion battery systems in City of Industry, California. EP Systems does not have experience with marine battery systems, but focuses on systems for aircraft, spacecraft and ground combat systems.

Properties of selected battery systems from the five manufacturers are shown in Table 7 on the following page.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 11 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 7: Battery Properties Spear Spear PBES Corvus Leclanché EP Systems SMAR-11N SMAR-3T Power 65 Orca TiRack EPiC t323 [9] [9] [10] Energy [11] [12] [13] Chemistry NMC LTO NMC NMC LTO LTO Energy (kWh) 124 40.8 65 125 63 .633 Power1 Not 372 204 195 209.8 5 (kW) available Charge C Not 3 5 3 3.33 8 Rate available Discharge Not Continuous 3 5 6 3.33 8 C Rate available Specific 2 Not Energy 108 49 68 35 75 (Wh/kg) available Specific 2 Not Power 325 247 205 117 (W/kg) available

4 Not Not Not Cycle Life 8,000 15,000 15,000 available available available 1. Using a continuous discharge rate 2. On a system level (entire rack included in weight) 3. Per module rather than per system 4. At 100% DOD

The Spear SMAR-11N and SMAR-3T battery racks are shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. The NMC based SMAR-11N is extremely compact, as evidenced by the high specific energy and small footprint. The battery rack is narrow with each module stacked vertically, whereas a typical battery rack is more similar to the array of modules in the SMAR-3T arrangement. Spear battery systems are modular and can be designed with verticals dimensions to optimize the available space. The cell agnostic integration of the battery systems allows more flexibility in selecting a battery chemistry that can be optimized for the specific application.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 12 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 7: Spear Power Systems SMAR-11N Figure 8: Spear Power Systems SMAR-3T NMC Battery Rack [9] LTO Battery Rack [9]

The PBES Power 65 battery rack is shown in Figure 9. With the lowest specific energy of the NMC options, the PBES battery racks are the least compact. The PBES battery modules incorporate CellSwapTM, an innovative re-coring process. Typically the entire module is replaced when the cells reach end-of-life. With CellSwapTM only the inside of the module is rebuilt by replacing the lithium-ion cells, allowing all other components to be reused. The CellSwapTM re-coring process can be done without a significant service interruption and without re-commissioning and re-integrating the entire system. CellSwapTM could achieve up to a 50% savings on the cost of a battery replacement.

Figure 9: PBES Power 65 NMC Battery Rack

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 13 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PBES and Corvus hold DNV GL Marine Type Approvals for their battery installations and thus comply with IEC 62619 safety regulations. The certificates are included with the brochures in Appendix B. Spear is currently in the process of testing for the DNV GL approval of the SMAR-11N and expects a certificate in March, 2018. The DNV GL testing of the SMAR-3T has been put on hold indefinitely.

4.1.5 Survey of Significant Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries Following is a list of notable hybrid and all-electric car ferries operating successfully around the world. The list would be much longer with the inclusion of hybrid or all-electric passenger-only ferries. These typically smaller vessels were left out in part because they have less relevance to the proposed conversion. More information on each car ferry can be found in Appendix H.

Table 8: Significant Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries

PRINSESSE BENEDIKTE 364 car / 1,140 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2013

BERLIN 364 car / 1,140 passenger ferry Delivered 2016

COPENHAGEN 364 car / 1,140 passenger ferry Delivered 2016

DEUTSCHLAND 364 car / 1,200 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2014

PRINS RICHARD 364 car / 1,140 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2014

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN 364 car / 1,200 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2014

TYCHO BRAHE 240 car / 1,250 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2017

AURORA 240 car / 1,250 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2017

AMPERE 120 car / 360 passenger ferry Delivered 2015

ELEKTRA 90 car / 375 passenger ferry Delivered 2017

FOLGEFONN 76 car / 300 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2014

MELSHORN 120 car / 299 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2016

VARDEHORN 120 car / 299 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2016

HALLAIG 23 car / 150 passenger ferry Delivered 2013

LOCHINVAR 23 car / 150 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2014

CATRIONA 23 car / 150 passenger ferry Retrofitted 2016

TEXELSTROOM 350 car / 1,750 passenger ferry Delivered 2012

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 14 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 8 cont'd: Significant Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries

SEASPAN RELIANT 59 trailer cargo ferry Delivered 2016

SEASPAN SWIFT 59 trailer cargo ferry Delivered 2017

BC Ferries (x2) 44 car / 300 passenger ferry Delivery 2020

Fjord1 (x3) 50 car / 195 passenger ferry Delivery 2018

Fjord1 (x5) 120 car Delivery 2020

4.2 Hybrid One-Line A graphic visualization of the hybrid propulsion system, the hybrid one-line, shows all major electrical equipment in Appendix C. Neufeldt Technical Services, with 20 years of intimate knowledge of the power and controls systems currently onboard a Jumbo Mark II vessel, was contracted by EBDG to support this effort. The one-line assumes the removal of two propulsion diesel generators and the repurposing of switchgear cubicles and circuit breakers.

Two separate battery banks are shown. In typical operations, the batteries will be the sole source of propulsive power. As such, a minimum of two separate connections from the switchgear to separate battery banks will be required by class rules that address such an installation. Two battery banks of 3.2 MWh NMC or 1.6 MWh LTO each are the furthest upstream components. Battery installations are typically connected in series strings of up to 1,250 volts DC (VDC). As the propulsion motors operate on AC power, an inverter for each battery bank will be required to convert the DC power to AC power. Step up transformers will convert the AC power from the low voltage inverter to 4,160 VAC for connection to the medium voltage main bus.

Whereas the batteries are sized for an energy-based requirement, the other electrical equipment is sized for the power throughput of 7.2 MW, or 9.0 MVA, peak power during transit determined in Section 3.3. Each battery connection, inverter, and transformer will be rated for 5 MVA, for a total throughput of 10 MVA. This adds an extra margin allowing the system to handle peak loads approximately 10% higher than anticipated for the continuous transit power at the assumed upper limit for battery sizing, depth of discharge and charge rates.

Two shore power connections will be required for charging at either end. While the actual shore connections are out of the scope of this report, all downstream equipment to the switchgear connections are within the scope. Three standards were referenced regarding medium-voltage shore power connections from IEC/ISO-IEEE [14], ABS [15], and DNV [16].

The IEC/ISO-IEEE 80005-1 standard would require a shore connection switchboard with a disconnect to be installed as close to the connection points as possible. At a minimum it would require the switchboard to contain a voltmeter, short-circuit devices, overcurrent devices, ground fault indication, and protection against system imbalance. The ABS Guide for High Voltage Shore Connection would also require a switchboard and circuit breaker installed in close

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 15 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

proximity to the shore power connection, but remote operation would be required without the additional operators. The DNV Rules for Ships / High Speed, Light Craft and Naval Surface Craft, July 2014, Pt.6, Ch.29, Sec.2 B106, would not require a switchboard and circuit breaker. In accordance with ABS and IEC standards, a remotely operated switchboard of small size and limited functionality at the shore connection location on each end of the vessel is assumed in this report. An interlock between these two shore connection switchboards will prevent the charging at one from back feeding the other shore power plug.

The shore power voltage, while also out of the scope of this report, will likely be 12.4 kV. Immediately downstream of each shore power connection disconnect will be isolation and step down transformers to 4,160 V. The isolation transformers are not clearly required by the three medium-voltage shore power connection standards just referenced, but they would be required for any shore power voltage not matching the propulsion switchgear's 4,160 V.

A power management system (PMS) would be required as part of the hybridization. A PMS would be responsible for starting propulsion diesels automatically when the battery pack had discharged to a certain level. It would also be responsible for shutting down the diesel once plugged in at the next docking. Finally, the PMS would be responsible for managing the share of power provided by one or both diesel engines with the battery pack. The bulk of the costs associated with such a control system would be born primarily by the separate modernization effort and be part of the larger propulsion control system (PCS) program (see Section 9.4). PMS functionality is a very standard element of dynamic positioning (DP) vessels used in the oil and gas industry to meet both United States Coast Guard (USCG) and classification society rules.

4.3 Redundancy The mission of WSF is to provide a safe, reliable, and efficient ferry transportation system. Redundancy and the availability of reserve onboard power is how WSF currently addresses the safe and reliable portion of the mission statement.

Table 9 and Table 10 demonstrate the duration of reserve battery capacity available at three state of charges (SOCs) – full charge, mid-channel charge, and minimum charge. The simplifying calculations were completed with end of life ratings of two 1,500 kWh LTO battery banks and two 3,000 kWh NMC battery banks. At end of life batteries can reach only 80% of the maximum capacity, effectively yielding two 1,257 kWh LTO battery banks and two 2,514 kWh NMC battery banks. Maximum C-rate is not dependent on the battery chemistry in this case, but the limited power rating of the inverters and transformers. The inverter ratings assume a cycloconverter power factor of 0.8. Even with the C-rate limited by the inverters and transformers, each battery bank can provide the power of 1.2 equivalent diesel generators. The discharge durations shown in the tables assume the batteries will have the capability to discharge completely to 0%, rather than the typical 30%. Such discharge would be envisioned to require a covered manual operator at the engine room control console that would only be exercised during an emergency. If the battery bank is not discharged at the maximum C-rate, the below durations would increase.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 16 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 9: Onboard Power Redundancy – 3,000 kWh LTO Battery Installation at End of Life Battery Inverter Max C- Equiv. Battery Discharge Duration (min) Source kWh kW Rate Diesel 100% SOC 65% SOC 30% SOC End #1 Batteries 1,257 3,600 2.9 1.2 21.0 13.6 6.3 End #2 Batteries 1,257 3,600 2.9 1.2 21.0 13.6 6.3 Prpl Diesel # 1 - 3,000 - 1.0 Prpl Diesel # 2 - 3,000 - 1.0

Table 10: Onboard Power Redundancy – 6,000 kWh NMC Battery Installation at End of Life Battery Inverter Max C- Equiv. Battery Discharge Duration (min) Source kWh kW Rate Diesel 100% SOC 82.5% SOC 65% SOC End #1 Batteries 2,514 3,600 1.4 1.2 41.9 34.6 27.2 End #2 Batteries 2,514 3,600 1.4 1.2 41.9 34.6 27.2 Prpl Diesel # 1 - 3,000 - 1.0 Prpl Diesel # 2 - 3,000 - 1.0

The following single and double failure scenarios were considered to ensure full redundancy is provided. The vessels could remain in service following a single failure, but would need to return immediately to a dock for a double failure.

• With a loss of a single battery bank, a propulsion diesel would start automatically. The remaining battery bank could supply full power for the durations shown in Table 9 or Table 10. • With the loss of a single propulsion diesel, the batteries would continue operating as usual with the other propulsion diesel in reserve. • With the loss of a single charging station, a propulsion diesel would come online to provide a source of charge for the battery banks. The batteries would fully charge at the remaining charging station. • With a loss of both battery banks, both propulsion diesels would start automatically, but no reserve capacity would be available. If a loss of a propulsion diesel were to occur subsequently, the vessel could transit to the closest dock under the power of a single generator. • With the loss of both propulsion diesels, the batteries could continue operating as usual, but no reserve capacity would be available. If a loss of a battery bank were to occur subsequently, the vessel could transit to the closest dock under the power of only a single battery bank. • With the loss of both charging stations, a propulsion diesel would come online to provide a source of charge for the battery banks. The batteries would operate in a peak shaving mode to supplement the single online generator. The second propulsion diesel would come online at times to maintain a margin on the SOC.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 17 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

5 HYBRID SYSTEM ARRANGEMENTS 5.1 Battery Room Arrangements Originally, the Engineer's Storeroom was examined as the most likely option for a battery room, with close proximity to the Engine Rooms and defined boundaries. However, the Engineer's Storeroom contains difficult to relocate auxiliary equipment not evident on the arrangements plan, including motor control centers, sewage drains, sewage aerators, and alarm and monitoring servers. The storage spaces are also used for their intended purpose of providing space for spare parts and materials. After ship checking, conversion of the Shaft Alleys and the next Voids towards each end was determined to be a feasible option. A minimal amount of existing auxiliary systems and structure would be impacted.

A 3D model of a Jumbo Mark II hull was provided by WSF in Rhinoceros 3D modeling software. As the most and least compact respectively, Spear and PBES battery installations were modeled in to the hull model to determine the space occupied and resulting access clearances. Images of the arrangements are shown in Appendix D. The initial assessment shows that each battery type can fit into the Shaft Alleys and Voids, some in the Shaft Alleys alone. Refinement of the arrangement will be necessary to ensure stairway access to the propulsion shafting, and to incorporate the supporting cooling, ventilation, and firefighting equipment.

For battery types that require space in both the Shaft Alleys and Voids, new watertight doors will be required in the bulkheads at Frame 74 at each end. These could be mechanized or possibly simple manual quick acting doors. Emphasis will be placed on access to the battery modules for efficient replacement. Since the modules will be replaced several times throughout the vessel life, adequate access will be important.

The existing emergency escape arrangements in the Shaft Alleys will most likely remain in use. Additional escapes will need to be installed for the Voids into which batteries could potentially also be installed.

Structural modifications will be required to add and support the battery racks. This would consist primarily of a platform level within the spaces, with associated stanchions, girders, and stiffeners. Special consideration needs to be given to maintaining reasonable access to the propulsion shafting, seals, bearings, and couplings. Additionally, consideration needs to be given to the removal of the propulsion shaft through the Main Deck. Some level of battery and structure removal would be necessary for shafting removal, but the complication would be minimized with some foresight.

Structural fire protection insulation will be included with the battery installation. The underside of the Main Deck will most likely be insulated to A-60, along with the Shaft Alley bulkheads. Portions of the battery platform may be insulated to protect the shafting in case of a battery fire.

Existing systems within the spaces in question will require rerouting and relocation. The systems are minimal, so this is only foreseen as a minor impediment.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 18 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

5.2 Engine Room Arrangements With the removal of one propulsion diesel generator in each Engine Room, space will become available for the additional inverters and transformers required by the hybridization. Appendix D contains a modification drawing for each Engine Room.

Opposite generators will be removed to eliminate any potential for a weight imbalance. Removals associated with the generators include the exhaust pipe and silencers, fuel piping to the day tanks, and related systems as appropriate and/or convenient. The foundations of the generators will require modification to repurpose the existing footprint.

Two half size inverters or one full size inverter, one step up transformer, and one shore power isolation step down transformer will be installed in the existing footprint of the removed diesel generator in each Engine Room. The footprint of the transformer is for a 5 MVA transformer with no housing. An enclosure rating of at least IP 22 is required for installation in machinery spaces. As such, either a housing will need to be provided with the transformer or a separate space will have to be built around the transformer. The modification drawings in Appendix D show all four items of equipment located between the six existing stanchions, minimizing the impacts of enclosing the space.

If only one diesel generator is removed, the inverters and transformers in one Engine Room would need to be relocated. A likely destination would be the Engineer's Storeroom. Some modifications and rearrangement would be required, but the equipment should fit easily. The low overhead clearance in the Engineer's Storeroom may pose a challenge, limiting inverter and transformer options.

The extent of the impact on switchgear upgrades also depends on the removal of one or two generators. If two generators are removed, the switchgear cubicles can be repurposed for the battery connections. If only one generator is removed, a new switchgear cubicle will need to be added.

5.3 Auxiliary Systems Impacts Along with the major modifications of propulsion power and control systems, a variety of auxiliary systems will require addition or modification. While there are several, each modification is relatively simple in comparison to the major modifications to the power and propulsion systems.

5.3.1 Alarm and Monitoring Rather than integrating the new battery alarm and monitoring points into the current alarm and monitoring system (AMS), auxiliary battery monitoring panels will be installed outside of each Battery Room. The signals will then be sent to the main AMS. Other parallel vessel modernization projects will require modifications of the AMS, making the additional battery monitoring a marginal effort.

The power management system is a related, but separate system, which will require modification to integrate the batteries, removed generators, and shore power charging. It will handle the task

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 19 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

of monitoring battery state of charge, cycling generators on and off, and balancing generator set run time. It will also control the shore power connection and battery charging.

5.3.2 Cooling Systems The battery installations may be liquid cooled, requiring the installation of a seawater cooling system to serve each Battery Room. The system would consist of a seachest, seawater strainer, pumps, heat exchanger, and interconnecting valves, piping, and control and monitoring equipment. On the fresh water-cooling side, the system would include strainers, pumps, the opposite side of the heat exchangers, distribution to the battery racks, and control and monitoring components.

5.3.3 Fire Suppression System Each Battery Room will include a fire suppression installation. The relevant DNV GL, ABS, and BV rules detailed in Section 8 differ on the use of fixed gas or water deluge. The recommendation of this report is that both would be employed. Fixed gas would discharge on the first indication of a fire. Water deluge would only be activated manually as a second course of action. The fixed gas system provides protection against fires external to the battery system, including portions of the battery rack not within the modules themselves, while the water deluge system will cool and extinguish a battery fire, in the unlikely occurrence one occurs. The water deluge system may be a relatively simple branch off the fire main. The most effective approach to combat a fire emanating from the battery cells is to cool the cells. Of the available options, water is the most effective media for cooling a fire.

It is likely that the existing bilge pumping system will have adequate capacity to dewater the space in the event the water deluge system is activated. This will be confirmed during the design phase.

5.3.4 Ventilation The Shaft Alleys and adjacent Voids are currently provided with forced ventilation. Should these spaces be converted to Battery Rooms, fire dampers and ventilation control systems will be necessary. Ventilation in relationship to fire control is different for lithium-ion battery rooms from most other spaces. Ventilation should be secured for a fire external to the battery pack, as typical for use with a fixed gas extinguishing system. However, if the batteries themselves are burning, the cells produce toxic and potentially explosive gases. Manufacturers are shifting to providing internal ducting inside each battery module. These then connect with a common duct at the rear of each battery rack that is then piped up and out the vessel. It might be considered to require such ducting of any potential lithium-ion battery supplier.

The production of potentially toxic and explosive gasses raises the concern of the location of the future ventilation duct discharge. Typical space ventilation flowrates will likely dilute the gas concentrations suitably below the harmful and explosive thresholds; , directing the discharge away from occupied areas is recommended.

5.3.5 Accommodation Heating Currently, accommodation heating is provided from waste heat produced by the generator sets. With the conversion to battery power and intermittent generator set use, alternative heat sources

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 20 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20 will be required. The simplest solution is to use the vessel's auxiliary boilers. This is a key assumption of this report as discussed in Section 9.1. If fueled by petroleum diesel however, this would offset some of the emissions savings resulting from the conversion to hybrid propulsion. There are approaches which would be more complicated and involved, yet would address the emissions created by boiler operation.

Perhaps the simplest alternative solution is to fuel the existing boiler system with a biofuel or biofuel blend. This would require essentially no modification to the HVAC system, though it would require an additional fuel system to be installed if the main generators sets were also not to be fueled by biofuel.

The water-cooled propulsion motors might be a source for waste heat recovery as well as potentially water-cooled lithium-ion batteries. Unfortunately, the large amount of heat given off by the cycloconverters would be difficult to capture and convert as they are air-cooled. Finally, a review of energy efficiency items such as insulation, window coatings, and air exchange rates may help reduce the overall heat required to maintain the accommodations at a comfortable temperature.

5.3.6 Fuel System The conversion to hybrid drive will reduce fuel consumption dramatically. The vessel will still carry fuel in preparation for an onshore power outage or natural disaster. This increases the possibility of fuel contamination from condensation and bacterial growth. To combat this phenomenon, a fuel-purifying loop to continuously clean the fuel in the storage tank should be considered.

6 WEIGHT ESTIMATE The battery conversion results in an average of 190 long tons (LT) of added weight, depending on battery selection, and 76 LT of removed weight. The added weights include added batteries, transformers, inverters, and shore connections, and modifications to structure, electrical systems, freshwater cooling, HVAC, fire extinguishing systems, insulation, and control systems. Removed weights include two diesel generators and their respective exhaust piping, insulation, and support piping. Lightship weight changes do not address differences in tank loadings. Table 11 shows a summary of lightship weight changes based upon battery manufacturer.

In addition to the change in lightship weight, the vessel operational displacement may be reduced by carrying a reduced fuel load. The vessels typically fuel weekly, and maintain at least a two- week reserve. Since fuel consumption will be drastically reduced, the quantity of fuel carried could also be reduced. The new fuel load would be based on a week's consumption at the electrified consumption rate plus two weeks consumption at the original diesel engine driven rate. The total fuel load reduction is approximately 110 LT. As may be observed from Table 11, a reduction of 110 LT in fuel weight will largely offset the weight addition of the hybrid system.

The battery installation is low in the hull and well below the vessel's current vertical center of gravity (VCG), so the modified lightship VCG is expected to drop as much as 2.76 inches. Fuel is stored in double bottom tanks at the very bottom of the vessel, so reducing the fuel load will result in a final increase in VCG of approximately 9 inches.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 21 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 11: Weight Estimate Summary

Weight VCG (LT) (ft) Current Light Ship 4408 28.44

New Light Ship Battery System Weight VCG Change (LT) (ft) (LT) (in) Corvus Orca Energy 4,527 28.2 119 -2.52 PBES 4,541 28.2 133 -2.76 Spear SMAR-11N 4,505 28.3 97 -2.04 Spear SMAR-3T 4,509 28.3 101 -2.04

In summary, the vessels have adequate weight capacity to support the addition of the proposed systems.

7 STABILITY ASSESSMENT The full load condition, including the battery conversion and the removal of a week's worth of fuel, results in a minimal change in displacement and an increase in VCG of approximately 9 inches. Figure 10 shows the current maximum VCG plot, which displays the maximum allowable VCG at any displacement. The existing conditions shown have several feet of margin from operating in the "Unsafe Operating Region". A VCG rise of nine inches is an insignificant penalty to the vessel's stability.

There will be little to no impact on the vessel's trim and list, as the modifications will be very nearly symmetrical about midship and centerline.

No adverse impacts on damaged stability are foreseen. The permeabilities of the end compartments will only be reduced by battery additions, and no asymmetrical flooding permutations will be introduced. No watertight bulkheads will be removed or relocated. The existing subdivision draft will remain in place.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 22 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 10: Jumbo Mark II Class Maximum VCG vs Displacement [17] 8 REGULATORY REVIEW The regulatory environment is changing quickly for alternative propulsion technologies. To date, DNV GL, BV, and ABS have released rules for the installation of propulsion batteries. Older battery related regulations, including those contained within the USCG Subchapters (46 CFR), are more applicable for lead acid or AGM batteries. When hybrid technologies began gaining traction in the marine industry, these regulations did not make technical sense, so regulatory agencies began developing new codes. DNV GL, BV, and ABS are all authorized classification societies by the USCG. Additionally, DNV GL and ABS are members of the Alternative Compliance Program allowing them to issue certificates on behalf of the USCG. However, none of the following rules or class notations are currently included in the agreements between USCG and the societies. As this would be the largest hybrid or electric passenger vessel in the United States, USCG will likely be very involved in the design and approval process.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 23 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

8.1 DNV GL DNV GL offers an additional Battery (Power) Class notation for hybrid vessels "where battery power is used as propulsion power during normal operation, or when the battery is used as a redundant source of power for main" [18]. The rules, released in 2015, are contained within the Rules for Classification of Ships, Part 6, Chapter 2, Section 1 (Battery Power). An earlier 2012 rule set titled the Tentative Rules for Battery Power, contained within the Rules for Classification of High Speed, Light Craft, and Naval Surface Craft, Part 6, Chapter 28 [16], was superseded.

In addition to the class notations, DNV GL offers a type approval for lithium-ion batteries [19]. Type approvals are granted to products or manufacturers that meet a minimum set of requirements. DNV GL's certification process involves battery cell, battery system, and environmental tests. Utilizing a manufacturer or product with a type approval can significantly speed up the regulatory review process.

8.2 Bureau Veritas Bureau Veritas, an international certification agency headquartered in France, offers additional class notations for Battery System and Electric Hybrid in Part F, Chapter 11, Sections 21 and 22 respectively. A Battery System notation applies "when batteries are used for propulsion and/or electric power supply purpose during ship operation" and an Electric Hybrid notation applies to ships "provided with an Energy Storage System (ESS) used to supply the electric propulsion and/or the main electrical power distribution system of the ship."

8.3 American Bureau of Shipping ABS, headquartered in Houston, offers an additional Battery-Li notation specifically for the use of "a lithium battery system used as an additional source of power with a capacity greater than 25 kWh" [20].

ABS also offers type approvals for lithium-ion batteries and control systems.

8.4 Comparison All rule sets were thoroughly reviewed and compared against a list of nine critical items. The comparison in whole is provided in Appendix F. The DNV GL rules were found to be the most rigorous. The ABS rules, while slightly less specific, were quite similar to DNV GL. The BV rules were the least substantial and not as logically organized.

Potentially the most glaring difference of the BV rules is the lack of an IEC 62619 reference. Both DNV GL and ABS require that the battery module perform tests such as the external short- circuit, impact, drop, thermal abuse, overcharge, forced discharge, cell-to-cell propagation, overcharge control, and overheating control tests. As the IEC 62619 reference involves the safety of the battery module in failure situations, any battery system on a WSF vessel should comply with the IEC reference.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 24 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

9 LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS 9.1 Diesel This life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) forms the basis for gauging the economic feasibility of this project. Certain aspects of the analysis rely on guidance from WSDOT and USDOT references [21] [22]. As is typical, these LCCA comparisons are made between competing alternatives. Only the differential costs are considered between alternatives studied here as costs common to all alternatives cancel out. The main differential costs are: diesel, electricity, lithium-ion batteries, vessel installation and maintenance, shore power installation and maintenance, terminal installation, and utility upgrades.

Estimating the future cost of diesel is by far the most challenging element of this LCCA. History has demonstrated the wide volatility that can occur, whether it is with the effective glut of oil in the last few years, the price shock around 2008, or the crisis of the 1970's. As a reference point, the historical diesel and crude oil prices are shown in Figure 11 [23] [24].

Diesel Price ($/gal) 2

1 Diesel, Retail

Brent Crude Oil Spot Prices 0 1/1/1995 1/1/1999 1/1/2003 1/1/2007 1/1/2011 1/1/2015

Figure 11: Historical Diesel and Crude Oil Prices, in 2017 Dollars Despite the recent glut, the straight-line approximations of the data for both diesel retail and crude market prices over the last 23 years reveal a steady increase over time as shown in Figure 12. In real 2017 dollars, the linear trend lines indicate an increase of 9.3 cents per year for retail diesel and $3.16/barrel for crude oil (42 gal/barrel at 7.53 cents/gal).

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 25 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

3 y = 0.09273x - 7.2006

Diesel Price ($/gal) 2

y = 0.0753x - 6.5789 1 Diesel, Retail Brent Crude Oil Spot Prices 0 1/1/1995 1/1/1999 1/1/2003 1/1/2007 1/1/2011 1/1/2015

Figure 12: Historical Diesel and Crude Oil Prices, Linear Trend Lines Another approach is an exponential curve fit as shown in Figure 13. In this case, the exponential trend lines indicate an annual rate of increase of 3.7% for retail diesel and 6.2% for crude oil. The effects of inflation have been removed as all the trend lines are in 2017 dollars. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) was used to extract data in 2017 dollars.

3 y = 0.0494e0.0369x

Diesel Price ($/gal) 2

y = 0.002e0.0606x 1 Diesel, Retail Brent Crude Oil Spot Prices 0 1/1/1995 1/1/1999 1/1/2003 1/1/2007 1/1/2011 1/1/2015

Figure 13: Historical Diesel and Crude Oil Prices, Exponential Trend Lines The ratio between a spot price such as the Los Angeles ultra-low sulfur diesel (LA ULSD CARB) market spot price and the Brent crude oil price is consistent. Figure 14 shows the relationship between the two over the last 11 years [25]. Obviously, there is some variation attributable to delays, inconsistencies, and market dynamics between the two tracked values. However, given the price volatility seen over the range, the ratio is rather stable. Based on the

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 26 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

data and for the purposes of this report, the LA ULSD CARB price will be assumed to include a 25% increase above that of Brent crude oil pricing, yielding a ratio of 1.25.

5 LA ULSD CARB Diesel Spot Price 4.5 Brent Crude Oil Spot Prices

4 Ratio of Diesel to Crude Spot Prices Average Ratio of Diesel to Crude Spot Prices 3.5

2.5

1.5 Diesel Price or($/gal) Ratio 1

0.5

0 6/14/2006 10/27/2007 3/10/2009 7/23/2010 12/5/2011 4/18/2013 8/31/2014 1/13/2016 5/27/2017

Figure 14: Ratio between LA USLD Market Spot Price & Brent Crude Oil, in 2017 Dollars Information obtained from WSF determined they typically receive a price that runs about 10% higher than that of the LA ULSD CARB spot price for ultra-low sulfur diesel, yielding a ratio of 1.1. However, it is important to note that WSF's price includes delivery charges, is for a biodiesel blend of B5, and tracks more closely with the privately published spot pricing for the Pacific Northwest region. Figure 15 shows the relationship between the LA ULSD CARB spot and the WSF price over the last two years of data.

Combining the aforementioned ratios yields a final ratio of 1.375 between the Brent crude oil price and that of final delivery to a WSF vessel.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 27 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

2.5

1.5

Diesel Price ($/gal) LA ULSD CARB Diesel Spot Price WSF Two Year Pricing, ULSD B5 0.5

0 7/1/2015 10/9/2015 1/17/2016 4/26/2016 8/4/2016 11/12/2016 2/20/2017 5/31/2017 9/8/2017

Figure 15: Relationship between LA ULSD Market Spot Price and Recent WSF to Vessel Pricing The most reliable, thorough, and publicly available price projections for fuel oil are a product of the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) and their "Annual Energy Outlook 2017" (AEO) [26]. The EIA's AEO Brent crude oil price projections will be used as part of this report's LCCA. The AEO has essentially eight crude oil price projections. Following is a list with quick definitions from the AEO report:

• Reference Case with Clean Power Plan (CPP): "The Reference case projection assumes trend improvement in known technologies, along with a view of economic and demographic trends reflecting the current central views of leading economic forecasters and demographers." • High Oil Price Case vs. Low Oil Price Case: "In the High Oil Price case, the price of Brent crude in 2016 dollars reaches $226 per barrel (b) by 2040, compared to $109/b in the Reference case and $43/b in the Low Oil Price case." • High Oil and Gas Resource and Technology Case vs. Low Oil and Gas Resource and Technology Case: "In the High Oil and Gas Resource and Technology case, lower costs and higher resource availability than in the Reference case allow for higher production at lower prices. In the Low Oil and Gas Resource and Technology case, more pessimistic assumptions about resources and costs are applied." • High and Low Economic Growth Cases: "The effects of economic assumptions on energy consumption are addressed in the High and Low Economic Growth cases, which assume compound annual growth rates for U.S. gross domestic product of 2.6% and 1.6%, respectively, from 2016–40, compared with 2.2% annual growth in the Reference case." • Reference Case without Clean Power Plan (CPP): "A case assuming that the Clean Power Plan (CPP) is not implemented can be compared with the Reference case to show how the absence of that policy could affect energy markets and emissions."

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 28 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Regarding the first and last case, the CPP is currently under review and proposed to be repealed by the current federal administration [27]. Interestingly, there was virtually no difference in projected Brent crude oil price projections between the Reference Case with or without the Clean Power Plan. This report will use the Reference Case with the Clean Power Plan simply because it served as the default Reference Case in the EIA's AEO. The Reference Case with Clean Power Plan will be simply referred to as the Reference Case in the rest of this report.

The High and Low Economic Growth Cases did not have much impact on the Reference Case. They tracked just above and below the Reference Case, as did the High and Low Oil and Gas Resource and Technology Cases. As a result, since they are in some sense redundant and difficult to show graphically with the other two cases, they have been eliminated from the analysis. See Figure 16 for the remaining five price projections from the AEO for Brent crude oil [26]. These are the same five curves shown in a similar graph in the AEO report.

300

250

200 Crude Oil, Reference Case, CPP 150 Crude Oil, High Resource and Tech Crude Oil, Low Resource and Tech 100 Crude Oil, High Price Diesel Price ($/barrel) Crude Oil, Low Price 50

0 2016 2024 2032 2040 2048 Year

Figure 16: EIA Brent Crude Oil Price Projections, in 2016 Dollars These projections extend out to the year 2050, close to the end of the LCCA model. For years past this point in time, i.e. 2051-2058, the LCCA will conservatively hold final 2050 values constant. As mentioned above, a multiple of 1.35 was used along with the conversion of 42 gallons per barrel of oil to scale Figure 16 into five price projections for the cost of delivered diesel fuel to a vessel at WSF, shown in Figure 17.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 29 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

6 Crude Oil, Reference Case, CPP 5 Crude Oil, High Resource and Tech 4 Crude Oil, Low Resource and Tech 3 Crude Oil, High Price Diesel Price ($/gal)

2 Crude Oil, Low Price

0 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 Year

Figure 17: WSF Diesel Price Projections, in 2016 Dollars Figure 16 and Figure 17 indicate a very wide range of price projections. However, neither the low or high price curves seem realistic to expect for the length of time shown. Given the volatility typical in the oil markets and as reflected by Figure 14 at the start of this section, the low and high price curves better represent the expected maximum and minimum envelope between which oil prices may peak or slump. The Reference Case then appears a good average of the expected range of future pricing. It should be noted that the just released World Energy Outlook 2017 from the International Energy Agency (IEA) [28] has a similar wide range of projections, except it has estimated the low price curve considerably higher than the EIA AEO's low price curve.

This report will utilize the following as a more conservative price projection in parallel to the Reference Case. WSF currently is paying approximately $2.12/gallon for diesel delivered to their vessels. A linear price increase projection will be utilized. Rather than the estimated 9.3 cents per year for retail diesel or 7.53 cents/gal per year for crude oil, a 3 cents/gal per year increase will be used to remain conservative. Figure 18 shows this conservative price projection in comparison to the Reference Case.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 30 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

6 Crude Oil, Reference Case, CPP Crude Oil, High Resource and Tech 5 Crude Oil, Low Resource and Tech 4 Crude Oil, High Price Crude Oil, Low Price

Diesel Price ($/gal) 3 WSF Current with Linear Increase 2

0 2016 2024 2032 2040 2048 2056 Year Figure 18: WSF Diesel Price Projections with Sixth Conservative Projection, in 2016 Dollars Calculated fuel consumption from information provided by WSF is shown in Table 12. These values are supported from tabulated data from WSF for the last 12 months available of Jumbo Mark II operation, shown in Figure 19.

Table 12: Jumbo Mark II Fuel Consumption Gallons/ Hours of Gallons/ Gallons/ Route Hour Operation Day Month Seattle-Bainbridge 275 20 5,500 167,500 Edmonds-Kingston 225 20 4,500 137,000

MARK II VESSEL CLASS CONSUMPTION BY VESSEL, BY MONTH - LAST 12 MONTHS THRU OCTOBER 2017 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 TOTALS TACOMA 157,225 166,109 163,189 50,663 164,206 160,071 163,249 160,005 165,507 166,974 162,372 49,034 1,728,604 WENATCHEE 160,100 63,467 60,451 140,884 177,128 164,273 169,175 169,440 173,172 173,339 165,648 175,039 1,792,116 PUYALLUP 88,069 107,266 145,234 131,439 136,732 131,454 137,284 132,932 141,712 135,060 135,298 158,231 1,580,711 JUMBO MARK II FUEL 405,394 336,842 368,874 322,986 478,066 455,798 469,708 462,377 480,391 475,373 463,318 382,304 5,101,431 Partial consumption month - vessel was undergoing maintenance at least part of the month Figure 19: Jumbo Mark II Monthly Diesel Consumption, Last 12 Months Information from WSF indicates that a Jumbo Mark II will typically be out of service an average of seven and a half weeks per year. When the TACOMA or WENATCHEE is out of service on the Seattle-Bainbridge run, the PUYALLUP shifts to this route. Jumbo Mark IIs will be on the Seattle-Bainbridge run 365 days per year and 208 days per year on Edmonds-Kingston. As a result, the life cycle cost analysis will estimate Jumbo Mark IIs annually consuming about 4,015,000 gallons at Seattle-Bainbridge (two vessels on run) and 935,100 gallons at Edmonds- Kingston.

The vessels are assumed to operate with periodic usage of the onboard diesels to avoid oversizing the hybrid power system. A necessary departure from the dock prior to a full recharge of the battery system might require a diesel generator to come online prior to docking at the other side. If the captain required accelerating above a certain threshold assumed in this

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 31 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20 report to be 7.2 MW/9.0 MVA continuously or 8.0 MW/10.0 MVA for a peak period of perhaps a minute, a reserve generator would be automatically brought online. An estimate was made that such usage would equate to one diesel online for one hour per day on average. With an average annual consumption presently of 1,650,333 gallons of fuel per vessel, such periodic diesel engine usage will only account for 1.67% of a Jumbo Mark II's current consumption. An additional 1.2% is estimated to achieve the utility required interruptibility requirements for significant electricity cost reductions (see Section 9.2).

Onboard waste heat recovery systems will be of little value if crossings will be primarily powered with shore-side electricity. The onboard boilers are assumed to provide the vessel with necessary heating. Previous heat load calculations obtained from WSF indicated that just over half of the vessels calculated worst-case heat loads were for the Engine Rooms, Motor Rooms, and Shaft Alley locations. It is assumed that these spaces will be adequately supplied with indirect heating from the new hybrid inverters, transformers, and battery packs as well as the existing cycloconverters and propulsion motors. This analysis and discussions with WSF resulted in an estimated 30,000 gallons of diesel needed annually to heat the vessel. With an average annual consumption presently of 1,650,333 gallons of fuel per vessel, boiler usage will only account for 1.8% of a Jumbo Mark II's current consumption.

9.2 Electricity In contrast to the history of diesel and crude oil prices, electricity has been a very stable commodity, even more so in the Pacific Northwest. Figure 20 shows the price of electricity in Washington State since 1990. The linear trend line shows that the average of commercial and industrial rates in 2015 dollars has only increased by 0.0319 cents per year.

0.10

0.09

0.08

0.07 y = 0.0003x - 0.5785 0.06

0.05

0.04 Residential 0.03 Commercial Electricity Price ($/kWh) Price Electricity 0.02 Industrial Indus-Comm Average 0.01 Linear (Indus-Comm Average) 0.00 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year

Figure 20: Historical Price of Electricity in Washington State, in 2015 Dollars Unfortunately, the EIA AEO only contains national averages and does not address regional price projections of electricity in its analysis. The national average projections show a very small rate

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 32 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

of increase as shown in Figure 21. The average of the industrial and commercial rates nationally is only projected to increase 0.027 cents per year.

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.10 y = 0.00027x - 0.44578 0.08

0.06 Residential

Electricity Price ($/kWh) Commercial 0.04 Industrial 0.02 Indus-Comm Average Linear (Indus-Comm Average) 0.00 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Year

Figure 21: EIA Electricity Price Projections, in 2016 Dollars For this report, quoted rates from the three involved utilities will be projected to increase at a rate of 0.0319 cents per year in accordance with historical Washington data.

Much of Western Washington is on or near a very powerful electrical grid. Downtown Seattle consumes approximately 200-300 MW per square mile [29]. The downtown Seattle ferry dock at Pier 52 has four major power lines passing underneath Alaskan Way right in front of the terminal, a 115 kV power line and three triply redundant 13 kV lines [30]. Even in the midst of Bainbridge Island, multiple substations have 115 kV supplied to them [31]. The Murden Cove substation is about two miles from the Bainbridge ferry dock. In 2010, peak Bainbridge loads in the winter exceeding 56 MW required upgrades to supply future increases. The Kingston substation placed online in 2007 also has 115 kV just over three miles from the Kingston dock [32].

Representatives at WSF worked to get rate data from the three involved utilities: Seattle City Light (SCL), Snohomish County Public Utility District (SnoPUD), and Puget Sound Energy (PSE). A utility bill can contain a large number of various charges. Most of the charges are quite small, at least relative to the energy and power levels that would be required to charge a Jumbo Mark II. It should be noted that the onboard inverters controlling the battery charging batteries will also be able to control the power factor involved. This should alleviate concerns about reactive power charges from the utility and a utility power factor of 1.0 will be assumed in this report. As a result, there are only two significant components of the cost of electricity for this LCCA, the energy charge and the demand charge.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 33 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

The following data is preliminary and conversations between WSF, EBDG, Glosten, and the three utilities are ongoing. It is very likely that WSF would operate under PSE's Schedule 46 [33]. While Schedule 31 had been initially considered [34], Schedule 46 is of significant benefit to WSF. The energy charge is about 7% lower, $0.0565/kWh vs. $0.0525/kWh and the demand charge is 70% lower, $2.95/kVA vs. an average of $9.82/kW. The Schedule 46 demand charge is the average of charges of $11.78/kW from October to March and $7.85/kW from April to September.

The key to achieving this significant reduction in rates is meeting Schedule 46's requirement for service interruptibility. A maximum of 210 hours of service disconnection are required annually. These would likely occur during winter cold snaps where PSE sees peak loads on their system. By offering this flexibility to a utility, the customer's peak loads have minimal impact on the utility's costs of sizing their power grid for peak load periods. For the Bainbridge and Kingston terminals, the 210 hours per year translates to 2.4% of their annual departures. Since either crossing has half of the departures occurring on the other side, this would effectively lead to no more than a 1.2% increase in fuel costs for either run.

Additionally and as discussed further in Section 10, PSE has higher carbon emissions from its power sources than the other two utilities analyzed. However, PSE offers a flexible Green Energy program that allows its customers to increase their rates slightly to ensure that the power comes from low or zero emissions sources. Given the importance of emissions reductions to WSF, this report includes the cost of the large volume Green Energy program, PSE Schedule 136 [35]. The additional energy charge is only $0.0035/kWh for the Bainbridge and Kingston terminals.

While transformers, inverters and lithium-ion batteries are all highly efficient devices, their inefficiencies still need to be included in this analysis. Each transformer will be estimated at 99.6% efficiency based on a representative Siemens Geafol 5 MVA transformer with 21 kW losses at full load, Part No. 4GB6744-9DY05-0AG0 [36]. Each inverter will be estimated at 98.6% efficiency based on a representative ABB central inverter, Part No. PVS980-58- 2091kVA-L [37]. The lithium-ion battery packs will be estimated at 99.1% efficiency based on PBES BBU/PB1 Modules [38]. As a result of the above, a round-trip efficiency of 94.2% will be assumed.

It is estimated that a Jumbo Mark II will make roughly 23 sailings per day on the Seattle- Bainbridge crossing and 26 on Edmonds-Kingston. This report assumes that each will be out of service only seven and a half weeks a year on average. When either the TACOMA or WENATCHEE is out of service on the Seattle-Bainbridge run, the PUYALLUP shifts to this route. As a result, Seattle-Bainbridge would see a total of 16,790 crossings per year and Edmonds-Kingston, 5,403 crossings. Figure 22 shows the estimates of energy, power and resulting utility charges at each terminal.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 34 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 22: Terminal Energy, Power, and Costs 9.3 Lithium-Ion Batteries The TACOMA and WENATCHEE will each make about 7,200 crossings per year while the PUYALLUP will make about 7,800. Due to the PUYALLUP's larger amount of time on the Edmonds-Kingston route, the battery pack would incur a lower average DOD and support a higher projected cycle life. As a result, the TACOMA and WENATCHEE serve as the worst case for this report. With selected target battery life duration of four years, the batteries will need to supply 28,800 cycles at the previously discussed DOD for the more demanding Seattle to Bainbridge crossing. Clearly, this will be a high cycle count application.

The two to one ratio in sizing the battery pack as discussed in Section 4.1.2 also relates to the cost of the batteries. The cost of a LTO cell at the same rough weight and volume will equal the cost of a similarly sized NMC cell. However, the two to one energy density differential means

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 35 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20 that its price will be approximately double in units of dollars per kilowatt hour. At half the size of the NMC bank in kilowatt hours, the LTO battery bank should cost approximately the same. For the purposes of the LCCA, NMC will be used.

The history of lithium-ion battery pricing has been one of decreasing cost and increasing performance. When WSF conducted a Request for Information (RFI) for an attempted hybridization in 2011, there was essentially one supplier of lithium-ion batteries for the marine market: Corvus Energy. At that time, their NMC cell supplier, Dow Kokam, advertised a cycle life of only 2,000. A Corvus Energy battery module cost approximately $1,100/kWh.

Figure 23 shows older price projections for lithium-ion batteries around the year 2012. These prices represent cells only, not the cost of packaging, thermal management and a battery management system (BMS). Interestingly, the price of $150/kWh out to the year 2025 may have already been met. Tesla had recently broken the $200/kWh barrier only to have GM surpass them with a reported price of $145/kWh [39] [40].

Figure 23: Lithium-Ion Battery Price Projections from 2012 The marine market has lagged behind the price reductions seen in the automotive market. There have not been the volumes as of yet to be able to achieve the economies of scale as with passenger vehicles. Unfortunately there is not ample pricing data for the marine sphere, but the heavy-duty electric vehicle market, essentially large trucks and buses, is another sub-sector that has also lagged behind light-duty automotive.

Figure 24, from Reference [41], shows lithium-ion battery price projections for heavy-duty electric vehicles. These are not cell costs, but costs of the actual packs. The price projections encompass 12 different studies from eight different sources. The three different sources tracing out the black median line for NMC, LFP, and other chemistries correlate well for the 2020-2030 time frame and will be used for the LCCA with prices held constant past the year 2030.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 36 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Figure 24: Battery Cost Estimates and Projections (Figure 4 from [41]) Based on discussions with lithium-ion battery suppliers and digesting publicly available information, 2017 marine prices for NMC are estimated at $650/kWh. The lithium-ion prices used in this LCCA are shown in Figure 25. This linear trend line incorporates the current price of $650/kWh and the projections shown in Figure 24.

$700

$600

$500

$400

$300

Battery Cost ($/kWh) Cost Battery $200

$100

$0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 Year

Figure 25: LCCA Marine Lithium-Ion Battery Cost Estimate, in 2017 dollars

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 37 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

9.4 Vessel Installation Costs Battery costs have been explored in other sections. The other significant vessel equipment cost is that of the inverters. The onboard inverters interfacing the battery energy to the existing 4,160 V switchboards will not require a DC-DC conversion stage.

Solar to grid applications must contend with a DC source voltage range that can change rapidly. The widest expected voltage range from the lithium-ion batteries during a full discharge will range from approximately 770-1,000 VDC for NMC and 724-1,000 VDC for LTO. A number of representative central inverters in the megawatt range were analyzed as used in the solar to grid market. All had DC input voltage ranges considerably wider than marine applications. Further, a solar source of DC voltage varies both more rapidly and over a wider range during the day as clouds pass overhead or from sunset to sunrise. The type of inverter used in solar to grid applications should be more than sufficient for marine purposes.

Given the focus and increasing use of solar to grid, there is a lot of data available on the pricing of such inverters. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publishes data in quarterly cost benchmark reports [42]. Figure 26 shows published price estimates for the residential, commercial, and utility sectors.

Figure 26: LCCA Inverter Cost Estimate, in 2017 dollars [42]

The published average price of a central inverter is estimated at $0.08 per Watt AC (WAC). This 2017 cost saw a stunning drop from the previous year's report at $0.12/ WAC. However, marine drives require special certification and testing and are not procured in the same volume as the typical solar-to-grid installation. As a result, the maximum value shown of approximately $0.15/ WAC was conservatively used for price estimates in this report.

The conversion cost estimate in Appendix G shows the updated equipment and systems integration price estimate for a single Jumbo Mark II hybridization. Past WSF systems integration cost information was combined with EBDG's in-depth experience with the last four

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 38 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

major WSF diesel-electric refurbishment projects. Additionally, many vendors were consulted to support the equipment and systems integration cost estimates.

It is important to note that the second column in the conversion cost estimate shows the assumed shared costs between the modernization effort that are currently planned for the Jumbo Mark II Class and the potential hybridization costs. These are only rough estimates and depend considerably on the extent that WSF decides to modernize systems onboard. Further study and coordination with WSF and those supporting their investigation of modernization options would be needed to better quantify potential cost savings. It is safe to say that many of the costs that would normally be associated with a hybridization effort may be significantly reduced if done in concert with the modernization effort.

The modernization effort could potentially include the following on the part of a systems integrator:

• Replacing the Siemens Simadyn propulsion control system • Replacing the Siemens S5 PLCs • Replacing the Siemens ET200 networks and remote racks • Replacing the switchgear protective devices, both inside and on the front cubicle doors • Replacing the switchgear engine control devices (Woodward) • Replacing the EOS and PH console EOTs • Requiring ship checking of the above • Requiring a new system design and drawing package • Requiring extensive control system reprograming • Require development of both an I/O and cable database • Require development of a Construction Bid Support package for shipyard bidding • Require submittals to and interface with the USCG • Require dock and sea trials, training, operating manuals, spare parts, as-built drawings, and additional smaller costs • Require an onsite full-time project manager

Vessel shipyard ROM costs were estimated by WSF. WSF factored in this report's equipment and systems integration cost estimates and included a 25% contingency and 10% preliminary engineering to determine a total installation cost per vessel. EBDG was invited to and participated in the initial team meeting where such costs were presented and discussed. Should more details be developed, this section can be completed in greater detail and include a discussion. The vessel shipyard ROM costs are:

• WENATCHEE: $35.9 million • TACOMA: $34.1 million • PUYALLUP: $33.4 million

9.5 Vessel Maintenance Costs EBDG obtained information from Staff Chief and Port Engineers [43] [44] [45] regarding the vessel maintenance costs. The following life cycle maintenance cost estimates for the Jumbo

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 39 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Mark II propulsion diesel engines were created utilizing this information. The listed engine hour intervals are the manufacturer's recommendations. As WSF has an extensive track record in maximizing engine life, life cycle costs in this report were based on Jumbo Mark II major engine maintenance occurring every six years or 30,000 hours. Costs involved with the onboard in-port and emergency generators will not change as a result of hybrid operations and so were not considered. A Jumbo Mark II propulsion diesel is a 16-cylinder EMD 710 engine, Model No. 16-710-G7A.

Cost of Net Cost of Total Net Engine Number Hours Total LIFE-CYCLE MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR Labor Labor Total Cost Parts & Cost of No. Hour of Per Labor Comments ONE MEDIUM SPEED EMD 16-710 Rate Per of Labor Mat'l Per Parts & Interval Events Event Hours Event Event Material LEVELS OF SERVICE Check Oil, Fuel & Air Inlet Filters, Engine 1 700 285 $0 4 1140 $0 $0 -$ $0 Protection, Coolant, & Soak Back Pump Replace Lube Oil, Soak Back & Turbocharger Based on 2015 EMD LCCA 2 1,400 142 $0 6 852 $0 $0 613$ $87,046 Filter Elements & Clean Lube Oil Strainers adjusted for inflation Inspect power assemblies, piston-cooling pipes, 3 2,000 connecting rod bearings, main bearings air box 100 $0 12 1200 $0 $0 250$ $25,000 $250 allowance per event emergency fuel cut off, etc. Set injector timing and rack length, inspect turbocharger inlet screen, clean oil separator & 4 4,000 50 $0 16 800 $0 $0 250$ $12,500 $250 allowance per event replace gaskets, clean oil strainers, retorque bolts, inspect/replace top deck cover seals. Replace fuel injectors, replace engine Injector pricing taken from WSF 5 8,000 protector device, check hot oil detector, replace 25 $0 16 400 $0 $0 24,649$ $616,235 PO dated 07/12/17. Coolant cap coolant pressure cap pricing from 2015 EMD LCCA Governor pricing taken from 6 12,000 Replace Governor 16 $0 8 128 $0 $0 1,124$ $17,984 WSF PO dated 07/12/17 Replace oil separator element and gaskets, Part pricing from 2015 EMD 7 16,000 clean airline orifices, clean prelube/soakback 12 $0 16 192 $0 $0 1,905$ $22,860 LCCA strainer, inspect fuel pump, compression test

CENTER SECTION OVERHAUL - Repl Power Paks, external fuel lines, Rod Brgs, Turbo, flexible couplings & expansion joints, Labor hours, 4 Techs, 14 days, oil pump, gov, gov gear drive, valves, prelube 8 20,000 10 $153 672 6720 $102,816 $1,028,160 416,140$ $4,161,400 12 hr/day and parts cost taken pump motor assy, fuel pump assembilies, from MSI quote dated 10/20/17 thermostatic valves. Inspect/qualify cam followers, cam lobes, crankshaft, gear trains, crankshaft damper, exhaust manifold, load test.

INTERMEDIATE OVERHAUL - Repl. Crankshaft Damper, inspect/service camshaft 9 40,000 5 $153 60 300 $9,180 $45,900 17,000$ $85,000 damper, replace rocker arm and cam followers, replace camshaft bearings and thrust collars.

MAJOR OVERHAUL - Line Bore Crankcase, 10 80,000 Repl Crankshaft, Cams, Complete Gear Train, 2 $153 420 840 $64,260 $128,520 91,000$ $182,000 Stub Shaft Ass'ys & Upper Main Brgs LABOR & MATERIAL COST TOTALS 12572 $1,202,580 $5,210,025 (per engine) Figure 27: Life Cycle Maintenance Cost Estimate Worksheet, in 2017 dollars Items 1-7 in Figure 27 were averaged out to a yearly value of $19,596. Items 8-10 will be distributed through the LCCA at the appropriate interval. The analysis is simplified by assuming that a reset of engine hours is in place with diesel maintenance on the first year of hybrid operation. The complication of calculating each engine's accumulated hours individually and precisely calculating the point they are at currently in their diesel maintenance schedule was not deemed justified.

Inverter maintenance costs are estimated based on information from Electric Power Research Institute and Sandia National Laboratories [46]. The average maintenance costs of $5.25/kW-yr. are used. Component replacement is assumed to occur on a 20-year cycle with an average cost of $8/kW. The inverters are sized at 10 MVA, but with the charge cycle and an assumed power

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 40 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

factor of 1.0, a value of 10 MW is used to estimate costs. With this assumption, annual maintenance costs are estimated at $52,500 and the one-time component replacement costs at $80,000. At the 20 year point both the annual maintenance costs and the component replacement costs are incurred.

Lithium-ion battery maintenance costs are estimated based on information from NREL and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory [47] [48] and split into fixed and variable components. The fixed component is incurred every year regardless of the energy requirement, while the variable component is proportional to electrical energy (kWh) throughput. Fixed costs are estimated at $3/kWh of energy storage capacity while variable costs are estimated at $0.007 per kWh. With the assumed 6.3 MWh of lithium-ion NMC batteries, the fixed costs would total $18,900 per year.

The variable component in [48] was simply estimated based on experience with sodium-sulfur molten-salt batteries. Further, the analysis did not assume the rapid and regular replacements of lithium-ion batteries as in this case. Since new battery banks are planned every four years, the variable costs will be left out of the LCCA as representing a replacement rate over a longer period.

9.6 Shore Power Installation Costs Shore power installation ROM costs were estimated by Glosten in Reference [49] and included a 25% contingency and 10% preliminary engineering. EBDG was invited to and participated in the initial team meeting where preliminary costs were presented and discussed. Further refinements in cost estimates were obtained from Glosten. Values developed from others' efforts will be included in the LCCA. The shore power installation ROM costs were combined with costs in the following terminal installation ROM cost section.

9.7 Terminal Installation Costs Terminal installation ROM costs were estimated by Glosten in Reference [49] and included a 25% contingency and 10% preliminary engineering. EBDG was invited to and participated in the initial team meeting where preliminary costs were presented and discussed. Further refinements in cost estimates were obtained from Glosten. Values developed from others' efforts will be included in the LCCA. The terminal installation ROM costs were combined with costs in the shore power installation cost section and are:

• Seattle: $6,909,570 • Bainbridge: $6,909,570 • Edmonds: $6,909,570 • Kingston: $6,909,570

9.8 Utility Upgrade Costs Utility upgrade ROM costs were estimated by utilities working with WSF and a 25% contingency was included. EBDG was invited to and participated in the initial team meeting where such costs were presented and discussed. More details are still in process and this section can be updated at a later date. The utility upgrade ROM costs are:

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 41 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

• Seattle: $4.4 million • Bainbridge: $2.5 million • Edmonds: $10.8 million • Kingston: $2.5 million

9.9 Results/Summary While the majority of this study considers a full implementation of three hybrid vessels (TACOMA, WENATCHEE, and PUYALLUP) and four docks with shore power charging capabilities (Seattle, Bainbridge, Edmonds, and Kingston), an incremental approach was taken in the LCCA. LCCAs were also performed for the conversion of three hybrid vessels (TACOMA, WENATCHEE, and PUYALLUP) with two docks (Seattle, Bainbridge) and two hybrid vessels (TACOMA, WENATCHEE) with two docks (Seattle, Bainbridge).

As previously discussed, two diesel price projections were considered in the LCCA – a U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reference case and a conservative case with a linear annual increase to the current WSF rates. Essentially six different LCCAs were calculated. The tabulated data is provided in Appendix G.

Table 13 summarizes the three scenarios considered in the LCCA and Table 14, Table 15, and Table 16 present the results.

Table 13: LCCA Scenario Summary LCCA Scenario Vessels Route TACOMA Edmonds-Kingston Three Vessels, Four Docks WENATCHEE Seattle-Bainbridge PUYALLUP TACOMA Three Vessels, Two Docks WENATCHEE Seattle-Bainbridge PUYALLUP TACOMA Two Vessels, Two Docks Seattle-Bainbridge WENATCHEE

Table 14: LCCA Results – Three Vessels, Four Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $271,034,715 $271,034,715 Not Hybridizing $324,121,623 $267,705,961 Savings $53,086,909 -$3,328,754 Savings, % 16.4% -1.2%

Table 15: LCCA Results – Three Vessels, Two Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $215,523,956 $215,523,956 Not Hybridizing $277,232,452 $229,126,355 Savings $61,708,496 $13,602,399 Savings, % 22.3% 5.9%

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 42 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 16: LCCA Results – Two Vessels, Two Docks Diesel Price Projections EIA Reference Case Conservative Case Hybridizing $169,949,605 $169,949,605 Not Hybridizing $224,493,460 $185,304,172 Savings $54,543,856 $15,354,567 Savings, % 24.3% 8.3%

10 EMISSIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Carbon emissions are directly related to the amount of consumed diesel in engines at a ratio of 22.38 lbs of CO2 per gallon of diesel. The most straightforward method of reducing emissions is simply to consume less fuel. A conversion to an all-electric propulsion system will, in theory, result in a 100% reduction in carbon emissions. However, in reality several sources of carbon emissions will still need to be considered.

Average yearly fuel consumptions were calculated for both the Seattle-Bainbridge and Edmonds- Kingston routes in Section 9.1. With the assumption that the PUYALLUP will shift to the Seattle-Bainbridge route when either the TACOMA or WENATCHEE are out of service, the Edmonds-Kingston route is only served 208 days per year, resulting in much lower emissions.

Table 17: Average Annual Fuel Consumption and Carbon Emissions

Annual Fuel Annual CO2 Route Consumption Emissions Seattle – Bainbridge 4,015,000 gal 40,800 MT Edmonds – Kingston 936,000 gal 9,510 MT Total 4,951,000 gal 50,310 MT

As discussed in Section 9.1, the onboard boilers will still need to operate in the winter months to heat the accommodation spaces. It is assumed the boilers will consume only 1.8% of the current annual fuel consumption after the hybridization.

A single diesel generator will need to come online periodically as the batteries were sized for a typical crossing. As discussed in Section 9.1, an assumption was made that the relief generators will consume only 2.87% of the current annual fuel consumption after the hybridization.

Washington is home to the largest hydroelectric dam in the country and is routinely the largest producer of hydroelectric sourced electricity. This is evident in the fuel mixes for the Snohomish County Public Utility District and Seattle City Light. With the vast majority of power produced by hydroelectric and nuclear plants, both SnoPUD and SCL have negligible emissions.

Puget Sound Energy is a utility on a much larger scale with a different mix of fuels for the production of electricity, including a 37% share from coal plants. PSE is one of six owners of the largest coal-fired power plants in the West, the Colstrip plant in Montana. This plant accounted for 25% of energy produced by PSE power plants [50] and 67% of the carbon emissions [51]. However, two of the four units at Colstrip are required to close in 2022 and the

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 43 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20 other two were very recently restructured financially and redefined as having an end to their "remaining useful life" in 2027 [52]. With the closure of at least two units, the fuel mix will have to be adjusted. The best-case scenario would be to make up for the loss of the Colstrip plants with renewable power sources. If the capacity of the plant is replaced by natural gas production, the carbon emissions will decrease as natural gas produces only half the carbon, but could still be significant.

Alternatively, the large volume Green Energy program offered by PSE presents customers with an option to slightly increase their rates, as in Schedule 136, to purchase Renewable Energy Credits (RECs). Without separate distributions, utilities cannot guarantee that the power delivered to a specific customer is produced solely by renewable sources. Instead the utility purchases RECs, which represent electricity produced by renewable sources, in the same quantity of electricity consumed by the customer. The renewably sourced electricity is added to the grid to, in theory; offset the amount consumed by the customer. Such renewable sources are shown in Figure 28 and include wind, livestock methane, low impact hydroelectric, solar, landfill gas, and geothermal. With the vast majority of the fuel mix from zero emissions sources (wind, hydro, solar) and the remainder from net zero emissions sources (livestock methane, landfill gas, geothermal), participation in the Green Energy program is assumed to effectively emit net zero emissions.

Puget Sound Energy SnoPUD 1% Seattle City Light 1% 2% 1% 11% 4%1% 5% 9% 37% 22%

87% 88% 31%

Coal Hydro Nuclear Wind Natural Gas Other

PSE Green Energy Plan 1% 5% 5% 6%

12% 71%

Wind Livestock Methane Hydro Solar Landfill Gas Geothermal

Figure 28: Utility Fuel Mixes [50] [53] PSE reported a 2015 carbon emissions intensity of 1.03 lb/kWh [51] for the typical fuel mix from both produced and purchased sources of electricity. Resulting emissions from use of PSE electricity is shown in Table 18. As only Bainbridge and Kingston use PSE, only half of the annual crossings determined in Section 9.1 were considered in the emissions calculations.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 44 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Table 18: Emissions from Electrical Usage – Puget Sound Energy w/o Green Energy Program

Energy Annual Crossings Annual Annual CO2 Route per Trip (One-way) 1 Energy Emissions Seattle – Bainbridge 2200 kWh 8,395 18,470 MWh 8,630 MT Edmonds – Kingston 1700 kWh 2,702 4,590 MWh 2,140 MT 1 Only Kingston and Bainbridge with Total 23,060 MWh 10,770 MT PSE sourced charging

While WSF would not include the emissions from the sourced electricity in their GHG emissions inventories, it is still important to consider. However, if WSF participates in the Green Energy Program the emissions in Table 18 can be neglected. With the inclusion of 1.8% diesel consumption from boiler usage, 2.87% from periodic diesel generator use, and the emissions from PSE sourced power, total annual emission reductions are as shown in Table 19. Based on these assumptions, a 73.9% decrease in carbon emissions from source to vessel can be expected without participation in the PSE Green Energy Program. With participation in the program, a 95.3% reduction of carbon emissions could be possible.

Table 19: Emissions Reductions 100% Boiler Periodic PSE Realistic Emissions Reduction Rate Gen Rate Electricity Reduction Emissions Reduction w/o 50,310 MT 1.8% 2.87% 10,770 MT 37,190 MT 73.9% PSE Green Energy Program Emissions Reduction w/ 50,310 MT 1.8% 2.87% - 47,960 MT 95.3% PSE Green Energy Program

While more difficult to quantify, the diesel generators produce significant particulate matter in nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulphur oxides (SOx) as they predate EPA tier certifications. These emissions can also contribute to poor air quality and respiratory ailments.

To ensure all possible sources of greenhouse gas emissions are discussed, the production of lithium-ion batteries must be considered as well. A study was completed by the State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy at Tsinghua University in Beijing [54] to quantify the greenhouse gas emissions through the entire manufacturing process, from material exploitation to battery manufacturing. Several different emission metrics were averaged to arrive at a rate of 125 kg CO2 per kWh for NMC batteries. However, Chinese manufacturing processes for NMC batteries emit 2.8 times the greenhouse gases relative to American processes. Application of this ratio yields an emission rate of approximately 45 kg CO2 per kWh for American manufactured batteries. Manufacturing 6,000 kWh of NMC batteries would emit 270 MT of GHG. Annualizing the emissions over a four-year replacement cycle results in lithium- ion battery carbon emissions of 67.5 MT per year, approximately 0.13% of the current carbon emissions. LTO batteries were not considered in the referenced study.

With the dramatic increase in use of lithium-ion batteries in the transportation industry, the global supplies of metals used in the cells are under close observation. Most of the mines or production sites for these metals, such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, are located in developing

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 45 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

countries with little to no worker protections. Additionally, the availability of the metals can be subject to the whims of corrupt governments.

The metals within the lithium-ion cells can be recycled at the end of life and reused. While technically feasible and proven, using recycled metals in the production of new lithium-ion cells may not yet be economically feasible. However, this may change in the near future as the demand for the metals increases to new highs. Almost all of the battery installation can also be recycled, with the exception of the foil wrapper of the cell. The metal racks, cabling, and circuitry can be scrapped and repurposed.

Emissions are not the only side effect of diesel engines in Puget Sound. Noise and acoustics in the water can affect the wildlife in Puget Sound, including orcas, seals, and porpoises. While the propellers and electric motors will still cause some noise and vibrations, the noise levels will be significantly reduced without the use of the diesel generators.

11 AREAS OF FUTURE WORK A three-vessel, three-dock scenario may warrant further investigation. This concept involves operating the PUYALLUP on the Edmonds-Kingston route with only Kingston having a charging station. A large differential in estimated utility costs exists between the two terminals.

One of three options was briefly explored. The initial assumption was that the PUYALLUP would be kept completely identical to the other two vessels. Unfortunately, preliminary LCCA numbers were slightly less positive than the three-vessel, two-dock scenario. This would involve crossings made with one diesel engine online for part of each round-trip.

Secondly, the onboard battery bank of the PUYALLUP might be increased to make round-trips without the need for a propulsion diesel. Unfortunately, drawings, documentation, and design elements would no longer be common for the three vessels. This would add some cost and could complicate required regulatory submittals.

The third option would be to explore a higher depth of discharge on the same size battery pack, but at half the cycles per day. Further study would be needed to see if the slower aging due to half the cycling overcame the faster aging due to higher depth of discharge. It would also have to be determined if there was additional margin to account for the more rapid aging at Seattle- Bainbridge, i.e. higher depth of discharge allowed but at the same cycles per day. This Seattle- Bainbridge issue might be combatted with a programmable set point for depth of discharge that would be adjusted depending on the route, but complications could arise with such an approach.

Continued study of the ROM costs is certainly warranted as the basis for the total cost of the hybridization. This project is a significant undertaking and radical departure from typical WSF projects. A number of the higher cost items in the hybridization effort are being studied for the first time by WSF. Continued analysis may not only reveal a large number of small cost savings, but significant cost savings that were not clear given the lack of initial detail about the nature of this endeavor.

While only one data point, the ABB HH Ferries Project may provide a point of reference. HH Ferries contracted ABB to upgrade the TYCHO BRAHE and AURORA ferries to full Onboard

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 46 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

DC Grids [55]. On the shore-side, ABB installed substations at the two terminals of Helsingborg, Sweden and Helsingør, Denmark. Also installed were ABB factory robots in dedicated charging towers to enable the 10 kV, 10 MW shore power connection – a rating similar to that required by the Jumbo Mark IIs.

In April HH Ferries published a project cost of 300 million Swedish Krona (SEK) or roughly $37.5 million at the average exchange rate of 8 SEK per U.S. dollar [56]. These costs were supported by a press release updated September 2014 from the European Commission funding approximately 40% of the project cost [57].

Large power cables were run a distance of 1.7 km through downtown Helsingborg by the local utility, Öresundskraft, for the 10 kV, 10 MW shore power connection. An agreement was reached between HH Ferries and Öresundskraft that the utility rate would be adjusted in exchange for Oresundkraft fronting the reported cost of 22 million SEK, or $2.75 million [58].

Excluding the ROM utility upgrade costs used in this report, the ROM cost of converting just two vessels and two terminals is $84 million (as shown in Appendix G). While it is entirely possible that there are some unknown additional costs of the HH Ferries Project, this brief comparison shows a 2:1 cost ratio between somewhat equivalent projects.

12 CONCLUSION Clearly the concept of this report is a large undertaking, but with a potential huge benefit. The emissions savings potential of this project with just three vessels involved could not have been imagined just a few years ago. However, as seen in Section 4.1.5 and Appendix H, areas of Europe and Canada are proceeding with hybridization and full electrification of vessels of increasing quantity and size. In fact, much of the research and development has been or is already being done within this area of technology.

WSF produces 67% of WSDOT's total emissions and the three Jumbo Mark II vessels emit 26% of WSF's share of carbon emissions. Given the late 1990's emissions standards that the Jumbo Mark II diesel engines were required to meet, the emissions savings is likely even greater in regard to NOx, SOx, and diesel particulate matter. This project would have enormous impact in meeting the 2020 emissions targets.

With the current modernization effort, this project is conveniently timed. Such a modernization could involve a significant level of cost savings for the hybridization effort if done concurrently.

Typically used by WSDOT to aid in the project funding decision, the LCCA was completed in accordance with WSDOT best practices. Essentially six different LCCAs were created with differing levels of hybridization and diesel price projections. Five of the six indicate the financial feasibility of this project with a cost savings associated with the hybridization. Such savings would be in the best interest of the state financially. It is believed that further study of the up-front costs involved may reveal significant cost savings and improved LCCA results. This level of detail would also better inform the level of hybridization that would be justified.

Washington State is in a unique position given its relatively inexpensive and stable price of electricity. By all accounts, the cost of lithium-ion battery prices is falling rapidly. While it

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 47 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

appears that the price of oil is rising out of a record downturn, the diesel fuel required by the WSF fleet is a very unpredictable and unreliably priced commodity. Hybridization of the Jumbo Mark IIs has the potential to accomplish WSF's role of providing safe, affordable, and environmentally friendly transportation across the waters of Puget Sound in a revolutionary new way.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 48 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

13 REFERENCES

[1] U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Power sector carbon dioxide emissions fall below transportation sector emissions," 19 January 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=29612. [Accessed 21 December 2017]. [2] B. Pailthorp, "Head of Washington State Ferries Has Plans to Electrify the Fleet," KNKX, 13 December 2017. [3] Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp, Electrical Load Analysis; A61-087-01, Seattle, WA, 04/09/98. [4] Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp, Propulsion System One Line Diagram; A62-090-05, Rev. H, Seattle, WA, 1998. [5] Battery University, "BU-205: Types of Lithium-ion," 15 November 2017. [Online]. Available: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/types_of_lithium_ion. [Accessed 10 December 2017]. [6] "Toshiba SCiB Cells," Toshiba, 2017. [Online]. Available: http://www.scib.jp/en/product/cell.htm. [Accessed 2 October 2017]. [7] Xalt Energy, XALT 60Ah High Power Lithium-Ion LTO Cell, Midland, MI, 2017. [8] Foss Maritime, Campbell Foss Engine Room Fire, Foss Form 102, rev 1.2, October, 2012. [9] Spear Power Systems, Trident Solutions; Technical Specifications, Lee's Summit, MO: 200611127-4, 2017. [10] Plan B Energy Storage, "PBES Specification Sheet; System Specifications for the PBES Power & Energy Systems," 30 May 2017. [Online]. Available: http://www.pbes.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/06/PBES_Power-Energy_2017-06-16.pdf. [Accessed 10 December 2017]. [11] Corvus Energy, "Orca ESS Solutions," 2016. [Online]. Available: http://corvusenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Orca_Energy_Spec.pdf. [Accessed 10 December 2017]. [12] Leclanché, "TiRack Energy Storage Systems," 3 March 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.leclanche.com/fileadmin/user_upload/products/leclanche_tirack_en_2015-03- 03.pdf. [Accessed 10 December 2017]. [13] EP Systems, "EPiC t32 Liquid Cooled Lithium Titanate Battery," July 2017. [Online]. Available: http://ep-sys.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/EPiC-t32.pdf. [Accessed 10 December 2017]. [14] IEC/ISO/IEEE, "International Standard Utility Connections in Port - Part 1: High Voltage Shore Connection (HVSC) Systems," IEC/ISO/IEEE 8005-1, 20107. [15] American Bureau of Shipping, "Guide for High Voltage Shore Connection," American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), Houston, Texas, 2011.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 49 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

[16] DNV GL, "Rules for Classification of High Speed, Light Craft and Naval Surface Craft," January, 2012. [17] WDOT WSF Vessel Engineering, Inact and Damage Stability Calculations; Average Passenger Weight Increase Study, Seattle, WA: 8100-2011-001, Rev. -, 2011. [18] DNV GL, "Rules for Classification of Ships," July, 2017. [19] DNV GL, Type Approval Lithium Batteries; DNVGL-CP-0418, December, 2015. [20] American Bureau of Shipping, "Guide for Use of Lithium Batteries in the Marine and Offshore Industries," 2017. [21] D. L. a. T. Rydholm, Economic Evaluation of Pavement Management Decisions, Alexandria, Virginia: 9th International Conference on Managing Pavement Assets, 2015. [22] J. W. I. a. M. R. Smith, Life-Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design —, Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Engineering, 1998. [23] U.S. Energy Information Administration, Weekly U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail Prices, Database EMD_EPD2D_PTE_NUS_DPG, Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Various. [24] U.S. Energy Information Administration, Europe Brent Spot Price FOB, Database RBRTE, Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2017. [25] U.S. Energy Information Administration, Los Angeles, CA Ultra-Low Sulfur CARB Diesel Spot Price, Database EER_EPD2DC_PF4_Y05LA_DPG, Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2017. [26] U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2017, Washington, DC, January 5, 2017. [27] United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), "Complying with President Trump's Executive Order on Energy Independence," 25 October 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.epa.gov/energy-independence. [Accessed 16 December 2017]. [28] International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2017, IEA, 2017. [29] City of Seattle, "Serving Load in North-Central Seattle, Briefing for SCL Review Panel," City of Seattle, Seattle, Washington, 2011. [30] WSDOT, "Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project, SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project," WSDOT, Seattle, WA. [31] Puget Sound Energy (PSE), "Existing Electric Power Grid, Two radial taps put 70% of islanders at risk for outages of long duration," Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Bellevue, WA, 2010. [32] Puget Sound Energy (PSE), "News Release: PSE fires up new substation in Kingston," Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Bellevue, Washington, 2007.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 50 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

[33] Puget Sound Energy, "PSE Electric Tariff G, Schedule 46, High Voltage Interruptible Service," Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue, WA, 2017. [34] Puget Sound Energy (PSE), "Puget Sound Energy Electric Tariff G, Schedule 31, Primary General Service," Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Bellevue, WA, 2017. [35] Puget Sound Energy (PSE), "Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Electric Tariff G, Schedule 136, Large Volume Green Energy," Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Bellevue, WA, 2016. [36] Siemens Energy Sector, "Power Engineering Guide, Edition 7.1," Siemens, Munich. Germany, 2015. [37] ABB, "ABB Central Inverters, PVS980 – 1818 to 2091 kVA," ABB, Zürich, Switzerland, 2017. [38] Plan B Energy Storage (PBES), "Commercial Marine Lithium-Ion Storage (Marine- Brochure_A4_2017-01-12.pdf)," Plan B Energy Storage (PBES), Vancouver, Canada, 2017. [39] J. Voeckler, "Electric-car Battery costs: Tesla $190 per kwh for pack, GM $145 for cells," Green Car Reports, 2017. [40] San Diego and Sunderland, "Electrifying everything: After electric cars, what more will it take for batteries to change the face of energy?," The Economist, 2017. [41] California EPA Air Resources Board, Advanced Clean Transit Battery Cost for Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicles, 2016. [42] NREL, "US Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: QA 2016," 2016. [43] E.-M. D. (EMD), Maintenance Instruction, M.I. 20019, 2009. [44] W. F. Division, Purchase Order Number G172-0210, Seattle, WA, 2017. [45] I. Marine Systems, Letter to Mark Voiland re QUOTE # 6193584, Seattle, WA, 2017. [46] D. W. a. G. K. Nadav Enbar, Budgeting for Solar PV Plant Operations & Maintenance: Practices and Pricing, Palo Alto, California: EPRI/Sandia, 2015. [47] A. D. a. S. J. Nicholas DiOrio, Economic Analysis Case Studies of Battery Energy Storage with SAM, Golden, Colorado: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), 2015. [48] M. K.-M. P. B. a. C. J. V Viswanathan, National Assessment of Energy Storage for Grid Balancing and Arbitrage, Phase II, Volume 2: Cost and Performance Characterization, Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), 2013. [49] Glosten, "WSF Medium Voltage Shore Power Feasibility Study," File No. 17122.01, Rev. -, Seattle, WA, 2018. [50] State of Washington Department of Commerce, Washington State Electric Utility Fuel Mix Disclosure Reports for Calendar Year 2016, Olympic, WA, 2017. [51] Environmental Resources Management, 2015 Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Seattle, WA:

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 51 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Puget Sound Energy, September, 2016. [52] P. Le, "Settlement sets aside $10M for Colstrip community," The Spokesman-Review, Spokane, WA, 2017. [53] Puget Sound Energy, "PSE Green Power Product Content Label," 2017. [54] H. Hao, Z. Mu, S. Jiang, Z. Liu and F. Zhao, "GHG Emissions from the Production of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles in China," MDPI, Beijing, China, 2017. [55] H. F. Moe, "High power solution for charging of ferries, Zero Seminar - Kristiansand," ABB Marine, Billingstad, Norway, 2016. [56] HH Ferries Group, "HH Ferries Group has docked Tycho Brahe for completion of battery conversion," HH Ferries Group, Helsingborg, Sweden, 2017. [57] European Commission Innovation and Networks Executive Agency, "Zero Emission Ferries - a green link across the Öresund, 2014-EU-TM-0489-S," European Commission Innovation and Networks Executive Agency, Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [58] P. Ferm, "Giant Charging Charger Is Pulled Through Helsingborg (Google Translation)," Helsingborg HD News Service, Helsingborg, Sweden, 2016. [59] Bureau Veritas, "Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships," July, 2017. [60] International Electrotechnical Commission, IEC 62619: Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing Alkaline or Other Non-Acid Electrolytes - Safety Requirements for Secondary Lithium Cells and Batteries, For Use in Industrial Applications, 2017. [61] Seattle City Light, Rates Database 1999-2017, Seattle, WA: SCL, 2017. [62] Snohomish County Public Utility District No.1, Washington State Ferries - Service to Edmonds to Kingston Hybrid Ferry, Snohomish, WA, Novermber 17, 2017. [63] Elliott Bay Design Group, Hybrid Conversion Feasibility Study, Seattle, WA: 17071-340-0, Rev A, June 21, 2017. [64] Washington State Ferries, Fuel Consumption Profile, Seattle, WA, April, 2017. [65] State of Washington Department of Ecology, Report to the Legislature on Washington Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: 2010-2013, Olympia, WA, October, 2016. [66] Norwegian Maritime Authority, Guidelines for Chemical Energy Storage - Maritime Battery Systems, Norway: RSV 12-2016, July, 2016. [67] International Electrotechnical Commission, IEC 62620: Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing Alkaline or Other Non-Acid Electrolytes - Secondary Lithium Cells and Battereis for Use in Industrial Applications, 2014. [68] Xalt Energy, XALT 75 Ah High Energy (HE) Superior Lithium Ion Cell, Midland, MI, 2016. [69] WSDOT Office of Air Quality and Noise, "Compendium of background Sound Levels for

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 52 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Ferry Terminals in Puget Sound," Seattle, WA, 2015. [70] Puget Sound Energy (PSE), "PSE's electric power system, Comparison of overhead and underground transmission lines," Puget Sound Energy (PSE), Bellevue, Washington, 2017.

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 53 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix A

TACOMA Datalog

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 54 Seattle-Bainbridge, April 13, 2017 TACOMA

1.00 Generator actual power G1

0.75

0.50

0.25

sec

1.00 Generator actual power G2

0.75

0.50

0.25

0 sec

1.00 Generator actual power G3

0.75

0.50

0.25

0 sec

1.0 Generator actual power G4 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec -0.2 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 00:00:... Seattle-Bainbridge, September 12, 2017 TACOMA

1.00 Generator actual power G1

0.75

0.50

0.25

sec

1.00 Generator actual power G2

0.75

0.50

0.25

0 sec

1.0 Generator actual power G3 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec

1.0 Generator actual power G4 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec -0.2 06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 Seattle-Bainbridge, October 6, 2017 TACOMA

1.0 Generator actual power G1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec

1.0 Generator actual power G2 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec

1.0 Generator actual power G3 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 sec

0.9 Generator actual power G4 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

-0.1 sec

06:00:00 08:00:00 10:00:00 12:00:00 14:00:00 16:00:00 18:00:00 20:00:00 22:00:00 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix B

Spear Power Systems Brochure (SMAR-11N and SMAR-3T)

PBES Power 65 Brochure

PBES DNV Type Approval Certificate

Corvus Orca Energy Brochure

Corvus DNV Type Approval Certificate

Leclanché TiRack Brochure (partial)

EP Systems EPiC-t32 Brochure

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 58 Trident® Solutions OPTIMIZE YOUR APPLICATION WITH THE MOST VERSATILE SERIES OF MARINE ENERGY STORAGE

Spear Power Systems’ Trident® family of marine battery solutions offer end users the ability to integrate the optimal lithium-ion chemistry for their application while leveraging the same BMS control interface. Trident® energy storage systems lead the charge in performance, safety, reliability, flexibility, and value.

With over a decade of experience developing next generation lithium-ion battery solutions, including the first large format lithium-ion cell used in commercial marine propulsion applications, Spear Power Systems delivers unmatched value to ship builders, owners, operators, and designers. Spear’s solutions are based on knowledge from designing and manufacturing lithium-ion packs for markets that demand quality and performance. As a chemistry and cell agnostic integrator, Spear selects the most appropriate cell for a given application, balancing performance, cost, and quality.

TRIDENT®ADVANTAGES

+ Exceptional Value – cost competitive + Industry-Leading Energy Density – 20% system-level energy-density improvement compared to competition + Industry-Leading Power Density – reduce weight with high power cells capable of 30C pulse discharge rates + Safety Oriented – thermal propagation prevention without the need for active liquid cooling, multi-level BMS protection, high voltage / current / temperature resolution, redundant safety features SMAR-11N String + Sophisticated Thermal Management – keeps cells cool and extends battery life, all systems support forced air or liquid cooling + Best-In-Class Cell Technologies – safety and performance starts with a high-quality cell, flexible BMS configuration allows the customer to pick the optimal lithium-ion chemistry for their application + Scalable Architecture – technology supports voltages up to 1250 VDC and installations beyond 10 MWh + Longer Life – variety of solutions that support 5,000 to over 20,000 cycles at high depths of discharge

SMAR-3T String

Spear Power Systems | +1 816.527.9200 | [email protected] | www.spearpowersystems.com 1009 NE Jib Ct, Lee’s Summit, MO 64064 Trident® Solutions ROBUST, RELIABLE SOLUTIONS FOR EVERY APPLICATION

Trident® modules integrate Spear’s proven SMOD technology and is designed with a rugged marine-grade enclosure to protect it from the harsh environment. All Trident® systems are feature propagation prevention and are monitored with Spear’s internally developed battery management system (BMS), ensuring a high degree of safety and accuracy.

Technical Specifications

Trident® System SMAR-11N SMAR-3T SMAR-2P SMAR-6A SMAR-2F

Fast Charge / Industry-Leading High Power / Industry- High Power Defining Features Energy Fast Charge / High Power Leading Cycle Density Density Long Cycle Life Life

Cell Chemistry NMC LTO NMC NANO LFP

Embedded Energy 11.3 kWh 3.4 kWh 2.7 kWh 6.2 kWh 2.4 kWh

Nominal Capacity 128 Ah 65 Ah 30 Ah 70 Ah 39 Ah

Maximum Continuous 2.0 C 5.0 C 20.0 C 8.0 C 6.0 C Discharge Rate

Pulse Discharge Rate 4.0 C 8.0 C 30.0 C 15.0 C 20.0 C

Maximum Continuous 2.0 C 5.0 C 3.0 C 4.0 C 3.0 C Charge Rate

Energy Density 91 Wh/L 34 Wh/L 38 Wh/L 61 Wh/L 34 Wh/L (system-level)

Specific Energy 108 Wh/kg 49 Wh/kg 60 Wh/kg 88 Wh/kg 52 Wh/kg (system-level)

Specific Power 215 W/kg 247 W/kg 1196 W/kg 703 W/kg 309 W/kg (system-level)

System Scalability 2.0 kWh — 10 MWh+

System Voltage Range 48 VDC — 1250 VDC

Battery Management System Spear Scalable Battery Management System (SBMS)

Cooling Method Forced Air / Liquid Cooling

Spear Power Systems | +1 816.527.9200 | [email protected] | www.spearpowersystems.com 1009 NE Jib Ct, Lee’s Summit, MO 64064 200611127-4 PBES Specification Sheet System Specifications for the PBES Power & Energy Systems

PBES Power and Energy Industrial Lithium Batteries:

Power 65 (P65) is designed for high discharge power applications requiring high C-rates and faster cycling, the system provides 15,000 charge/discharge cycles at 80% DoD.

ROI focussed Energy 100 (E100) has been designed for applications requiring lower discharge rates and greater energy density. A 35% decrease in cost and weight provides the end user with a faster path to ROI and decreased footprint and weight.

Both systems use the same PBES form factor and are backed by industry leading safety, performance, and recycling systems. CellCoolTM, ThermalStopTM and CellSwapTM provide ideal operating conditions, thermal runaway prevention and best industry value.

PBES batteries are manufactured in Norway and exceed NMA flag approval and DNV Type Approval criteria (DNV Type Approval pending).

PBES proudly uses the highest quality lithium-ion NMC cells from XALT Energy in USA.

General PBES Features PBES System Specifications BMS (Battery Management System) MegaWatt ++ IMS (Information Management System) API Interface Engineered Design Life 5/10 year CellCool™ Liquid Cooling Yes - Patent Pending Cell Partner XALT Energy (USA) TCP Ultra Fast Internal Comms Yes Thermal-Stop™ Thermal Runaway Protection Yes - Patent Pending E-Vent™ Safety Venting System Yes - Patent Pending Operating Temperature (active heating/cooling) 15°C to 30°C Series Configurable Yes OnPoint™ Remote Active Monitoring Yes OnPoint™ Remote Active Programming Yes Parallel Configurable (capacity scalable) Unlimited *Specifications subject to change

Plan B Energy Storage Locations: Vancouver • Trondheim • Barcelona • Copenhagen www.pbes.com • [email protected] PBES Specification Sheet System Specifications for the PBES Power & Energy Systems

Single Module (BBU) Power 65 Energy 100 C Rate RMS (Continuous) 3C 1.4C Cycle Life @ 80% DoD 15000 cycles TBF Cell Chemistry NMC NMC L 580mm, H 380mm, L 580mm, H 380mm, Dimensions W 320mm W 320mm Weight 90kg 90kg Energy 6.5kWh 10kWh Capacity 75Ah 112Ah Voltage Range 77-100VDC 77-100VDC Nominal Voltage 88.8VDC 88.8VDC RMS Continuous Current 225A 160A Max Discharge Current 450A 336A Max Charge Current 225A 112A Connectors IP67 IP67 Terminal Isolation at Module Contactor Contactor Thermal-Stop™ Thermal Runaway Protection Yes Yes Self Discharge Rate/month <2% <2% Internal resistance 17mΩ 20mΩ Efficiency (at 1C) >98% >97% Open circuit when not in Open circuit when not in Electrical Isolation operation operation Communication interface UDP UDP

Series String (1000V) Power 65 Energy 100 Dimensions (including racking, venting and lifting W 896mm, H 2550mm, W 896mm, H 2550mm, apparatus) D 632mm D 632mm Weight 10BBUs +1 MBU 950 kg 950 kg Energy 65kWh 100kWh Capacity 75Ah 112Ah Voltage Range 770-1000VDC 770-1000VDC Nominal Voltage 888VDC 888VDC RMS Continuous Current 225A 160A Max Discharge Current 450A 336A Max Charge Current 225A 112A Internal Resistance 180mΩ 200mΩ Electrical Isolation at DC Bus Breaker Breaker Integrated Racking System Included Included Communication to Higher Level System Modbus/TCP Modbus/TCP *Specifications subject to change

Plan B Energy Storage Locations: Vancouver • Trondheim • Barcelona • Copenhagen www.pbes.com • [email protected]

Published 2017-05-30 Certificate No: TAE0000271 TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE

This is to certify: That the Battery (Accumulator) with type designation(s) Basic Battery Unit (BBU), Main Battery Unit (MBU), Parallel Battery Unit (PBU)

Issued to PBES Ltd. Vancouver BC, Canada is found to comply with DNV GL rules for classification – Ships, offshore units, and high speed and light craft

Application : Product(s) approved by this certificate is/are accepted for installation on all vessels classed by DNV GL.

Issued at Høvik on 2017-10-12 This Certificate is valid until 2022-10-11. for DNV GL DNV GL local station: Trondheim

Approval Engineer: Sverre Eriksen Andreas Kristoffersen Head of Section

This Certificate is subject to terms and conditions overleaf. Any significant change in design or construction may render this Certificate invalid. The validity date relates to the Type Approval Certificate and not to the approval of equipment/systems installed.

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 1 of 4

Product description Liquid cooled lithium-ion battery based energy storage system (EES) for use in battery-powered or hybrid vessels and off-shore units. The system consists of basic battery units (BBU) connected in series to form a string and achieve the needed system voltage. The string is controlled by a main battery unit (MBU) that includes a breaker. The strings can be installed in parallel in order to provide the required energy capacity. The parallel strings are controlled by a separate controller, Parallel Battery Unit (PBU).

The liquid cooled [CellCoolTM] BBU is designed with thermal runaway protection [Thermal-StopTM] and the battery units BBU and MBU are housed within a dedicated racking system with an integrated off-gas exhaust duct [E-VentTM].

Battery Module Unit Type: BBU Cell Type: XALT 75 HP Chemistry: Lithium ion NMC Number of cells: 24 Cell configuration: 1p24s Max Voltage: 100.8 V Min Voltage: 76.8 V Capacity: 75 Ah Energy: 6,5 kWh Cooling: Liquid

Main Battery Unit Type: MBU

Parallel Battery Unit Type: PBU

String Max Number of modules: 10 Max Voltage: 1008 V Max Energy: 65 kWh

Battery Management system Functionality of BMS is distributed between BBU and MBU. The software is identified by the following versions: BBU sw:0.1.x.x MBU sw: 0.1.x.x

Application/Limitation The type approval covers hardware and software listed under Product description.

Software versions Software versions are declared in PBES document TN-0018. BMS software version is a common identifier for software in BBU, MBU and PBU. Identifiers in the software version denoted as “x” may vary and are covered by the type approval.

Modifications to software resulting in a new version (identified by the 2nd number in the version string) shall be informed to DNV GL by forwarding updated software version documentation and updated version of TN-0018. Such modifications may require witnessing of type testing and will require that the certificate is renewed to identify the new software version.

Ventilation fans The capacity and speed of the ventilation fans for the integrated exhaust duct are to be submitted for each product certification individually.

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 2 of 4 Job Id: 262.1-023774-1 Certificate No: TAE0000271

Cable protection The power cables between the battery modules must be overload protected by the charger. Documentation of the chargers cable protection functionality are to be submitted for each product certification individually.

Environmental temperature control To avoid condensation inside the liquid cooled battery modules the modules must be located in an environmental controlled room where the temperature and /or humidity of the room is controlled so that the room temperature is at all time above the dewpoint temperature of the cooling water.

Alarms All alarms required by the rules shall be “latching” (i.e. use of non-latching warnings/alarms shall be limited to abnormal conditions which are not safety-related and which are not required alarmed).

Network storm on external network External network storm testing shall be done onboard after the MBUs/PBUs are commissioned and connected to the external system.

Documentation for product certification For each delivery to DNV GL class the following documentation of the battery system is to be submitted for approval:

- Reference to this type approval certificate - Copy of the approved Safety description - I130 Project-specific Battery System Block Diagram - E120 Technical specification of the battery system that is subject for product certification - E170 Electric schematic diagram of the battery system showing internal arrangement of battery modules, battery strings, switch unit and emergency stop - Z060 Functional description, including o Project-specific overall description of the battery management system o Software and hardware versions of BBU, MBU and PBU o capacity calculations for the gas extract ventilation fan o description of the cable protection (overload) functionality of the charger o other relevant information not covered by the safety description. - Z252 Test program for product certification, including routine tests specified in applicable rules

Product certificate Each delivery of the application system is to be certified according to Pt.6, Ch.2, Sec. 1. The certification test is to be performed at the manufacturer of the application system before the system is shipped to the yard. After certification, all changes in software/configuration are to be recorded as long as the system is in use on board. Documentation of major changes is to be forwarded to DNV GL for evaluation and approval before implemented on board.

Type Approval documentation

Tests carried out Tests according to DNVGL-CP-0418, DNVGL-CG-0339

Marking of product PBES-BBU PBES-MBU PBES-PBU

Periodical assessment

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 3 of 4 Job Id: 262.1-023774-1 Certificate No: TAE0000271

The scope of the periodical assessment is to verify that the conditions stipulated for the Type approval are complied with and that no alterations are made to the product design or choice of materials.

The main elements of the assessment are:  Inspection on factory samples, selected at random from the production line (where practicable)  Results from Routine Tests (RT) checked (if not available tests according to RT to be carried out)  Review of type approval documentation  Review of possible change in design, materials and performance  Ensuring traceability between manufacturer’s product type marking and Type Approval Certificate.

Periodical assessment is to be performed after 2 years and after 3.5 years. A renewal assessment will be performed at renewal of the certificate.

END OF CERTIFICATE

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 4 of 4 designed for life at sea™

The Scandlines M/V Berlin — the latest addition to the world’s largest ﬂ eet of hybrid ferries and the 6th Scandlines ferry powered by a Corvus ESS

Orca ESS Solutions

THE WORLD’S MOST ADVANCED MARITIME ESS (ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS). Designed and built speciﬁ cally for the maritime industry, the Orca ESS product line from Corvus Energy represents the future of maritime ESS solutions. Corvus combined its industry leading research & development capabilities and knowledge gained from having the largest global installed base of ESS solutions, to build the industry’s safest, most reliable, highest-performing and most cost-effective maritime ESS product line, which includes: Orca Energy and Orca Power.

Orca Energy

Orca Energy is ideal for applications that are primarily energy capacity driven, moving large amounts of energy at an inexpensive lifetime cost per kWh. Speciﬁ cally designed to meet the operational requirements of:

HYBRID FERRIES CRUISE SHIPS ALL-ELECTRIC FERRIES SUPER YACHTS TUG BOATS CARGO VESSELS

Air Cooled Module Air Cooled Pack Liquid Cooled Pack

THE ORCA ENERGY DIFFERENCE ORCA SAFETY INNOVATIONS

• Price per kWh reduced by 50% Cell-level Thermal Runaway (TR) Isolation • Highest C-Rates in the industry – up to a 6C peak C-rate • True cell-level thermal runaway isolation – • Increased cycle life – lowering total system cost and extending ESS Lifespan TR does not propagate to neighbouring cells • Unparalleled energy density – 50% volume & 35% weight reductions • Isolation NOT dependant on active cooling • Connection & commissioning time reduced by 80% • Exceeds Class and Flag standards • Enhanced EMI immunity design for maritime environments TR Gas venting • Economical upfront & through-life costs = lower total cost of ownership • Integrated thermal runaway gas • Power connections contained within rack – no manual connections, exhaust system enhanced reliability, increased safety • Easily vented to external atmosphere • Designed for pack voltages up to 1200VDC rather than the battery room • Scalable beyond 10MWh • Additional ﬁ re suppression system not required • Industry-proven 4th generation BMS • Easily monitored through the Watchman™ ESS Advisory Portal

CONTACT Toll Free: +1 (888) 390-7239 | [email protected] || www.corvusenergy.com designed for life at sea™

The Norled Ampere — powered by a Corvus ESS; the world’s ﬁrst all-electric car and passenger ferry.

Technical Speciﬁcations*

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS C-Rate — Peak 6C

OPERATIONAL SPECIFICATIONS Pack Sizing 50-1200V | 5.7-137kWh

1100V STANDARD B ATTERY PACK EXAMPLE 1 Energy 125 kWh Voltage Maximum: 1100 VDC | Nominal: 980 VDC | Minimum: 870 VDC Cooling Forced Air / Liquid Cooling Dimensions (vertical arrangement) Height: 2200 mm | Width: 870 mm | Depth: 710 mm Dimensions (horizontal arrangement) Height: 1220 mm | Width: 1740 mm | Depth: 710 mm Weight 1550 kg (3420 lb)

GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS EMC IEC 61000-4, CISPR16-1, 2, IEC60945-9 Ingress Protection System: IP44 | Module: IP56 (IP67 optional) Vibration & Shock UNT 38.3, DNV 2.4, IEC 60068-2-6 Class compliance DNV-GL, Lloyds Register, Bureau Veritas, ABS

SAFETY SPECIFICATIONS Voltage Isolation 7.2 kV (IEC 60947-2) Thermal runaway anti-propagation Cell-level; DNV-GL Pt.6 Ch.2, NMA 2016 circular Fire suppression recommended Per SOLAS (machinery space) Disconnect circuit Hardware-based fail-safe for over-temperature, over-voltage Maximum current parameter Updated 2x per second Faults communicated Over-voltage, under-voltage, over-temperature Short circuit protection Fuses included Disconnect switchgear rating Full load Emergency stop circuit Hard-wired Ground fault detection Integrated

* Subject to change without notice 1 Values shown are for reference only and should not be used for system design. Please contact Corvus Energy for complete system design solutions.

CONTACT Toll Free: +1 (888) 390-7239 | [email protected] || www.corvusenergy.com HEAD OFFICE #220-13155 Delf Place, Richmond, BC V6V 2A2, Canada || NORWAY Nagelgården 6, 5004 Bergen | +47 918 25 618 | [email protected] Certificate No: TAE000026N TYPE APPROVAL CERTIFICATE

This is to certify: That the Battery (Accumulator) with type designation(s) ORCA Energy

Issued to Corvus Energy Inc. Richmond BC, Canada is found to comply with DNV GL rules for classification – Ships, offshore units, and high speed and light craft

Application : Product(s) approved by this certificate is/are accepted for installation on all vessels classed by DNV GL.

Issued at Høvik on 2017-08-14 This Certificate is valid until 2022-08-13. for DNV GL DNV GL local station: Vancouver

Approval Engineer: Marta Alonso Pontes Andreas Kristoffersen Head of Section

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 1 of 4

Name and place of manufacture Corvus Energy Richmond BC Canada

Product description Air cooled lithium-ion battery based energy storage system (EES) for use in battery-powered or hybrid vessels and off-shore units. The system consists of battery modules connected in series to form a pack and achieve the required system voltage. Packs are installed in parallel in order to provide the required energy capacity. Each battery module contains a module control board (MCB) which monitors and communicates voltage, temperature and diagnostic information to the pack controller. The pack controller consists of pack disconnection module (PDM) and master control module (MCM). PDM is the electrical interface between the load and the battery pack. The MCM communicates with the pack modules, other packs, and external systems. The battery modules, PDM, MCM and all other pack components are housed within a dedicated racking systems which provides: all module and pack electrical interconnection, pack communication, module cooling, and an integrated thermal runaway exhaust duct.

Module including cells and MCB Type: ME1(G)-(VVV)V-AR* Chemistry: Lithium ion NMC Number of cells: 24 Cell configuration: 2P12S Max Voltage: 50 V Min Voltage: 36 V Capacity: 128 Ah Energy: 5,7 kWh Cooling: Forced air

MCM Type: MCM10(G)-(EE)*

PDM Type: PDM100-(AAA)A-(PS)-(F)-(RR)R-(BS)*

Pack Type: E(NN)(VVV)(C)-AR-(EE)-(PS)-ST-(Core)* Max No. of modules: 24 Max Voltage: 1200V Max Energy: 137 kWh

* The values in parenthesis may vary from one configuration to another. Refer to CORVUS document “Configurations for DNVGL TAC Rev2” dated 18 July 2017 for possible configurations.

Battery Management system Functionality of BMS is distributed between MCB, MCM and PDM. Independent overtemperature protection according to DNV GL Pt.6 Ch.2 Sec.1 [4.1.5.2] is arranged as hardwired signal tripping high voltage interlock loop (HVIL).

The software is identified by the following versions:

Modules SW: v1.3.2 Build# 359

MCM SW: v.1.3.18 Build # 449

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 2 of 4 Job Id: 262.1-023629-1 Certificate No: TAE000026N

PDM SW: v1.3.9 Build#338

Application/Limitation 1. When installed on a ship or offshore unit, the DNV GL class rules for battery installation must be followed (DNV GL Pt.6 Ch.2 Sec.1) 2. The piping system venting the exhaust gases from the rack to open air/safe location shall be verified onboard in each case. Requirements in DNV GL rules Pt.6 Ch.2 Sec.1 shall be fulfilled. 3. Communication interface between battery arrays / banks is not covered by this Type Approval and if installed it shall be approved and tested on case by case basis 4. The Type Approval covers hardware and software listed under Product description 5. The Type Approval is valid for systems made by production facilities listed under Place of Manufacture

Product certification: A DNV GL product certificate according to DNV GL Pt.6 Ch.2 Sec.1 Table 2 is required for each delivery. The following documents shall be submitted for approval: - Reference to this type approval certificate - Copy of the approved Safety description - (E120) Technical specification of the battery system that is subject for product certification - (I030) Project-specific Battery System Block Diagram - (I020) Project-specific functional description - Information on software versions applicable for the particular delivery - (Z252) Test procedure at manufacturer

Location classes (DNVGL-CG-0339) Temperature Class A Humidity Class B Vibration Class A EMC Class A Enclosure IP44

Software update notification When the type approved software is revised (affecting all future deliveries) DNV GL is to be informed by forwarding updated software version documentation. If the changes are judged to affect functionality for which rule requirements apply a new functional type test may be required and the certificate may have to be renewed to identify the new software version

Type Approval documentation

Tests carried out Tests according to DNVGL-CP-0418, DNVGL-CG-0339 and pack level safety function tests, DOC#: 1009814 rev.C

Marking of product Manufacturer name, and battery system type designation.

Periodical assessment The scope of the periodical assessment is to verify that the conditions stipulated for the Type approval are complied with and that no alterations are made to the product design or choice of materials.

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 3 of 4 Job Id: 262.1-023629-1 Certificate No: TAE000026N

 Review of possible change in design, materials and performance  Ensuring traceability between manufacturer’s product type marking and Type Approval Certificate.

Periodical assessment is to be performed after 2 years and after 3.5 years. A renewal assessment will be performed at renewal of the certificate.

END OF CERTIFICATE

Form code: TA 251 Revision: 2016-12 www.dnvgl.com Page 4 of 4 Lithium-titanate – technology of a new standard Benefit from unprecedented cell qualities

The heart of any storage device is the cell. Its quality determines the performance of the entire storage system. Cells provided with a lithium-titanate anode are vastly superior to conventional lithium-ions with regard to capacity, service life and load cycles.

15,000 full cycles With 15,000 charging and discharging cycles the lithium-titanate cell LecCell is particularly suitable for long-term investment and low-maintenance storage systems. The costs for maintenance and exchange are minimal and shorten the return on investment period.

Permanent charging/discharging rate of up to 4C 60 60

45 15 45 15 The quality of the cell permits a stable current of 4C. Thus a cell is charged or discharged within 15 min. 30 30

100% DoD (= Depth of Discharge) The possible Depth of Discharge of LecCell of 100% considerably increases the effi ciency of the storage system. The depth of discharge persists over the 15,000 charge/discharge life of the cells.

Stable operating range on any SOC level The service life of the cell is not infl uenced by the operation of the cell in a specifi c SOC (= State Of Charge) range. Whether primarily in a range of 30% SOC or 60% SOC: The service life is entirely independent of the SOC.

Water-based cell manufacturing As the only manufacturer worldwide Leclanché avoids using ecologically damaging solvents in electrode manufacturing and using water based method. This method is environmentally friendly and prolongs the service life of the cell.

• Wide temperature range for operating the cell • CE and UN 38.8 tested by TÜV Rheinland • Individual ID for each cell for tracking the manufacturing process • Continued internal and external tests Innovative Technology – quantifiable added value in the field Profit from our sound partnership with ads-tec

Flexibility

Leclanché energy storage systems are individually designed, developed and produced according to the customers‘ requirements. Depending on the specific demand and application alternative cell technologies are used. The integration of the storage system into existing systems is possible without problems owing to the use of prevailing industry

100 % depth of development – the expertise in detail

• Development of everything from electronics, mechanics and software to complete systems takes place in-house • Years of research and development work lead to special results in important points such as cell bonding and cooling • Multi-stage and redundant monitoring equipment ensures safe shutdown and monitored operation on module and system level

Final assembly, logistics and service Under one roof

• Based on highly integrated, IT-driven processes, material flow, final assembly, tests and services take place in a modern and optimised infrastructure • Key process steps of module assembly take place on automation lines developed by ads-tec for this • Flexible and demand-based purposet warranty for up to 10 years • Final assembly and testing are monitored • 19“ industry standard mounting and documented with the aid of » in-line « • International certifications measurement methods and processes • In-house laboratory and testing facilities • Free from maintenance • Quality “Made in Germany” Example ofproduct:TiRack 63 Standards Function anddurability Guarantee Environmental conditions Battery system Currents Connection values String configuration Security [email protected] Fax +41(0)244246520 Tel. +41(0)244246500 CH-1400 Yverdon-les-Bains Avenue desSports42 Leclanché SA -HeadOffice Unbeatable factsoftechnology VDE 0471DINEN60695-11-10 und-20 Isolation andfireprotection:DINEN60664-1,VDE 0110-1, DINVDE0298-4, Transport: UN38.3 Transport directiveforlithiumbatteries Safety (functionalandelectrical):EN61010-1:2010; 50272-2:2001 EN 55016-2-1:2009+ A1:2011; EN55016-2-3:2010+ A1:2010 A1:2010; EN61000-4-5:2006;61000-4-6:2009; 61000-4-11:2004; EN 61000-4-3:2006+ A1:2008 + A2:2010; EN61000-4-4:2004+ + A1:2011; EN55024:2010;55022:2010;61000-4-2:2009; EN 61000-6-2:2006;61000-6-3:2007+ A1:2011; EN61000-6-4:2007 In combinationwithaBig-LinXservicecontract Limitation periodforclaimsduetodefects Humidity Protection class Temperature range(longlife<2C) Expected calendarlifespan Specified cycles1C/1C@23°Cat100%DOD Nominal systemcapacity Cell capacity Cell chemistry Maximum stringcurrent Operating current(upto2Ccharging/discharging) Battery voltage»full« Battery voltage»empty« Number ofstringshutoff modules »bipolar« Number ofstringcontrollersperdoublerack Number ofstringcontrollerspertriplerack Number ofbatterymodulesconnectedinseries String format Protokoll ads-tec External /internalinterfaces Embedded String-Controller EMV: www.leclanche.com Fax +49(0)7852818-48 Tel. +49(0)7852818-00 D-77731 Willstätt Industriestraße 1 Leclanché GmbH Up to10years 24 months non-condensing < 90%, IP20 10 to30°C 20 years 15.000 63kWh 30Ah Lithium-titanate 300A 180A 810V DC 510V DC 1 - 1 15 19“ triplerack Master orslave Ethernet /CAN Integrated

PB TiRack EN 2015-03-03 EPiC t32 Liquid Cooled Lithium Titanate Battery

Features

● Integrated liquid cooling system ● Scalable in series and parallel ● Lightweight (75 Wh/kg) ● Compact (79 Wh/l) ● High power (1,000W/l) ● 15,000+ Cycles (100% DOD) ● Isolated CANbus interface ● Isolated discrete control and sense I/O EPiC t32 27.5 V @ 23 Ah (633Wh) SpecificationsFeatures EPS introduces the t32 advanced lithium-ion battery offering very high power, long life rechargeable energy in an extremely lightweight compact package. The chemistry uses high power lithium titanate (LTO) chemistry, capable of very high symmetrical discharge and charge rates, very high cycle life and very long calendar life. A proprietary cooling system allows the t32 to operate at very high discharge and charge rates continuously without impacting the cycle life of the cells.

The design also allows the t32 to be assembled into parallel and series strings up to 1kV to construct larger battery systems. The t32’s integrated battery management system (BMS) communicates to a central controller that manages the complete system, balances the lithium cells, controls charge and discharge operations, measures current, and provided state-of-charge information over the integrated CANbus interface.

Contact EPS to discuss incorporation of this Electric Power Systems 16125 East Gale Ave. advanced technology into your application. City of Industry CA 91745 www.ep-sys.net ● [email protected] (714) 200-3209 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix C

Hybrid One-Line

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 77

Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix D

Battery Room Arrangements

Machinery Room Arrangements

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 79 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

BATTERY ROOM ARRANGEMENTS

Spear SMAR-11N NMC Battery Arrangements

Table 20: Battery Installation Particulars – Spear SMAR-11N NMC Total Rack Capacity No. of Racks Width Depth Height 5,969 kWh 48 492 mm 1,256 mm 2,245 mm

Figure 29: Battery Room Arrangement Overview – Spear SMAR-11N

Figure 30: Battery Room Arrangement Profile View – Spear SMAR-11N

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 80 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Spear SMAR-3T LTO Battery Arrangements

Table 21: Battery Installation Particulars – Spear SMAR-3T LTO Total Rack Capacity No. of Racks Width Depth Height 3,034 kWh 54 1,140 mm 570 mm 2,455 mm

Figure 31: Battery Room Arrangement Overview – Spear SMAR-3T

Figure 32: Battery Room Arrangement Profile View – Spear SMAR-3T

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 81 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PBES Power 65 Battery Installation

Table 22: Battery Installation Particulars – PBES Power 65 Total Rack Capacity No. of Racks Capacity Width Depth Height 6,032 kWh 116 52 kWh 1,063 mm 632 mm 2,156 mm

Figure 33: Battery Room Arrangement Overview – PBES Power 65

Figure 34: Battery Room Arrangement Profile - PBES Power 65

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 82 2/7/2018 3:04:05 PM 2/7/2018 3:04:09 PM 2/7/2018 3:04:14 PM 2/7/2018 3:04:19 PM Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix E

Weight Estimates

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 87 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

WEIGHT ESTIMATE SUMMARIES

Spear SMAR-11N Battery Installation

VESSEL WEIGHT SUMMARY

BATTERIES Spear SMAR-11N INSTALLED BATTERY ENERGY 6000 kW-hr COOLING SYSTEM Air WEEKS OF FUEL ABOARD 2

WEIGHT (LT) VCG (ft) CURRENT LIGHT SHIP 4408 28.44 ADDITIONS 174 20.15 REMOVALS -76 19.40 NEW LIGHT SHIP 4505 LT 28.27

FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6184 LT 28.87 REMOVED FUEL -110 LT 4.94 NEW FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6172 LT 29.17

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 88 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes 100 Estimate for Roll and Weld 1,796 0.00 20.15 190 Battery Support Structure 59,851 10% 0.00 17.05 313 Batteries 129,682 10% 0.00 20.50 314 Power Conversion Equipment 126,765 10% 0.00 20.27 438 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms 1,200 10% 0.00 20.00 512 Ventilation System 1,880 10% 0.00 25.00 532 Cooling Water - 10% 555 Fire Extinguishing System 8,990 10% 0.00 18.00 635 Hull Insulation 24,063 10% 0.00 25.75 - 0%

Subgroup-based Margin Total 35,243 10% 0.00 20.15 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 389,469 10% 0.00 20.15

100.0 Hull Structure, General

101.0 Estimate for Roll and Weld 3% 59,851 1,796 0.00 20.15 E 3% per EBDG standard

190.0 Battery Support Structure

Support girders - 8x0.25 w 6x.375 flg W 800.4 ft 22.1 17,689 17.00 C Secondary Support Members 600 ft 5.7375 3,443 17.00 C Cap over shaft 2000 ft² 10.2 20,400 17.00 E Deck plates 1600 ft² 10.2 16,320 17.00 C Railings 200 ft 10 2,000 18.50 E

313.0 Batteries

Spear SMAR-11N 6000 kW-hr 21.6 129682 20.50

314.0 Power Conversion Equipment

Inverter Unit: 2.25MVA 4 4189 16,755 19.00 V Gamesa E-2.25 MVA Step-Up Transformer: 5MVA, 10kV:3.3kV 2 ea 21208 42,417 19.00 V For reference only Switch Gear Section 2 ea 1600 3,200 19.00 E Isolation Transformer 2 ea 21208 42,417 19.00 E Shore Power Connection 2 1800 3,600 28.00 E Shore Power Supply Cable 500 ft 34 17,177 26.00 E Cable supports, guards 2 ea 600 1,200 26.00 E

438.0 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms

Control systems, alarms, cables 1 ea 1200 1,200 20.00 E

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 89 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

512.0 Ventilation System

Air Cooled Batteries Fans 8 ea 85 680 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 300 1,200 25.00 E

Water Cooled Batteries Fans 4 ea 60 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 160 25.00 E

532.0 Cooling Water

Air Cooled Batteries 0 ea 0 - E

Water Cooled Batteries Piping 600 ft 2.72 16.00 E Pump 2 ea 45 16.00 E Heat Exchanger 2 ea 140 16.00 E Valves, fittings 0.15 16.00 E Expansion tank 2 ea 400 16.00 E Entrained Fluids 800 gal 8.34 16.00 E

555.0 Fire Extinguishing System

555.1 Fixed gas fire extinguishing sys (Novec) 2 ea 2600 5,200 18.00 E

555.2 Deluge system 3" Sch 40 Pipe 500 7.58 3,790 18.00 E Includes nozzels Ties into exisiting sys

635.0 Hull Insulation

A-60 Insulation over shaft alley 9625 ft 2.5 24,063 25.75 E Area over shaft Alley

700.0 Other

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 90 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes

200 Gensets 137,000 10% 0.00 17.50 220 Genset support systems 2,274 10% 0.00 16.00 230 Exhaust System 16,485 10% 0.00 35.69 240 Fuel 245,486 0% 0.00 4.94 -

Subgroup-based Margin Total 15,576 4% 0.00 19.40 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 416,821 4% 0.00 10.89

200 Gensets

Engine 2 ea 40500 81,000 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Accessory Rack 2 ea 3700 7,400 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Generator (Assumed to be 0.6 of engine wt) 2 ea 24300 48,600 17.50 E

220 Genset support systems

Cooling Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E Fuel Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E

230 Exhaust System

Exhaust Piping 200 ft 63.4 12,680 32.00 E Silencers 2 ea 800 1,600 70.00 E Sheathing 200 ft 9.4 1,885 32.00 E Hangers 2 ea 160 320 32.00 E

240 Fuel

Assume vessel carries 1wk less fuel 33824 gal 7.26 245,486 4.94 C

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 91 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Spear SMAR-3T Battery Installation

VESSEL WEIGHT SUMMARY

BATTERIES Spear SMAR-3T INSTALLED BATTERY ENERGY 3000 kW-hr COOLING SYSTEM Air WEEKS OF FUEL ABOARD 2

WEIGHT (LT) VCG (ft) CURRENT LIGHT SHIP 4408 28.44 ADDITIONS 178 20.16 REMOVALS -76 19.40 NEW LIGHT SHIP 4509 LT 28.27

FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6184 LT 28.87 REMOVED FUEL -110 LT 4.94 NEW FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6176 LT 29.16

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 92 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes 100 Estimate for Roll and Weld 1,796 0.00 20.16 190 Battery Support Structure 59,851 10% 0.00 17.05 313 Batteries 137,788 10% 0.00 20.50 314 Power Conversion Equipment 126,765 10% 0.00 20.27 438 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms 1,200 10% 0.00 20.00 512 Ventilation System 1,880 10% 0.00 25.00 532 Cooling Water - 10% 555 Fire Extinguishing System 8,990 10% 0.00 18.00 635 Hull Insulation 24,063 10% 0.00 25.75 - 0%

Subgroup-based Margin Total 36,054 10% 0.00 20.16 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 398,385 10% 0.00 20.16

100.0 Hull Structure, General

101.0 Estimate for Roll and Weld 3% 59,851 1,796 0.00 20.16 E 3% per EBDG standard

190.0 Battery Support Structure

313.0 Batteries

Spear SMAR-3T 3000 kW-hr 45.9 137788 20.50

314.0 Power Conversion Equipment

438.0 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms

Control systems, alarms, cables 1 ea 1200 1,200 20.00 E

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 93 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

512.0 Ventilation System

Air Cooled Batteries Fans 8 ea 85 680 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 300 1,200 25.00 E

Water Cooled Batteries Fans 4 ea 60 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 160 25.00 E

532.0 Cooling Water

Air Cooled Batteries 0 ea 0 - E

555.0 Fire Extinguishing System

555.1 Fixed gas fire extinguishing sys (Novec) 2 ea 2600 5,200 18.00 E

555.2 Deluge system 3" Sch 40 Pipe 500 7.58 3,790 18.00 E Includes nozzels Ties into exisiting sys

635.0 Hull Insulation

A-60 Insulation over shaft alley 9625 ft 2.5 24,063 25.75 E Area over shaft Alley

700.0 Other

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 94 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes

200 Gensets 137,000 10% 0.00 17.50 220 Genset support systems 2,274 10% 0.00 16.00 230 Exhaust System 16,485 10% 0.00 35.69 240 Fuel 245,486 0% 0.00 4.94 -

Subgroup-based Margin Total 15,576 4% 0.00 19.40 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 416,821 4% 0.00 10.89

200 Gensets

Engine 2 ea 40500 81,000 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Accessory Rack 2 ea 3700 7,400 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Generator (Assumed to be 0.6 of engine wt) 2 ea 24300 48,600 17.50 E

220 Genset support systems

Cooling Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E Fuel Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E

230 Exhaust System

Exhaust Piping 200 ft 63.4 12,680 32.00 E Silencers 2 ea 800 1,600 70.00 E Sheathing 200 ft 9.4 1,885 32.00 E Hangers 2 ea 160 320 32.00 E

240 Fuel

Assume vessel carries 1wk less fuel 33824 gal 7.26 245,486 4.94 C

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 95 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PBES Power 65 Battery Installation

VESSEL WEIGHT SUMMARY

BATTERIES PBES, liquid cooled rack INSTALLED BATTERY ENERGY 6000 kW-hr COOLING SYSTEM Water WEEKS OF FUEL ABOARD 2

WEIGHT (LT) VCG (ft) CURRENT LIGHT SHIP 4408 28.44 ADDITIONS 209 20.09 REMOVALS -76 19.40 NEW LIGHT SHIP 4541 LT 28.21

FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6184 LT 28.87 REMOVED FUEL -110 LT 4.94 NEW FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6208 LT 29.11

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 96 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes 100 Estimate for Roll and Weld 1,796 0.00 20.09 190 Battery Support Structure 59,851 10% 0.00 17.05 313 Batteries 193,326 10% 0.00 20.50 314 Power Conversion Equipment 126,765 10% 0.00 20.27 438 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms 1,200 10% 0.00 20.00 512 Ventilation System 880 10% 0.00 25.00 532 Cooling Water 9,721 10% 0.00 16.00 555 Fire Extinguishing System 8,990 10% 0.00 18.00 635 Hull Insulation 24,063 10% 0.00 25.75 - 0%

Subgroup-based Margin Total 42,480 10% 0.00 20.09 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 469,071 10% 0.00 20.09

100.0 Hull Structure, General

101.0 Estimate for Roll and Weld 3% 59,851 1,796 0.00 20.09 E 3% per EBDG standard

190.0 Battery Support Structure

313.0 Batteries

PBES, liquid cooled rack 6000 kW-hr 32.2 193326 20.50

314.0 Power Conversion Equipment

438.0 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms

Control systems, alarms, cables 1 ea 1200 1,200 20.00 E

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 97 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

512.0 Ventilation System

Air Cooled Batteries Fans 8 ea 85 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 300 25.00 E

Water Cooled Batteries Fans 4 ea 60 240 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 160 640 25.00 E

532.0 Cooling Water

Air Cooled Batteries 0 ea 0 - E

Water Cooled Batteries - Piping 600 ft 2.72 1,632 16.00 E Pump 2 ea 45 90 16.00 E Heat Exchanger 2 ea 140 280 16.00 E Valves, fittings 0.15 1,632 245 16.00 E Expansion tank 2 ea 400 800 16.00 E Entrained Fluids 800 gal 8.34 6,674 16.00 E

555.0 Fire Extinguishing System

555.1 Fixed gas fire extinguishing sys (Novec) 2 ea 2600 5,200 18.00 E

555.2 Deluge system 3" Sch 40 Pipe 500 7.58 3,790 18.00 E Includes nozzels Ties into exisiting sys

635.0 Hull Insulation

A-60 Insulation over shaft alley 9625 ft 2.5 24,063 25.75 E Area over shaft Alley

700.0 Other

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 98 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes

200 Gensets 137,000 10% 0.00 17.50 220 Genset support systems 2,274 10% 0.00 16.00 230 Exhaust System 16,485 10% 0.00 35.69 240 Fuel 245,486 0% 0.00 4.94 -

Subgroup-based Margin Total 15,576 4% 0.00 19.40 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 416,821 4% 0.00 10.89

200 Gensets

Engine 2 ea 40500 81,000 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Accessory Rack 2 ea 3700 7,400 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Generator (Assumed to be 0.6 of engine wt) 2 ea 24300 48,600 17.50 E

220 Genset support systems

Cooling Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E Fuel Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E

230 Exhaust System

Exhaust Piping 200 ft 63.4 12,680 32.00 E Silencers 2 ea 800 1,600 70.00 E Sheathing 200 ft 9.4 1,885 32.00 E Hangers 2 ea 160 320 32.00 E

240 Fuel

Assume vessel carries 1wk less fuel 33824 gal 7.26 245,486 4.94 C

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 99 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Corvus Orca Energy Battery Installation

VESSEL WEIGHT SUMMARY

BATTERIES Corvus Orca Energy, liquid cooled rack INSTALLED BATTERY ENERGY 6000 kW-hr COOLING SYSTEM Water WEEKS OF FUEL ABOARD 2

WEIGHT (LT) VCG (ft) CURRENT LIGHT SHIP 4408 28.44 ADDITIONS 195 20.06 REMOVALS -76 19.40 NEW LIGHT SHIP 4527 LT 28.23

FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6184 LT 28.87 REMOVED FUEL -110 LT 4.94 NEW FULL LOAD CONDITION 5 6193 LT 29.13

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 100 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes 100 Estimate for Roll and Weld 1,796 0.00 20.06 190 Battery Support Structure 59,851 10% 0.00 17.05 313 Batteries 164,022 10% 0.00 20.50 314 Power Conversion Equipment 126,765 10% 0.00 20.27 438 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms 1,200 10% 0.00 20.00 512 Ventilation System 880 10% 0.00 25.00 532 Cooling Water 9,721 10% 0.00 16.00 555 Fire Extinguishing System 8,990 10% 0.00 18.00 635 Hull Insulation 24,063 10% 0.00 25.75 - 0%

Subgroup-based Margin Total 39,549 10% 0.00 20.06 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 436,836 10% 0.00 20.06

100.0 Hull Structure, General

101.0 Estimate for Roll and Weld 3% 59,851 1,796 0.00 20.06 E 3% per EBDG standard

190.0 Battery Support Structure

313.0 Batteries

Corvus Orca Energy, liquid cooled rack 6000 kW-hr 27.3 164022 20.50

314.0 Power Conversion Equipment

438.0 Integrated Control Systems and Alarms

Control systems, alarms, cables 1 ea 1200 1,200 20.00 E

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 101 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

512.0 Ventilation System

Air Cooled Batteries Fans 8 ea 85 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 300 25.00 E

Water Cooled Batteries Fans 4 ea 60 240 25.00 E Ducting 4 ea 160 640 25.00 E

532.0 Cooling Water

Air Cooled Batteries 0 ea 0 - E

555.0 Fire Extinguishing System

555.1 Fixed gas fire extinguishing sys (Novec) 2 ea 2600 5,200 18.00 E

555.2 Deluge system 3" Sch 40 Pipe 500 7.58 3,790 18.00 E Includes nozzels Ties into exisiting sys

635.0 Hull Insulation

A-60 Insulation over shaft alley 9625 ft 2.5 24,063 25.75 E Area over shaft Alley

700.0 Other

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 102 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SWBS Qty. Unit Wt. Total Wt. Margin LCG VCG Source No. Description Qty. Unit (lb) (lb) (ft) (ft) C, E, V Notes

200 Gensets 137,000 10% 0.00 17.50 220 Genset support systems 2,274 10% 0.00 16.00 230 Exhaust System 16,485 10% 0.00 35.69 240 Fuel 245,486 0% 0.00 4.94 -

Subgroup-based Margin Total 15,576 4% 0.00 19.40 Item-based Margin Total - 0% Group Total W/ Margin 416,821 4% 0.00 10.89

200 Gensets

Engine 2 ea 40500 81,000 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Accessory Rack 2 ea 3700 7,400 17.50 V EMD 16-710 Generator (Assumed to be 0.6 of engine wt) 2 ea 24300 48,600 17.50 E

220 Genset support systems

Cooling Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E Fuel Piping 150 ft 7.58 1,137 16.00 E

230 Exhaust System

Exhaust Piping 200 ft 63.4 12,680 32.00 E Silencers 2 ea 800 1,600 70.00 E Sheathing 200 ft 9.4 1,885 32.00 E Hangers 2 ea 160 320 32.00 E

240 Fuel

Assume vessel carries 1wk less fuel 33824 gal 7.26 245,486 4.94 C

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 103 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix F

Regulatory Review

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 104 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

REGULATORY REVIEW COMPARISON

ABS DNV BV Guide for Use of Lithium Batteries Rules for Classification of Ships: Part F, Chapter 11, Sections 21 in the Marine and Offshore Part 6, Chapter 2 and 22 Industries [18] [59] [20] 1. Essential services located in the battery space Section 2.2.2 Section 21/3.1.2 Section 3.3(iii) Cannot contain other systems It should not be possible to have sea Cannot contain any equipment supporting essential vessel services water entering battery compartment. supporting essential services, so as in order to prevent loss of propulsion Piping systems not involved in to prevent loss of such essential or steering upon possible incidents battery operation are not to be services in the event of an incident. in the battery system. located in the battery compartment. 2. Ventilation for non-water-cooled batteries Section 2.3.1.5 Section 21/3.1.1 Section 3.3(ix) Ventilation for the space (for non- References ventilation requirements References ventilation requirements water-cooled batteries) must be set for lead acid batteries (Pt C, Ch. 2, for lead acid batteries (ABS SVR 4- up for automatic shutdown upon fire Section 11). Requirements for 8-4/5.3.1). Requirements for detection. thermal runaway events are not thermal runaway events are not addressed. addressed. 3. Ventilation for water-cooled batteries Section 2.3.1.7 Section 21/3.1.1 Section 3.3(ix) An independent ventilation system is References ventilation requirements References ventilation requirements required for possible vapors from a for lead acid batteries (Pt C, Ch. 2, for lead acid batteries (ABS SVR 4- thermal runaway event. Section 11). Requirements for 8-4/5.3.1). Requirements for thermal runaway events are not thermal runaway events are not addressed. addressed. 4. Hazardous spaces Section 2.3.2.1 Section 21/3.1.1 Section 3.3.3 Possible classification of the battery Possible classification of the battery Possible classification of the battery space as a hazardous zone per IEC space as a hazardous zone per IEC space as a hazardous zone per IEC 60079 requiring explosion proof 60079 requiring explosion proof 60079 requiring explosion proof equipment depending on the equipment depending on the equipment depending on the chemistry of the batteries. chemistry of the batteries. chemistry of the batteries. 5. Gas detection Section 2.3.2.3 Section 21/3.1.1 Section 3.3(x) Gas detection will likely be required. Gas detection will likely be required. Gas detection will likely be required. 6. Structural fire protection Section 2.4.1.2 & 2.4.1.3 Section 21/3.1.5 Section 3.3.1(i) Battery spaces must be enclosed to In accordance with structural fire Considered an Auxiliary Machinery A-0, as well as A-60 towards muster protection for "Other machinery Space or a Machinery Space other and evacuation stations for a spaces." At a minimum A-0 than category A as defined in Battery(Safety) notation and A-60 boundaries are to be fitted between SOLAS Regulation II-2 and is towards machinery spaces for two battery compartments. subject to those structural fire Battery (Power) notation. protection requirements. 7. Firefighting Section 2.4.3.1 Section 21/3.1.5 Section 3.3.1(ii) Battery space must have a fixed fire Battery space must have a fixed fire Battery space must have a fixed fire extinguishing system. Currently extinguishing system. Currently extinguishing system that is requires a water-based system, but requires a gas system, but states recommended by the vendor and alternative systems could be "fluid employed is to be compatible appropriate to the battery chemistry. considered. with technology of the battery employed."

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 105 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

8. Emergency shutdowns Section 4.1.5.1 Section 22/3.6.3 & Table 2 Section 2.1.1(iii) For the Battery (Safety) notation Requires control and monitoring for An independent emergency "Battery Protective System" alarms different system parameters. shutdown mechanism outside of the shall cause a shutdown. For Shutdowns are required for short battery space is required. Additional batteries used for essential services, circuit currents, overloads, shutdowns required on the such alarms shall NOT cause a overvoltage, and under voltage. navigation bridge and at the EOS shutdown. when batteries are used for propulsion. No requirement for automatic shutdowns. 9. Battery testing – IEC 62619 [59] Section 4.2.3 Section 21/5.1.2 Section 2.1.1(iii) Lithium based batteries must meet Lithium based batteries must only be Lithium based batteries must IEC 62619, including its cell-to-cell tested per "a National or undergo a number of tests in IEC propagation tests. International standard. If such a 62619. standard is not available, the manufacturer's specifications are to be submitted to the society."

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 106 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix G

Life Cycle Cost Analysis – Summary Life Cycle Cost Analysis – Calculations Conversion Cost Estimate

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 107 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS – SUMMARY

Three Vessels and Four Docks

Three Vessels and Two Docks

Two Vessels and Two Docks

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 108 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS – CALCULATIONS

Three Vessels and Four Docks

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: EIA Reference Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 109 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: Conservative Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 110 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the PUYALLUP: EIA Reference Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 111 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the PUYALLUP: Conservative Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 112 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Three Vessels and Two Docks

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: EIA Reference Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 113 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: Conservative Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 114 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the PUYALLUP: EIA Reference Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 115 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the PUYALLUP: Conservative Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 116 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Two Vessels and Two Docks

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: EIA Reference Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 117 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Conversion of the TACOMA and WENATCHEE: Conservative Case

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 118 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

CONVERSION COST ESTIMATE PER VESSEL

$5,000

$25,000

$50,000

$816,594

$180,000

$322,725

$180,000

$8,982,533

$40,000.00

$33,333.33

$5,600 $5,600

$5,600 $25,600

$11,200 $71,200

$28,000 $9,333

$76,800 $25,600

$57,600 $19,200

$38,400 $12,800

$35,000 $11,667

$28,000 $9,333

$32,000 $32,000

$22,400 $32,400

$42,000 $49,500

$33,600 $38,600

$28,000 $28,000

$14,000 $49,000

$20,000 $240,000

$16,000 $176,000

$20,000 $240,000

$40,000 $1,540,000

$16,800 $96,800

$14,000 $29,000

$16,800 $36,800

$22,400 $4,108,114

$150,000 $150,000

$216,000 $144,000

$168,000 $56,000

$280,000 $93,333

600

200

480

240

150

120

100

200

160

1200

2,490 1,640 $1,438,200 $8,165,939

320

Systems Integrator Labor

120

150

120

$0 1200

$0 175

$0 200

$0 2000

$0 80

$0 100

$35,000

$80,000

$100,000

$180,000

$7,470,939 4,465

$1,500,000

$4,085,714

$650

$5,000 $5,000

$7,500 $7,500

$2,500 $5,000

$7,500 $15,000

100000

$75,000 $75,000

$50,000 $50,000

$60,000 $60,000

$10,000 $10,000

$80,000 $160,000

$10,000 $20,000

$120,000 $120,000

$110,000 $220,000

$161,363 $322,725

$110,000 $220,000

kWh

Qty Unit Price Unit Cost Equipment Design Manuf Comm Other Labor Cost Per Vessel Cost

100

100 6286

* Some items share costs with modernization effort, portion shown ofpercentage is hybrid total cost

% *

GRAND TOTALGRAND

Return on Return Investment, 10%

SUBTOTALS

Contingencies

Project Management

Supplies and Rentals and Supplies

Travel and LivingTravel and

Miscellaneous Contract Labor

As-Built Drawings As-Built

Spare Parts Spare

Operating Manuals Operating

Training

Dock Sea Trials and

ABS/DNV Surveying ABS/DNV

Factory Acceptance Testing

USCG Submittals and Interface and Submittals USCG

Construction Bid Support Construction Bid

Hybrid I/O and Cable Database I/OCable and Hybrid

Control System Programming

System Design

Shipchecking and iba Data iba Analyzing and Shipchecking

Additional Hybrid System Equipment Hybrid Additional

EOS Console Mods, HMI I/O, and Metering,

Pilothouse Operators & MeteringAdditional

Main Switchgear I/O, Switchgear Comm,Main interface hardwire

Bus DuctsBus for Extensions Switchgear

ShorePower Rm 15kV, Eng Switchgear, 1200A

ShorePower Isolation Transformer(s), VPI

At ShorePower Connection Swgr, 15kV, 1200A

Shore Shore Power Equipment Receiving

Battery-Inverter PLC Panels

Battery-Inverter 15kV, Switchgear, 1200A

Inverter Step-Up Transformers,Inverter Step-Up VPI

Inverters, PWM, low-voltage

Li-ion Battery Suppression Fire NOVEC

Li-ion Battery Water-Cooling & Exchanger Heat

Lithium-ion BatteryLithium-ion Room BMS PLC Panels Lithium-ion BatteryLithium-ion Racks, NMC, Water-Cooled Hybrid Item DescriptionHybrid

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 119 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

Appendix H

Hybrid and All-Electric Car Ferries

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 120 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SIGNIFICANT HYBRID AND ALL-ELECTRIC CAR FERRIES

Vessel Page No. PRINSESSE BENEDIKTE Page 122

PRINS RICHARD Page 123

DEUTSCHLAND Page 124

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN Page 125

BERLIN Page 126

COPENHAGEN Page 127

TYCHO BRAHE Page 128

AURORA Page 129

AMPERE Page 130

ELEKTRA Page 131

FOLGEFONN Page 132

MELSHORN Page 133

VARDEHORN Page 133

HALLAIG Page 134

LOCHINVAR Page 135

CATRIONA Page 136

TEXELSTROOM Page 137

SEASPAN RELIANT Page 138

SEASPAN SWIFT Page 138

BC Ferries (x2) Page 139

Fjord1 (x3) Page 140

Fjord1 (x5) Page 141

Fjord 1 ZeroCat 120 Page 142

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 121 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PRINSESSE BENEDIKTE

IMO: 9144421 Year Built: 19971 Year Modified: 2013 Owner: Scandlines Route: Puttgarden – Rødby (18.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 143 m x 25.4 m x 5.5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 18.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 364 car / 1,140 passengers Propulsion Power: 17,440 kW Battery Capacity: 2.6 MWh2 Charge Time: 30 min Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

Retrofitted in 2013, the PRINSESSE BENEDIKTE was the world's first 1,000 plus passenger hybrid ferry. A 2.6 MWh battery pack can power the ship for up to 30 minutes and can recharge from the onboard generators in 30 minutes.

Figure 35: PRINSESSE BENEDIKTE Ferry2

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/prinsesse- benedikte.aspx 2 http://corvusenergy.com/marine-project/prinsesse-benedikte-ferry/

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 122 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

PRINS RICHARD

IMO: 9144419 Year Built: 19971 Year Modified: 2014 Owner: Scandlines Route: Puttgarden – Rødby (18.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 142 m x 25.4 m x 5.5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 18.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 364 car / 1,140 passengers Propulsion Power: 17,440 kW Battery Capacity: 2.6 MWh2 Charge Time: 30 min Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

Figure 36: PRINS RICHARD Ferry2

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/prins-richard.aspx 2 http://corvusenergy.com/portfolio/prins-richard/

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 123 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

DEUTSCHLAND

IMO: 9151541 Year Built: 19971 Year Modified: 2014 Owner: Scandlines Route: Puttgarden – Rødby (18.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 142 m x 25.4 m x 6 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 18.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 364 car / 1,200 passengers Propulsion Power: 15,840 kW Battery Capacity: 1.6 MWh2 Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

Figure 37: DEUTSCHLAND Ferry3

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/deutschland 2 http://corvusenergy.com/energy-storage-system-order-for-two-new-scandlines-battery-hybrid-ferries/ 3 https://www.scandlines.dk

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 124 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN

IMO: 9604378 Year Built: 19971 Year Modified: 2014 Owner: Scandlines Route: Puttgarden – Rødby (18.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 142 m x 25.4 m x 6 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 18.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 364 car / 1,200 passengers Propulsion Power: 15,840 kW Battery Capacity: 1.6 MWh2 Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

Figure 38: SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN Ferry3

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/schleswig-holstein 2 http://corvusenergy.com/portfolio/schleswig-holstein/ 3 https://www.scandlines.dk

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 125 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

BERLIN

IMO: 9587855 Year Built: 20161 Owner: Scandlines Route: Rostock – Gedser (48.9 km) Principal Dimensions: 169.5 m x 25.4 m x 5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 21 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 460 car / 1,300 passengers Propulsion Power: 18,000 kW Battery Capacity: 1.5 MWh2 Charge Time: 30 min Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

The battery bank is used in lieu of an extra on board generator that would be used in normal non- hybrid operation.

Figure 39: BERLIN Ferry3

11 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/berlin 2 http://corvusenergy.com/energy-storage-system-order-for-two-new-scandlines-battery-hybrid-ferries/ 3 https://www.scandlines.dk

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 126 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

COPENHAGEN

IMO: 9587867 Year Built: 20161 Owner: Scandlines Route: Rostock – Gedser (48.9 km) Principal Dimensions: 169.5 m x 25.4 m x 5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 21 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 460 car / 1,300 passengers Propulsion Power: 18,000 kW Battery Capacity: 1.5 MWh2 Charge Time: 30 min Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

The battery bank is used in lieu of an extra on board generator that would be used in normal non- hybrid operation.

Figure 40: COPENHAGEN Ferry3

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/copenhagen 2 http://corvusenergy.com/energy-storage-system-order-for-two-new-scandlines-battery-hybrid-ferries/ 3 https://www.scandlines.dk

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 127 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

TYCHO BRAHE

IMO: 9007116 Year Built 19911 Year Modified: 2017 Owner: Scandlines / HH Ferries Route: Helsingborg – Helsingör (4 km) Principal Dimensions: 111 m x 28 m x 5.3 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 14.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 240 car / 1,250 passengers Propulsion Power: 9,840 kW Battery Capacity: 4.16 MWh Charge Time: 9 min / 5.5 min Integrator: ABB Battery Manufacturer: Plan B Energy Storage (PBES) Charging System: ABB robotic stations

As of the time of this report, the ABB high power charging system is not yet functional.

Figure 41: TYCHO BRAHE Ferry2

1 https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/ferries-and-ports/tycho-brahe.aspx 2 HH Ferries – www. hhferriesgroup.com

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 128 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

AURORA

IMO: 9007128 Year Built 19921 Year Modified: 2017 Owner: Scandlines / HH Ferries Route: Helsingborg – Helsingör (4 km) Principal Dimensions: 111 m x 28 m x 5.5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 14.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 240 car / 1,250 passengers Propulsion Power: 9,840 kW Battery Capacity: 4.16 MWh Charge Time: 9 min / 5.5 min Integrator: ABB Battery Manufacturer: Plan B Energy Storage (PBES) Charging System: ABB robotic stations

Figure 42: AURORA Ferry2

1 http://hhferriesgroup.com/about-hh-ferries-group/ferries/ 2 HH Ferries – www. hhferriesgroup.com

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 129 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

AMPERE

IMO: 9683611 Year Built: 2015 Owner: Norled Route: Lavik – Oppedal, Norway (5.6 km) Principal Dimensions: 80 m x 21 m x 3 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 10 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 120 car / 360 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 450 kW Battery Capacity: 1040 kWh1 Charge Time: 10 min Integrator: Siemens Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Cavotec APSTowers (1.2 MW)2

Introduced in 2015, the AMPERE was the first all-electric, battery powered ferry in the world. The grid was not strong enough to handle a rapid charge at either location, so additional battery packs were installed at both Lavik and Oppedal. The shore-side batteries rapidly recharge the onboard batteries, while the grid can slowly recharge the shore-side batteries.

Figure 43: AMPERE Ferry3

1 http://corvusenergy.com/marine-project/mf-ampere-ferry/ 2 http://www.cavotec.com/uploads/2017/11/15/cavotec-moormaster-references-as-per-q4-201715112017ld.pdf 3 https://www.siemens.com/press/IM2015050750PDEN

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 130 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

ELEKTRA

IMO: 9806328 Year Built: 20171 Owner: FinFerries Route: Nauvo – Parainen, Finland (1.6 km) Principal Dimensions: 98 m x 15.2 m x 3.5 m (draft) Cruise Speed: 11 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 90 car / 375 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 900 kW Battery Capacity: 1 MWh Charge Time: 5 min Integrator: Siemens Charging System: Cavotec APSTowers (1 MW)2

The ELEKTRA is an electric ferry operating in Finland with an ice class notation. Following the AMPERE, the ELEKTRA is the second battery-powered ferry operating in Europe. The propulsion system was designed to operate solely on battery power for the majority of the year. A diesel generator is included onboard to assist in more challenging operations, such as ice conditions or a shore-side power failure.

Figure 44: ELEKTRA Ferry3

1 http://www.finferries.fi/media/elektra-technical-data.pdf 2 http://www.cavotec.com/uploads/2017/11/15/cavotec-moormaster-references-as-per-q4-201715112017ld.pdf 3 https://www.siemens.com/press/IM2017110066PDEN

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 131 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

FOLGEFONN

IMO: 9172090 Year Built: 19981 Year Modified: 2014 Owner: Norled Route: Jektevik – Hodnanes, Norway (2.3 km) Principal Dimensions: 85 m x 15 m Cruise Speed: 9.5 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 76 car / 300 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 750 kW Battery Capacity: 1.4 MWh2 Charge Time: 10 min Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Wartsila wireless induction 3

The FOLGEFONN was originally retrofitted with a hybrid propulsion system in 2014.

Figure 45: FOLGEFONN Ferry4

1 https://maritimecleantech.no/project/mf-folgefonn/ 2 http://corvusenergy.com/portfolio/folgefonn/ 3 https://www.wartsila.com/twentyfour7/innovation/hybrid-tech-gets-a-jolt-of-sea-air 4 http://corvusenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Folgefonn_SDTC.jpg

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 132 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

MELSHORN AND VARDEHORN

IMO: 9210610 / 9210622 Year Built: 1999 Year Modified: 2016 Owner: Torghatten Nord (Norway) Principal Dimensions: 112m x 16m x 3.3m (draft) Max Speed: 14 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 120 car / 299 passengers Power: 2,560 kW Integrator: Siemens

The MELSHORN and VARDEHORN are sister ships that were retrofitted with hybrid propulsion systems in 2016.

Figure 46: MELSHORN Hybrid Ferry Conversion

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 133 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

HALLAIG

IMO: 9652832 Year Built: 20121 Owner: Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (Scotland) Route: Sconser-Rasaay, Scotland (5 km) Principal Dimensions: 43.5 m x 12.2 m x 1.73 m (draft) Service Speed: 9 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 23 car / 150 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 375 kW Battery Capacity: 2 x 350 kWh Charging System: Overnight shore charge

The first of a class of three vessels, the HALLAIG was one of the world's first hybrid vehicle ferries. The vessels typically operate as a hybrid with traditional diesel power supplemented with 20% electric battery energy. The battery banks are charged from the utility overnight.

Figure 47: HALLAIG Ferry1

1 http://www.cmassets.co.uk/ferry/mv-hallaig-2/

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 134 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

LOCHINVAR

IMO: 9652844 Year Built: 20131 Owner: Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (Scotland) Route: Tarbert-Portavadie, Scotland (5.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 43.5m x 12.2m x 1.73m (draft) Service Speed: 9 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 23 car / 150 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 375 kW Battery Capacity: 2 x 350 kWh Charging System: Overnight shore charge

As a sister ship to the HALLAIG, the vessels have similar particulars and operational profiles.

Figure 48: LOCHINVAR Ferry1

1 http://www.cmassets.co.uk/project/mv-lochinvar/

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 135 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

CATRIONA

IMO: 9759862 Year Built: 20151 Owner: Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (Scotland) Route: Claonaig-Lochranza, Scotland (7.5 km) Principal Dimensions: 43.5 m x 12.2 m x 1.73 m (draft) Service Speed: 9 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 23 car / 150 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 375 kW Battery Capacity: 2 x 350 kWh Charging System: Overnight shore charge

As a sister ship to the HALLAIG, the vessels have similar particulars and operational profiles.

Figure 49: CATRIONA Ferry2

1 http://www.cmassets.co.uk/ferry/mv-catriona/ 2 http://www.ynfpublishers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Catriona-in-water.jpg

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 136 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

TEXELSTROOM

IMO: 9741918 Year Built 20161 Owner: Texels Eigen Stroomboot Onderneming (TESO) Route: Texel-Den Helder, Netherlands Principal Dimensions: 135 m x 28 m x 4.4 m (draft) Service Speed: 10 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 350 car / 1,750 passengers Propulsion Power: 2 x 4,000 kW Battery Capacity: 1.6 MWh2 Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Solar panels

The TEXELSTROOM is a dual fuel hybrid ferry operating in the Netherlands. The propulsion system is able to operate on either diesel or compressed natural gas and is supplemented by electric batteries. A 150 kWh solar panel array is used to charge the batteries.

Figure 50: TEXELSTROOM Ferry1

1 http://www.ship-technology.com/projects/texelstroom-ferry/ 2 http://corvusenergy.com/merchant_marine/

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 137 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

SEASPAN RELIANT AND SEASPAN SWIFT

IMO: 9764233 / 9764221 Delivery: 2016 / 2017 Owner: Seaspan (Canada) Routes: Vancouver-Vancouver Island (~40 km) Principal Dimensions: 148.9 m x 26 m x 7 m Service Speed: 14 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 59 Trailers Battery Capacity: 546 kWh1 Battery Manufacturer: Corvus Charging System: Onboard generators

The Seaspan cargo ferries transport trucks and cargo from Vancouver to Vancouver Island. The vessels are dual fuel with diesel, LNG, and supplemented by batteries. Seaspan recently ordered three more vessels of the class.

Figure 51: SEASPAN RELIANT Cargo Ferry2

1 http://corvusenergy.com/merchant_marine/ 2 http://www.seaspan.com/seaspan-ferries-corporation-announces-arrival-second-new-liquefied-natural-gas-lng- fuelled-vessel

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 138 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

BC FERRIES

Expected Delivery: 2020 No. of Vessels: 2 Owner: BC Ferries (Canada) Routes: Powell River-Texada Island, BC (8 km) Port McNeill-Alert Bay-Sointula, BC (11 km) Principal Dimensions: 81.2 m LOA Service Speed: 14 knot Car/Passenger Complement: 44 car / 300 passengers

Two hybrid ferries are currently under construction for BC Ferries for service in the Salish Sea. The propulsion system is a true hybrid with engines that will operate on ultra-low Sulphur diesel fuel and a complement of batteries to supplement. Future expansion of the battery bank will be possible to potentially perform all-electric operations. The project is partially funded by the Government of Canada.

Figure 52: BC Ferries Illustration1

1 https://www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 139 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

FJORD1

Expected Delivery: 2018 No. of Vessels: 3 Owner: Fjord1 (Norway) Routes: Brekstad-Valset Husavik-Sandvikvag Principal Dimensions: 66.4 m x 14.2 m1 Car/Passenger Complement: 50 car / 195 passengers Battery Capacity: 1 MWh

Fjord1 has three all-electric ferries under construction at Havyard Shipyard in Norway.

Figure 53: Fjord1 Ferry Illustration2

1 https://www.shippax.com/en/news/havyard-to-build-three-diesel-electric-ferries-for-fjord1.aspx 2 multi-maritime.no

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 140 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

FJORD1

Expected Delivery: 2020 No. of Vessels: 5 Owner: Fjord1 (Norway) Routes: Hareid-Sulesund1 Magerholm-Sykkylven Principal Dimensions: 111 m LOA Car/Passenger Complement: 120 car System Integrator Norwegian Electric Systems

Fjord1 has five additional all-electric ferries under construction at Havyard Shipyard in Norway.

Figure 54: Fjord1 Ferry Illustration2

1 https://www.norwegianelectric.com/news--media/all-time-high-order-reserve/ 2 http://www.fjord1.no/om-fjord1/presse/bors-og-pressemeldingar/nye-ferjer-til-austevoll

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 141 Washington State Ferries Jumbo Mark II Class 1/17/20

FJORD1 ZEROCAT 120

Expected Delivery: 2018 No. of Vessels: 1 Owner: Fjord1 (Norway) Routes: Halhjem-Vage Principal Dimensions: 87.5 m x 20.8 m Car/Passenger Complement: 120 car / 296 passenger System Integrator Norwegian Electric Systems

A sister ship to the AMPERE, the ZeroCat 120 vessel will operate with an all-electric propulsion system.

Figure 55: Fjord1 ZeroCat 120 Illustration1

1 http://www.fjord1.no/om-fjord1/presse/bors-og-pressemeldingar/nye-ferjer-til-austevoll

ELLIOTT BAY DESIGN GROUP Job: 17102 By: EMT 17102-070-0A.docx Rev. A Page: 142