Connect with us
DNV Decarbonization Insight Series August 2026 - What maritime professionals should know about AI Training

Business

Views and concerns of a Greek and an Asian shipowner as 2020 approaches

Panos Zachariadis of Atlantic Bulk Carriers and Jeremy Nixon of Ocean Network Express speaks to BIMCO Bulletin.

Admin

Published

on

5d394f93aedfd 1564037011

The following article entitled ‘Views and concerns of a Greek and an Asian shipowner as 2020 approaches’ first appeared in the June edition of the BIMCO Bulletin here.

It interviews Panos Zachariadis, the Technical Director of Atlantic Bulk Carriers Management, Greece and Jeremy Nixon, CEO of Ocean Network Express (ONE), Singapore; the article below has been shared with Manifold Times:

Are the challenges and possibilities the same for a Greek bulk carrier and an Asian container shipping company when it comes to the sulphur cap? The Bulletin has spoken to both and they have different views and concerns ahead of 1 January:

Which strategy have you chosen to comply with the new sulphur regulation?

Zachariadis:
“The decision was taken quite early. In the beginning, we contemplated whether we should install scrubbers or not, but, finally, we decided not to. We will comply with the new regulation by using whatever compliant low-sulphur fuel is available.”

Nixon:
“We are going for the low-sulphur compliant fuel for the vast majority of our fleet, and are not focused on LNG or scrubbers, although we have the option to fit scrubbers to some of our core fleet vessels in 2020 if absolutely necessary.”

Why this strategy?

Zachariadis:
“Our fleet consists of small to medium-sized bulk carriers, mostly Supramax and a few Panamax. That means we have a rather small fuel consumption per day, so the pay-off period of a scrubber becomes quite long – plus, it is a big upfront investment. Another reason is the big uncertainty of whether heavy fuel oil will be available, especially in the very strange ports in which we sometimes find ourselves, such as in Africa and South America. Even in the US Gulf, we have our doubts that heavy fuel oil will be easily obtainable. One more thing that goes against scrubbers are the concerns over the environment and open-loop scrubbers.”

Nixon:
“As a container shipping company, we have a reasonably clear understanding of our long-term schedule. We know which vessels will be in which ports on which dates, as we start the countdown during November and December. So, choosing the compliant fuel strategy means our team can work out what the last available bunker port is for each vessel, and they can work out a long-term schedule to try to ensure the availability of the right bunkers in those particular locations. It also means the team can work out an option B, C or D where there are indications that there may be some initial shortfall.”

What are your concerns when it comes to compliant fuel?

Zachariadis:
“I worry a lot about the safety of the fuels I am going to get. I do not worry so much about the availability. I believe there will be compliant fuel – my question is, what kind is it going to be and will it be safe? A lot of suppliers will start doing blends and a lot of these might be unstable. If I get the fuel from reputable majors, I am sure it will be OK, but thousands of traders will do their own mixing and their own blends, and – as long as it is below 0.50% – they will consider it safe. That might end up in my ships. We are missing some guidelines about whether fuel with a high percentage of distillate will be stable and safe. The ones that are out there now have proven to be not so stable. In addition, because of the nature of our tramp business, many of our ships do not have fixed voyages and fixed routes. One of the biggest problems is knowing what voyages I have ahead, in order to plan.”

Nixon:
“We tend to run our services on specific geographical loops – vessels operating on exactly the same loop rotation. Every four to eight weeks, for example, they come past the same bunker port. So, while we get assurances from the refining industry that there will be enough compliant fuel, our concern would be if there is an initial shortfall. Also, we will be trying to avoid mixing different types of low-sulphur fuel. Another potential concern is whether the regulators and governments in every country will make it very clear that fuel compliance is mandatory and that checks will be taking place. We do not want to see a situation where there is some flexibility around non-compliant fuel, because then we no longer have a level playing field.”

How much of the extra fuel cost will you be able to pass on to customers?

Zachariadis:
“That will depend on the market. If the world economy is doing well, you can pass more of your expenses on to consumers. It depends if freight rates are high or not. If the freight rates are low, sometimes we cannot even pass the actual cost of today’s fuel oil price to the consumers.”

Nixon:
“We all need to comply, and that means a potentially significant increase in costs. We bunker around 4.3 million tonnes of fuel per year. We are not in a situation where we can absorb the expected increase in fuel cost. We have no other option but to pass it on 100% to our customers. That is, passing on whatever the premium differential will be between the 3.5% and 0.50% compliant fuel – and that is our intention. The whole industry will have to do that.”

When it comes to 1 January 2020, what could go wrong?

Zachariadis:
“Issues with unstable blends. I think we will see an increase in ship troubles, engine stops and so on. To what extent, I do not know, but I believe some of it will be because of the fuel and some will have to do with crew training. I think the increase in incidents will be caused by unstable blends and wrong moves by the crew in switching the fuel type.”

Nixon:
“I think, quite simply, that the availability of compliant fuel is not as available as the oil companies and refiners have indicated it will be.”

Having come this far in your own planning, what is your advice to shipowners preparing for 2020?

Zachariadis:
“Do not leave it till the last minute. I consider at least two months for each ship to clean the tanks and get rid of the non-compliant fuel. Two months, if everything goes right, but preferably three.”

Nixon:
“To accelerate their planning to give themselves as much time as possible, and not to be hoping this regulation will suddenly be lifted at the last minute. In our view, this will go ahead. It will happen and we all just have to get on with it.”

Published: 25 July, 2019
 

Continue Reading

Business

IBT Bunkering & Trading appoints Kevin Döhmen to lead Singapore expansion

Döhmen will lead the new Singapore office, with responsibility for managing and developing the operation and strengthening relationships with customers and partners.

Admin

Published

on

By

IBT Bunkering & Trading appoints Kevin Döhmen to lead Singapore expansion

Hamburg-based marine fuels firm IBT Bunkering & Trading on Wednesday (12 August) said it has appointed Kevin Döhmen as Executive Vice President to lead the company’s new Singapore office. 

Manifold Times previously reported the company announcing that it is opening its doors in Singapore and will be running a trading desk in the city-state after trading bunkers out of Hamburg since 1976.

The company said Kevin Döhmen will lead the new Singapore office, with theresponsibility for managing and developing the operation and strengthening relationships with customers and partners.

IBT said the Singapore office represents an important first step in strengthening its presence in Asia.

“At the same time, we are actively exploring further opportunities to expand our activities and establish new partnerships in this key maritime hub,” the company said. 

Döhmen said: “Singapore is the heartbeat of global bunkering. Bringing IBT’s Hamburg roots — 50 years of them — onto the ground in this hub is a real privilege, and I couldn’t be more ready for it.”

IBT said it will maintain the service approach established through its Hamburg operations while building its activities in Singapore.

The company described the move as bringing together its Hamburg roots and Singapore presence through a global bunker network. 

Related: German firm IBT Bunkering & Trading establishes Singapore presence, adds second trading desk

 

Photo credit: IBT Bunkering & Trading
Published: 13 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Bunker Alerts

Low flashpoint found in Indonesia bunker fuels, alerts Maritec-Naias

Firm tested eight bunker samples representing LSMDO and B40 fuel grade from vessels that took fuel oil /bunkered in Indonesia ports, which indicated flashpoints as low as 39.5°C.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Shaah Shahidh on Unsplash

Bunker fuel testing and marine surveying business Maritec-Naias on Wednesday (12 August) issued an alert regarding bunker samples from vessels that took fuel oil/bunkered in Indonesia showing flashpoints as low as 39.5°C:

During the period of 21 July to 04 August 2026, Maritec-Naias tested eight bunker samples representing Low Sulfur Marine Distillate Oil (LSMDO) and B40 fuel grade from vessels that took fuel oil /bunkered in Indonesia ports, which indicated Flashpoints as low as 39.5°C.

All eight fuel samples tested were sourced from a single supplier.

Regulatory Implications:

Based on the results of the eight samples tested, the fuels do not comply with the minimum flashpoint requirement of 60 °C set by SOLAS and ISO 8217.

As per SOLAS requirements, the minimum flashpoint of any fuel carried in the tanks of a ship should be not less than 60 °C (with exception of fuel for lifeboats, which can be grade DMX with a flash point min of 43 °C).

ISO 4259 interpretation for tested flashpoint temperature is not taken into consideration here as the safety of onboard crew and vessel is of higher precedence.

Since 01 May 2024, it has been a MARPOL Annex VI requirement that the Bunker Delivery Note (BDN) includes either the actual flashpoint of a fuel as supplied or a declaration that its flashpoint has been determined as being at or above 70°C.

From 1 January 2026, SOLAS amendments clarified that the flashpoint requirement applies to fuels, which were specifically intended to have a flashpoint not less than 60°C as required under SOLAS II‑2/2.1.1 These amendments now align with MARPOL by requiring flashpoint details to be recorded on the BDN. Additionally, prior to bunkering, suppliers must provide the ship’s representative with a signed declaration confirming that the fuel meets the SOLAS flashpoint standard.

MARITEC-NAIAS RECOMMENDATIONS

When ordering fuels from Indonesia it is advised to insist on getting the actual flash point values from the supplier. If your vessel has bunkered a low flashpoint fuel it is prudent to observe/implement the precautions below:

  • Flame screens on tank vents should be maintained in good condition and there should be no sources of ignition in the vicinity of the vents. This will assist in safe natural ventilation of volatile components in the fuel.
  • No Smoking, no naked flame and no hot work must be allowed at any areas near to tank air vents.
  • Send additional tank(s) samples upon arrival in port to check the fuel properties and flash point results especially if there has been co-mingling of fuels in bunker tanks
  • If the vessel is out at sea, it may be possible to obtain dispensation from your Flag State Administration up to the next arrival port.
  • Put the supplier on notice promptly and notify your P&I club.

 

Photo credit: Shaah Shahidh on Unsplash
Published: 13 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Methanol

China: Xiamen issues safety guidelines for methanol bunkering operations

New guidelines establish safety requirements across the full methanol bunkering process, supporting the expansion of green marine fuel supplies at Xiamen Port.

Admin

Published

on

By

Xiamen, China

Xiamen Free Trade Zone on Monday (10 August) said its Administrative Committee recently jointly issued the Safety Guidelines for Marine Methanol Fuel Bunkering in Xiamen Waters with Xiamen Port Authority and Xiamen Maritime Safety Administration, establishing a framework for methanol bunkering operations in the port.

The guidelines are the first safety operating standard in Fujian province specifically covering marine methanol fuel bunkering. They apply to methanol bunkering operations conducted by bunker vessels in Xiamen waters and set out safety requirements covering the entire operation, from preparation through completion.

The guidelines specify requirements for bunkering companies, equipment and materials used on bunker vessels, hose inspection intervals, personnel certification and personal protective equipment.

They also require operators to conduct dedicated risk assessments and prepare emergency response plans before operations begin. During bunkering, operators must maintain continuous monitoring and comply with specified weather restrictions. After completion, pipelines must undergo procedures including purging and inerting.

Xiamen Port has previously carried out ship-to-ship bunkering of biofuels and LNG. The new guidelines provide a regulatory framework and operational basis for methanol bunkering and are intended to support the safe and orderly conduct of such operations.

The move is also expected to help Xiamen Port expand its market and bunkering capacity for green marine fuels. 

 

Photo credit: Woo Winter on Unsplash
Published: 13 August, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending