Connect with us

Alternative Fuels

接收“Pearl Khaoyai”轮,Consort Bunkers将以IMO 2型新油轮迎向IMO 2030/2050年目标

Admin

Published

on

Pearl Khaoyai 1

周二(4 月 18 日),新加坡燃油与物流服务提供商Consort Bunkers Pte Ltd从中国山东省的京鲁船业(蓬莱中柏京鲁船业有限公司)接收了“Pearl Khaoyai”轮。

Consort Bunkers创始人杨肃敬(SK Yeo)先生告诉《满航时报》,这艘悬挂新加坡国旗的7,999 载重吨加油船是2020年该公司订购的七艘“K”系列加油船中的第三艘,将被部署于Maersk Oil Trading的海上加油业务。

“我们‘K’系列加油船的最后一艘将升级IMO 2型化学品油轮,以部署在面向未来的加油业务,并涵盖传统船燃类以及绿色替代船燃,如生物燃料和甲醇。”杨先生分享道。

“预计,这艘船将在2024 年第一季度交付;其中,Consort Bunkers 将成为先行运营此新建IMO 2 型油轮的新加坡燃料供应商之一,并于当地提供服务。”

Pearl Khaoyai 2

借此机会,杨先生表示,作为Consort Bunkers 船队更迭计划的一部分,Consort Bunkers 也在4月初向招商局金陵船舶(南京)有限公司订购了6艘6,500载重吨的IMO 2型油轮。

这一批6,500 载重吨的新船除了能够提供各种常规船用燃料,也可以提供包含生物燃料和甲醇在内的可持续绿色燃料。

“这六艘船都属于我们的‘L’系列油轮,将于2024年至2025年之间陆续交付。”他指出,并解释,这些最新订购的升级版IMO 2型油轮将能够在即将来临的IMO 2030目标框架下提供加注服务。

“生物燃料和甲醇是当今被预测可能帮助航运业向IMO 2030/2050脱碳目标推进的替代燃料之一,同时,也都属于化学品类,其运输必须依靠配备不锈钢或涂层管道、涂层罐等其他特性的化学品油轮,以确保能够符合相关的安全规定。

“因此,我们推进航运脱碳的理念,也促成了我们决定委托金陵船厂建造新型的加油船;而这也与MPA(新加坡海事及港务管理局)去年发布的《新加坡海事脱碳蓝图》步伐一致。

“另外,我们也注意到,MPA已引入一项有关生物船燃规格的临时国家标准 (WA 2:2022),因此,我们在致力于推出新的IMO 2 型油轮时也考量了这一因素。”

展望未来,杨先生分享道,Consort Bunkers 将把2018 年建竣的“Pearl Mercury ”轮和2019年建竣的“Pearl Majestic”轮分别出售给欧洲和中东买家;这两艘8,000 载重吨的船舶是该公司2016 年向一家中国造船厂订购的七艘“M”系列船的其中姊妹船。

“从 2016 年至今 [2023 年],能够运载常规船燃的新建加油船成本已经上涨了30-40%。”杨先生发表其个人洞见。

“根据我们最新的[‘L’ 系列新造船订单] 信息,与当前的新造传统油轮价格相比,新型IMO 2型油船还得面对额外15-20% 的建造成本溢价。”

2022 年,在MPA的年度船用燃油供应商排行榜上,Consort Bunkers排名第18 位(2021 年的排名为第20 位)。

相关文章Singapore: Consort Bunkers welcomes first of seven 7,999 dwt ‘K’ series newbuild bunker tankers to bunkering fleet
相关文章Consort Bunkers acquires five bunker tankers in Q4; orders up to seven more newbuilds from China
相关文章Consort Bunkers takes productivity to new levels with latest fleet expansion
相关文章MPA blueprint prepares marine fuels sector for multi-fuel bunkering transition
相关文章Singapore: MPA maritime decarbonisation blueprint sets target for bunkering sector
相关文章MPA: Singapore bunker tanker fleet expected to run on net zero fuels by 2050
相关文章Singapore: MPA develops framework to support biofuel bunker fuel deliveries
相关文章Exclusive: Estimated marine fuel sales figures of Singapore top 10 bunker suppliers by volume in 2022

照片来源:Consort Bunkers
发布日期:2023 年 4 月 20 日

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

IUMI: How can liability and compensation regimes adapt to alternative bunker fuels and cargoes?

Existing international liability and compensation regimes do not fully cater to the changes that the use of alternative marine fuels will bring.

Admin

Published

on

By

Dangerous cargo

By Tim Howse, Member of the IUMI Legal & Liability Committee and Vice President, Head of Industry Liaison, Gard (UK) Limited

The world economy is transitioning, with industries across the board seeking to reduce their carbon footprint and embrace more sustainable practices. As part of this, there is a huge effort within our industry to look to decarbonise, using alternative fuels such as biofuel, LNG, LPG, ammonia, methanol, and hydrogen.

Until now there has been much focus on carbon emissions and operational risks associated with the use of alternative fuels. This includes increased explosivity, flammability, and corrosivity. An ammonia leak causing an explosion in port could result in personal injuries, not to mention property damage, air, and sea pollution. In addition, alternative fuels may not be compatible with existing onboard systems, increasing the risk of breakdowns and fuel loss resulting in pollution. Apart from these safety concerns, which particularly concern crew, air pollution and other environmental impacts need to be addressed.

However, the green transition also presents us with a separate regulatory challenge, which has received less attention so far. So, whilst carbon emissions and safety concerns are rightly on top of the agenda now, the industry also needs to prioritise the potential barriers in the legal and regulatory frameworks which will come sharply into focus if there is an accident.

If anything, historic maritime disasters like the Torrey Canyon spill in 1967, have taught us that we should look at liability and compensation regimes early and with a degree of realism to ensure society is not caught off-guard. With our combined experience, this is perhaps where the insurance industry can really contribute to the transition.

Currently, existing international liability and compensation regimes do not fully cater to the changes that the use of alternative fuels will bring. For example, an ammonia fuel spill would not fall under the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (Bunkers Convention), potentially resulting in a non-uniform approach to jurisdiction and liability. Similarly, an ammonia cargo incident would not fall under the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage (CLC). Uncertainties may also exist in the carriage of CO2 as part of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects, which may be treated as a pollutant, with corresponding penalties or fines.

A multitude of questions will arise depending on what happens, where it happens, and the values involved, many of which may end up as barriers for would be claimants. How will such claims be regulated, will there be scope for limitation of liability, and would there be a right of direct action against the insurers? In the absence of a uniform international liability, compensation and limitation framework, shipowners, managers, charterers, individual crew, and the insurers may be at the mercy of local actions. Increased concerns about seafarer criminalisation (even where international conventions exist, ‘wrongful’ criminalisation does still occur) may emerge, creating another disincentive to go to sea.

When being carried as a cargo, the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS), which is not yet in force, may resolve some of these issues for alternative fuels and CO2. However, until HNS comes into force, there will be no international uniformity to liability and compensation for the carriage of alternative fuels and CO2 as cargoes. This creates uncertainties for potential victims and their insurers, who may face increased risks and costs, due to the potential inability of existing regulations to provide protections.

The situation is even less clear in the case of bunkers. The rules for using alternative fuels as bunkers might require a separate protocol to HNS, a protocol to the Bunkers Convention, or a whole new convention specifically for alternative fuels.  Relevant considerations for the appropriate legislative vehicle include states’ preparedness to reopen the Bunkers Convention, the ability to conclude a protocol to HNS before it comes into force, and whether a multi-tier fund structure is needed for alternative fuels as bunkers (perhaps unnecessary because bunkers are usually carried in smaller quantities compared to cargoes).

Until then, what we are left with are the existing international protective funds, designed to respond at the highest levels to pollution claims resulting from an oil spill, without any similar mechanism in place to respond to a spill of alternative fuels, which are themselves so central to a green transition. Somewhat perversely, victims of accidents involving an oil spill may therefore enjoy better protections than victims of an alternative fuels spill.

In summary, while the use of alternative fuels will no doubt help to reduce the industry's carbon footprint, there are safety and practical hurdles to overcome. Stakeholders must also come together to find solutions to complex - and urgent, in relative terms - legal and regulatory challenges.

 

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Source:  International Union of Marine Insurance
Published: 13 June 2024

Continue Reading

Ammonia

Expert discusses technical considerations of using ammonia as marine fuel

Ammonia as bunker fuel poses significant safety challenges due to its toxicity and flammability, says Senior Marine Surveyor Muammer Akturk.

Admin

Published

on

By

Technical considerations of ammonia as marine fuel

Muammer Akturk, a Senior Marine Surveyor specialising in alternative bunker fuels, on Monday (10 June) published an article on technical considerations of using ammonia as a marine fuel in his Alternative Marine Fuels Newsletter.

The article dives into the use of ammonia as a marine fuel, focusing on the safety and technical considerations necessary for its implementation.

Ammonia is recognised for its potential as a zero-carbon fuel, making it an attractive option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the shipping industry. However, it poses significant safety challenges due to its toxicity and flammability.

Key points discussed include:

  1. Safety Measures: The importance of stringent design and operational safety measures to prevent ammonia releases and mitigate risks during both normal and emergency conditions is emphasized. This includes the need for gas dispersion analyses and the use of safety systems like gas detectors and alarms
  2. Regulatory Framework: The article reviews the latest regulations and guidelines developed to ensure the safe use of ammonia as a marine fuel. This includes the IACS Unified Requirement H1, which provides a framework for controlling ammonia releases on vessels
  3. Engineering Considerations: Technical aspects such as fuel storage, handling systems, and the role of risk assessments in identifying potential hazards and implementing preventive measures are detailed
  4. Human Factors: The article also considers the human factors approach to safety, emphasizing training and the importance of designing systems that account for human errorOverall, the article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the challenges and solutions associated with using ammonia as a marine fuel, highlighting the importance of safety and regulatory compliance in its adoption.

Editor’s note: The full article can be found at the link here.

 

Published: 13 June 2024

Continue Reading

Methanol

Green Marine Fuels Trading, Vopak team up on green methanol port storage facilities

Green Marine Fuels revealed a strategic collaboration with Vopak to secure necessary port storage to accommodate green methanol supply in Shanghai, Tianjin and later in Singapore.

Admin

Published

on

By

Green Marine Fuels Trading, Vopak team up on green methanol port storage facilities

Green Marine Fuels Trading on Tuesday (11 June) announced a strategic collaboration with Royal Vopak Terminals in the key ports of Shanghai Caojing and Tianjin Lingang, China. 

The firm said the milestone agreement marked the next phase of methanol supply chain infrastructure expansion for Green Marine Fuels Trading, securing necessary port storage capacity to accommodate projected supply of green methanol from Chinese business partners.  

Green Marine will be undertaking a similar cooperation plan with Vopak Singapore as well. 

Gavin McGrath, Director at Green Marine, said: “This is an important milestone in the evolution of Green Marine Fuels Trading and further underscores our preparedness to supply green methanol to the imminent green transition within the shipping industry.” 

“Our leadership in the global methanol marine fuel sector uniquely positions us to bridge the gap between methanol producers and buyers, with storage and supply infrastructure being a crucial link in the chain.”

“We eagerly anticipate leveraging our expertise in these domains to enrich the Shanghai and Tianjin green port and marine fuel ecosystems.”

Manifold Times previously reported Vopak signing a strategic cooperation agreement with the Vice Mayor of Tianjin delegation to support the repurposing of Vopak Tianjin's infrastructure for new energies, including green methanol, sustainable aviation fuel, and potentially ammonia and liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHC).

Vopak said Tianjin Port Group will work closely with Vopak to develop a green methanol bunkering service solution.

Related: Tianjin Port Group and Vopak partner to develop green methanol bunkering service

 

Photo credit: Green Marine Group
Published: 12 June 2024

Continue Reading
Advertisement
  • Consort advertisement v2
  • RE 05 Lighthouse GIF
  • SBF2
  • v4Helmsman Gif Banner 01
  • EMF banner 400x330 slogan
  • Aderco advert 400x330 1

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

  • SEAOIL 3+5 GIF
  • Singfar advertisement final
  • Triton Bunkering advertisement v2
  • 102Meth Logo GIF copy
  • HL 2022 adv v1


  • Synergy Asia Bunkering logo MT
  • Auramarine 01
  • E Marine logo
  • Energe Logo
  • CNC Logo Rev Manifold Times
  • Golden Island logo square
  • endress
  • Central Star logo
  • Uni Fuels logo advertisement white background
  • Cathay Marine Fuel Oil Trading logo
  • Headway Manifold
  • 400x330 v2 copy
  • Advert Shipping Manifold resized1
  • VPS 2021 advertisement

Trending