ABS Chairman, President and CEO Christopher J. Wiernicki has highlighted on the dynamic nature of next-generation bunker fuels during a key note speech at the Shipping Insight 20/20: A Vision For The Decade conference.
“In all likelihood, the fleet of the future will be fuelled by a variety of choices, including oil, that will be selected depending on the owner’s operational preferences,” he said.
“The next-generation fuels making up that variety of choices are primarily dynamic in nature, meaning they tend to change state over the course of a voyage or during storage. LNG, which boils off underway, is an example.
“That means a very significant change is coming in terms of crew training. Right now, handling dynamic fuels is for specialists only. But as these fuels grow in adoption and application, it is likely that all crew members will need to become specialists and receive the appropriate skill sets and safety training. Remember that whatever we build, whatever we invent, whatever we put in place, none of it will work without properly trained and educated crew, operating in a safety-first atmosphere.”
“As a result, I expect the IMO will need to update SOLAS to account for the many challenges presented by alternate fuels and other new technologies. Think about it, the SOLAS framework in place today was written before cell phones or internet. Additionally, out of necessity, I think the industry will come to see ISM not only as the safety framework of the future, but also as a pillar of the decarbonisation journey,” he adds.
He called on the industry to recognise that successful decarbonisation of the shipping industry will take teamwork and cooperation, and emphasised the importance of people over technology in the development of the industry.
“The real solution to the 2050 challenge is likely to be a hybrid solution, triggered by four primary levers: development of alternate fuels; technology improvement; operational efficiencies and the impact of policy. One thing that is certain about the future is that it will surprise us,” he said.
“Let’s hope that, as we go forward, we work together as a team to apply sufficient insight and mindfulness to our present debates, so that we are successful in leaving the next generation a solid foundation on which to build their own achievements, that we cannot even imagine as possibilities today.”
Photo credit: kobu-agency
Published: 15 October, 2020
Plans new generation of its mtu Series 2000 and 4000 engine ranges for use with sustainable bunker fuels such as second-generation biofuels or e-diesel from 2023.
Ammonia is the ‘most promising’ hydrogen carrier and zero-carbon shipping fuel as it does not need to be refrigerated and has a higher energy density than liquid hydrogen.
Port will provide space for shore-to-ship fuelling ops while Stabilis will deploy existing fleet of mobile cryogenic assets to support LNG bunkering operations.
The Orcelle Wind is scheduled to be ready for the high seas by 2025, and is capable of up to 90% reduced emissions compared to today’s most efficient vessel.
‘LNG as fuel is attracting widespread attention as an environmentally friendly option, but LPG as fuel has advantages over LNG,’ says ABS spokesman.
Study shows electrifying coastal ferries on the Pearl River could eliminate more than 30% of fossil fuel used by the Chinese coastal ferry fleet in February 2019.
Program introduces periodic assessments, mass flow metering data analysis, and regular training for relevant key personnel to better handle the MFMS to ensure a high level of continuous operational competency.
U.S. Claims Register Summary recorded a total USD 833 million claim from a total 180 creditors against O.W. Bunker USA, according to the creditor list seen by Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times.
Glencore purchased fuel through Straits Pinnacle which contracted supply from Unicious Energy. Contaminated HSFO was loaded at Khor Fakkan port and shipped to a FSU in Tanjong Pelepas, Malaysia to be further blended.
Individuals were employees of surveying companies engaged by Shell to inspect the volume of oil loaded onto the vessels which Shell supplied oil to; they allegedly accepted bribes totalling at least USD 213,000.
MPA preliminary investigations revealed that the affected marine fuel was supplied by Glencore Singapore Pte Ltd who later sold part of the same cargo to PetroChina International (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
‘MPA had immediately contacted the relevant bunker suppliers to take necessary steps to ensure that the relevant batch of fuel was no longer supplied. Further investigations are currently on-going,’ it informs.
