Bunker fuel testing and marine surveying business Maritec Pte Ltd (CTI-Maritec) on Friday (6 September) said it recently tested VLSFO samples from vessels that took up fuel/bunkered in Malta, and found high concentrations of chemical compounds, that can potentially prove harmful for vessel health:

Findings & Insights:

In the last few weeks CTI-Maritec has tested multiple fuel oil bunker samples from vessels that have taken fuel/bunkered in MALTA and reported operational issues and/or tested to have the presence of high levels of chemical compounds.

Extended Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) testing by ASTM D7845 was conducted for two Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) samples, which showed the presence of high concentrations of acetophenone, phenolic compounds (4-cumylphenol, phenol and others), styrene glycol and phenethyl alcohols. Furthermore, testing by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) GC-MS technique indicated low levels of bisphenol isomers, fatty acids, long chain fatty acids and dehydroabietic acid. All mentioned compounds are non-hydrocarbons. Our GC-MS analysis also indicated the presence of reactive hydrocarbons like DCPD, Dihydro-DCPD, Styrene and Indene.

The common problems encountered, as reported by the vessels, were sludging, filter clogging and in some instances, fuel pump issues associated with phenolic compounds and phenethyl alcohols.

Due to the high levels of these chemical compounds, the fuels do not meet the general requirement and is considered as off-spec fuel as per clause 5 of ISO8217 and MARPOL Annex VI regulation 18 which states:

“The fuels shall be homogeneous blends of hydrocarbons derived from petroleum refining. This shall not preclude the incorporation of small amounts of additives intended to improve some aspects of performance.”

The fuels shall be free from inorganic acids and from used lubricating oils. The fuel should not include any added substance or chemical waste which,

1. a) jeopardizes the safety of ships or adversely affects the performance of the machinery; or
2. b) is harmful to personnel; or
3. c) contributes overall to additional air pollution.”

CTI-Maritec Recommendations:

CTI-Maritec recommends to:

• Closely observe the vessel fuel system/s for signs of filter clogging and purifier sludging and additionally, increase vigilance on the centrifuges to monitor overloading.
• Increase frequency of their de-sludging cycle depending on the accumulated sludge.
• Possibly reduce the Mean Time between bowl cleaning of the purifier and fuel system filters.
• Avoid blending with other fuels, in particular marine diesel and gas oil and also other fuel oil as such mixing may well increase the sediment problem.

Furthermore, at these levels of concentration of chemical compounds present in fuel oil, there is an increased risk of excessive wear to the vessel’s fuel pump plunger and barrel assembly. Therefore, it is advised to monitor the fuel pump index closely to check for deteriorating performance. As a back-up, ensure there are sufficient spare seals and plunger barrel assembly to replace damaged units if necessary.

In addition, as a precaution, it is advised to closely monitor the performance of the engines while using this fuel to detect any deterioration of the fuel injection equipment performance and the sealing effect of the piston rings.

This document, however, does not reflect on the overall quality of fuel being supplied in Malta. If you intend to bunker in this region, please request for a Certificate of Quality prior to loading.

 

Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 9 September, 2024

Lloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) on Friday (15 March) released a bulletin highlighting on ships receiving bunker fuels containing ‘unestablished’ blend component which potentially result in engine fuel pump and injector related damage : 

Recently a number of ships in the Rotterdam area have, undeclared to them, received fuels with up to around 20% of an ‘unestablished’ blend component. One of these ‘unestablished’ products appears to have been a Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) from undeclared source materials or production processes. 

This was highlighted to FOBAS as a result of investigating a number of ships reporting having experienced engine fuel pump and injector related damage leading to operational problems which have been linked to the presence of ‘unestablished’ CNSL in the fuel as supplied.

Over the last year, LR FOBAS has had at least four ships reporting similar operational issues from bunkers loaded in Rotterdam, which have been subsequently identified with a significant presence of ‘unestablished’ CNSL. This indicates the continued practice on the part of some suppliers blending ‘unestablished' biofuel feedstocks without essential evidence of its suitability for use in marine machinery and furthermore without any notification to the receiving ship to be so alerted.

This practice is contrary to the guidance by IMO on Best practice for suppliers on the quality of fuel oil delivered to ships. MEPC.1 /Circ. 875/Add.1 section ‘5’– where it states that:

5.3 Blend components should be tried and tested so that their typical properties and suitability for bunker production and how they combine with other components is well understood…… and

5.4 Where there are any uncertainties as to the nature and quality of blend component, any issue should be identified and resolved before its use in the production of bunkers.

Recognising that there is a wide range of possible biofuels, ISO 8217 specifies the now accepted bio-fuels: FAME and paraffinic fuels such as HVO, defined by the specifications of EN 14214, ASTM D6751 and EN 15940 respectively. These have been well tried and tested at sea over the past few years and are now generally acknowledged by equipment manufacturers (OEM), Classification societies (Class) and flag Administrations as acceptable ‘drop-in’ fuels.

It should be further understood by suppliers and ship operators that because of the diversity of feedstocks and production processes ‘No one biofuel / bio-oil product can be used as a reference fuel for all biofuels. Whilst blending in a marine fuel might result in the ISO 8217 tables 1 and 2 parameter limits being met, the onus is on the supplier to ensure that the delivered product has met the fundamental and inescapable requirement of complying with the workmanship clause defined under Clause 5 of ISO 8217.

LR FOBAS over the past year has been jointly working with a ship owner and a supplier to explore the use of one of the forms of their CNSL as a blend component. This collaboration has aimed at resolving the challenges of using CNSL, by carrying out a structured and phased process, as required by Class, which has included extensive engine test bench trials and analytical assessment of the specific form of CNSL blend on offer by the supplier. The outcome of this to date has led to a provisional acceptance of this form of CNSL, cleared by OEM, Class, and flag Administration to proceed to the sea-trial stage on a specific engine for subsequent approval.

In view of the above, it is recommended that a precautionary measure is taken at the bunker procurement stage where the purchaser makes clear that no biofuel product is to be used as a blend feedstock unless otherwise offered as an ‘established’ biofuel and agreed by all parties, thus seeking transparency from the supplier on the blend components to be used. It should be underlined that the use of any bioproduct as a blend component in marine fuels is not allowed by Clause 5 ISO 8217:2017 unless the end-user agrees to receive an established bio-grade fuel.

Furthermore, as always, attention should be given to the collection of bunker samples. It should be ensured that all parties have witnessed the sampling process and have signed and witnessed forms accordingly. The supporting documentation should include records of all the samples considered representative of the fuel as loaded.

 

Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 18 March 2024

Marine fuels testing company VPS on Tuesday (16 January) published an article titled ‘2023 Marine Bunker Fuels Review’ by Steve Bee, VPS Group Commercial Director, giving insightful annual review of VPS findings on both global and regional maritime fuel matters, focusing on marine fuels. 

Introduction

2023 saw the continuing evolution and the widening of available maritime fuel types and grades, as the global shipping industry gathered decarbonisation momentum to reduce its emissions and achieve current and future legislation targets. Existing CII and EEXI requirements, the incoming EU ETS legislation, plus the slightly longer-term IMO legislation, saw increasing demand for additional testing, lower-carbon fuels, data and digitalisation solutions across the shipping sectors.

As the leading maritime decarbonisation testing and advisory services provider, VPS continued to be at the forefront of marine fuels and lubricants analysis, utilising our experience, expertise and innovative approach, to support this drive for a more sustainable shipping fleet.  

Throughout the year, VPS witnessed further fuel quality issues with VLSFOs in terms of cold-flow property issues, sulphur compliance and cat-fines. HSFO and VLSFO suffered numerous degrees of chemical contamination, whilst MGO suffered from cold-flow, flash point and FAME off-specifications.

Biofuels usage certainly gathered momentum and the increased demand from the market led to increasing queries regarding their fuel management and their “fit-for-purpose” as a drop-in marine fuel, which in turn called upon VPS to provide answers and solutions to customers, utilising our extensive knowledge and understanding of biofuels and their associated test parameters. 

The Marine Fuel Mix

Across 2023, the fuel mix with respect to samples received for testing in VPS laboratories, equated to 62.7 million MT, which is over 5 million MT of marine fuels per month. VLSFO was the most popular marine fuel with 54.3% of the fuels used, followed by 29.5% HSFO (a growth of 15.4% over 2022), 14.2% MGO, 1.2% ULSFO and 0.8% Biofuels. Regarding biofuels usage, the samples tested by VPS equated to an increase from 231,000 MT in 2022 to 558,000 MT in 2023.

VPS Bunker Alerts

Bunker Alerts highlight short term fuel quality issues identified by VPS, for a specific test parameter of a specific fuel grade/type in a specific port. The service provides valuable information to customers, to assist in avoiding potentially problematic fuel types in a highlighted port or region, to further protect the customer’s asset and crew.

In 2023 VPS issued 28 Bunker Alerts, eight fewer than in 2022. The 2023 Bunker Alerts included all major fuel grades, i.e. VLSFO, HSFO, MGO and ULSFO, ten different test parameters, 12 ports and 9 countries.

58% of the 2023 Bunker Alerts were for VLSFO fuels, followed by 24% for MGO fuels and 14% for HSFO. The most common problematic parameter was Flash Point, accounting for 28% of the Bunker Alerts, followed by Sodium at 24%, with Sulphur and TSP at 10% each.

Singapore (32%) and ARA (21%) were the regions/ports most frequently requiring a Bunker Alert to be issued. But as these are the two busiest bunkering regions, it is not too surprising.

VLSFO Fuel Quality

As the most used marine fuel type, VLSFO accounts for more than half of the fuels tested by VPS. In terms of quality, Europe provided the highest level of off-specification VLSFOs in both 2023 (7.8%) and 2022 (7.9%). Africa provided the next highest level of off-specification fuels with 6.7% in 2023 and 7.0% in 2022, with North America third with 4.4% of fuels tested exhibiting at least one off-specification parameter in 2023 and 4.3% in 2022.

Sulphur is the most common off-specification parameter of VLSFOs, accounting for 26.6% of VLSFO off-specs in 2023 and 31.5% in 2022. 0.7% of VLSFOs tested in 2023 had a sulphur level of 0.50%-0.53%, with 0.5% of samples tested having a sulphur level greater than 0.53%.

Pour Point was also a common off-specification parameter for VLSFOs with 13.6% of VLSFOs off-specs relating to this parameter in 2023 an increase over the 11.4% level witnessed in 2022. 

The importance of the additional cold-flow test of Wax Appearance Temperature (WAT) and Wax Disappearance Temperature (WDT), was highlighted in 2023 with 63% of VLSFOs exhibiting WAT of 31-40ºC and 14% having WAT between 41-50ºC. 55.7% of VLSFO samples had a WDT of 41-50ºC, with 28.1% having a WDT of >50ºC. VLSFOs cold-flow properties are a definite concern with wax precipitating from the fuel at temperatures way in excess of 10ºC above the pour point, potentially causing numerous operational problems such as filter and pipework blockages.

Sulphur is the most common off-specification parameter of VLSFOs, accounting for 26.6% of VLSFO off-specs in 2023 and 31.5% in 2022. 0.7% of VLSFOs tested in 2023 had a sulphur level of 0.50%-0.53%, with 0.5% of samples tested having a sulphur level greater than 0.53%.

Pour Point was also a common off-specification parameter for VLSFOs with 13.6% of VLSFOs off-specs relating to this parameter in 2023 an increase over the 11.4% level witnessed in 2022. 

The importance of the additional cold-flow test of Wax Appearance Temperature (WAT) and Wax Disappearance Temperature (WDT), was highlighted in 2023 with 63% of VLSFOs exhibiting WAT of 31-40ºC and 14% having WAT between 41-50ºC. 55.7% of VLSFO samples had a WDT of 41-50ºC, with 28.1% having a WDT of >50ºC. VLSFOs cold-flow properties are a definite concern with wax precipitating from the fuel at temperatures way in excess of 10ºC above the pour point, potentially causing numerous operational problems such as filter and pipework blockages.

2023 also saw a significant increase in cat-fine levels in VLSFOs, with 12.7% of all off-specifications relating to this parameter, compared to 8.5% in 2022. 16.2% of all VLSFOs showed a cat-fine level greater than 40ppm. Frequent checking of purifier efficiency via VPS’ Fuel System Checks (FSC) service is a highly recommended proactive safeguard in respect to increased cat-fines within VLSFOs.

VLSFO viscosities vary enormously depending upon to blend components used. In 2023 VLSFO viscosities ranged from <20Cst to >380Cst. 16% of all VLSFO off-specifications were due to viscosity. Only 0.5% of VLSFOs had a viscosity of >380Cst. 68% of all VLSFO viscosities were less than 180Cst. Viscosity is such a key operational parameter, determining the transfer and injection temperatures of fuel onboard ships and therefore determining the exact viscosity of VLSFOs is crucial to ensure optimal efficiency.

Biofuels

As global shipping looks towards low-to-zero carbon fuels to answer many emissions reduction challenges, biofuels offer an immediate “drop-in” solution. As such VPS tested the equivalent of over 500,000 MT of biofuels in 2023 compared to ca. 230,000 MT in 2022.

Europe, (mainly ARA-region) provided the highest volume of biofuels at almost 400K MT (ca. 74%) and Singapore second (ca. 21%), providing just over 100K MT.

The most common biofuel blend was B30 (10-30% bio), which accounted for 34.3% of biofuel samples tested by VPS. Yet, B100 (>90% bio) was not far behind with 30.1%.

The majority of biofuels contained Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) as the bio-component, although VPS did test others containing HVO, HEFA, Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) and Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO).

Where FAME is the bio-component within marine biofuels, the key considerations are:

• Energy Content, Renewable Content
• Fuel Stability, Cold-Flow Properties
• Corrosivity, Microbial Growth

Of the biofuels tested by VPS in 2023, 9% of those tested for oxidation stability gave the concerning result of <5 hours, highlighting a high degree of instability, whilst 6.7% gave a result of 5-8 hours which is still a cause for concern.

In terms of corrosivity, 11.9% of those biofuels tested provided an amber/caution result, whilst 8.5% of those tested provide a red warning, indicating potential high levels of corrosivity.

It is fully expected that the growth in biofuels usage for marine applications will continue to increase across 2024 and the VPS Additional Protection Service (APS) when using biofuels, will only increase in importance as the industry looks for more information regarding the fuel management of biofuels.

Summary

2023 once again highlighted the importance of bunker fuel quality testing, as a proactive means to protect vessels, their crew and the environment. With additional tests, currently not included within ISO8217, providing further  vital information in achieving heightened levels of protection.

Whilst we can expect a new revision of ISO8217 in early 2024, additional tests will still hold an important role in fuel management.

Biofuels usage will continue to increase in demand and importance, as ship owners and operators look to achieve improvements through CII and EEXI, as well as looking to counter the financial impact of the EU ETS scheme.

Methanol demand and usage will also grow, following the recent success of Maersk’s Laura Maersk and the rapidly growing order book for methanol-powered vessels.

So 2024, suggests another year of widening marine fuel types and grades coming to market, coupled with their growing fuel management considerations.

Note: The full article titled ‘2023 Marine Bunker Fuels Review’ with related graphs and charts can be found here. 

Related: World’s first methanol-fuelled boxship christened and named “Laura Maersk”

 

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 30 January, 2024