Lloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) on Friday (17 January) released a bulletin highlighting several VLSFO fuel samples from UK ports, Belfast and Fishguard were found to have Total Sediment Potential (TSP) exceeding the ISO8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m:

In recent days, FOBAS has tested several samples from UK ports, Belfast and Fishguard with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m. The samples were all VSLFO fuels and TSP results ranged from 0.22% m/m to 0.29% m/m. Extended analysis indicated these results were due mainly to extraneous dirt.

Fuels with high sediments can result in excessive sludge deposition in tanks and throughout the handling and treatment/fuel injection systems. Furthermore, in certain cases the attempted use of such fuels may result in highly compromised combustion leading to engine and turbocharger damage.

In addition to the above, fuels containing a high amount of extraneous dirt can result in heavy loading on

purifiers which can lower the purifier plant efficiency with respect to removing harmful contaminants such as aluminium, silicon, and / or water. Purifiers should be monitored and operational adjustments made as necessary.

In view of the above, if your ships are planning to bunker in these ports, we recommend that suppliers are advised of your concerns regarding the stability of the fuel in the area, and that they provide you with additional reassurance that they will adhere to the ISO 8217 requirements for the grade ordered.

Additional 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 witness forms accordingly, and that the supporting documentation includes records of all the samples considered representative of the fuel as loaded.

Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 20 January, 2025

Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore on Monday (25 November) said to date, it has not received reports of vessels experiencing operational problems related to fuel bunkered in Singapore.

This comes following bunker fuel testing and marine surveying business Maritec Pte Ltd (CTI-Maritec) issuing a bunker flash stating testing of Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) samples from ships in the Singapore and Rotterdam area which reported operational problems, indicated it was blended with Cashew Nutshell Liquid (CNSL). 

“All bunker fuels supplied in the Port of Singapore must meet the ISO 8217 standards,” MPA said. 

“The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), in consultation with relevant industry experts, has also developed a provisional national standard on specifications of marine biofuel (WA 2:2022) to supplement the international standards.”

MPA added an enhanced set of testing parameters was implemented on 1 June 2024, in addition to the existing quality assurance measures, to test the quality of fuels upstream before they are supplied as bunker fuel in Singapore.

CTI-Maritec said in the recent-past few months several ships in the Singapore and Rotterdam area reported operational problems including fuel sludging, injector failure, filter clogging, system deposits and corrosion of turbocharger nozzle rings.

In light of the reported problems, CTI-Maritec swiftly carried out extended Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) testing for Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) samples from these said vessels.

GC-MS testing by Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) method showed the presence of high concentrations (>10000 PPM) of cardol, cardanol, anacardic acid and other alkyl resorcinols. All mentioned compounds, which are substituted long chain phenols, indicated the fuel was blended with Cashew Nutshell Liquid (CNSL) from undeclared source materials or production processes.

CTI-Maritec recommended that shipowners should not use 100% CNSL as a marine fuel or use CNSL as a blending component in marine fuel, which is contrary to the guidance by IMO on best practices for suppliers on the quality of fuel oil delivered to ships.

Related: CTI-Maritec warns of CNSL biofuel bunker blends found at Singapore, Rotterdam
Related: Singapore: MPA tightens testing parameters to reduce contaminated bunker fuels

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 25 November, 2024 

Steve Bee, Group Commercial Director of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Tuesday (1 October)  wrote about mitigating fuel quality risks and safeguarding vessel operations against poor-quality bunker fuels:

As the global marine fuel mix grows, becoming more varied and consequently more complex in terms of fuel management, there is a potential increasing risk to vessels, crew and the environment, from the possible impact of poor-quality fuels.

Yet, whilst shipping looks to decarbonise, with a view to introducing low-to-zero carbon fuels, such as biofuels and methanol, these fuels currently account for approximately 1% of the fuel mix. The more traditional fossil fuels are continuing to satisfy the day-to-day demand in terms of fuels supplied to vessels at this time, with almost 230 million MT of marine fuels being bunkered last year.

The VPS database shows for all fossil fuels tested the following current Off-specifications have been identified:

VPS Bunker Alerts, are also a good indication of current fuel quality and so far to date, VPS have issued 21 Bunker Alerts this year. These alerts have highlighted witnessed quality issues with the three main fuel types of HSFO (6 alerts), VLSFO (9 alerts) and MGO (6 alerts). The 2024 alerts show significant off-specifications for 8 different test parameters, from 11 different locations, across Europe, Middle-East, Asia and the Americas. This proves fuel quality issues can arise anywhere at any time, for any fuel type or test parameter.

June 2024, saw the 7th revision of the marine fuel standard ISO8217, released to the industry. ISO8217:2024 is seen as a major step forward in terms of setting specifications for marine fuel quality. This latest revision has moved from two fuel specification tables, to four. It now includes, for the first time, specifications for VLSFO and ULSFO fuels containing 0.50% or 0.10% sulphur respectively, plus biofuels containing FAME, HVO, GTL, BTL, bio-components.

Acknowledging that ISO8217:2024, is an improvement on previous revisions of the standard, it still does not cover enough of the further potentially problematic issues of chemical contamination, cold-flow properties, microbial-growth, plus wider bio-components such as Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL), to name but a few areas of concern.

In addition, the industry has a very poor track record of purchasing fuel against the very latest revision of the ISO8217 standard. To date, VPS as the world’s largest marine fuel quality testing company, still see 12.6% of samples received for quality testing, being purchased against the 2005 revision of the standard. So, vessels are purchasing fuel against a standard which is actually only 3 months off being 20 years old? That revision has since been replaced by four further revisions of the standard over the years and it bears very little relevance to today’s fuels. Therefore, these vessels are really operating at a significantly increased level of risk, if they are relying on ISO8217:2005 to fully protect them.

The most common revision against which marine fuel is purchased today, is still ISO8217:2010. 48% of all fuel samples received by VPS, are being tested against this revision. Again, ISO8217:2010 is almost 15 years old, so why is almost half of the fuel being purchased to it? There is no consideration of VLSFO, or ULSFO fuels, with FAME also being classed as a contaminant.

The 2017 revision, still only accounts for 20% of the fuel samples VPS receive for testing, even though its nearly eight years old. However, it does consider the presence of FAME within certain distillate grades, but still offers no specification for the lower sulphur grades of residual-based fuels, where VLSFOs are the most widely purchased fuel type.

All this means is the global fleet is buying fuel and testing its quality against a standard which is between 8-20 years old?

To date, VPS have not received a fuel sample, fossil fuel, or biofuel, purchased to the 2024 revision. Based on past history it maybe sometime before such a sample is received? Even then ISO8217:2024, whilst a major improvement to previous revisions, is not an all-encompassing standard.

As far back as 2018, The Swedish Club released their independent report, “Main Engine Damage”. This report highlighted how to avoid engine damage, including information showing the average cost of a single fuel management incident onboard a vessel was $344,069. It also stated the average cost of a single lubrication failure was $763,320.

The Swedish Club’s advice and recommendations were:

Back in 2019, in the lead up to IMO2020 and the reduction in the global sulphur cap to 0.50%, VPS foresaw potential quality issues with the new incoming VLSFO fuels. These fuels would be of higher paraffinic content, leading to poorer cold-flow behaviour, potential wax precipitation and major stability issues. VPS recognised that the ISO8217 standard did not provide sufficient protection to a vessel, when using VLSFO, or even HSFO and MGO fuels.

Therefore, the VPS Additional Protection (APS) service was launched prior to 2020. This service offers the full ISO8217 test scope, plus a number of additional tests, in one package offering, at a significantly reduced price, in order to ensure a greater level of protection to vessels and enhanced peace-of-mind to the, now more informed operator, using this service.

The APS Package is customised by fuel type, to cover, HSFO, VLSFO, or Distillates. The additional tests included, will provide much more information and greater understanding of the fuel in relation to stability, chemical contamination, cold-flow properties, lubricity and microbial-activity. The package can also be further customised to individual customer requirements. Many VPS customers have used and continue to use APS, to mitigate the potential risks from poor quality fuel and benefit from the added-value and cost savings, the service delivers.

In 2022, the incoming range of marine biofuels, warranted VPS to research a number of different additional tests to assist in identifying biofuel management issues and understanding their behaviour and operational risks.  As a consequence, VPS launched the APS-BIO packages. Once again, these include the ISO8217 as a base test slate, but also include additional tests to measure energy content, stability, renewable content, microbial-activity, corrosivity and cold-flow properties. The APS-BIO suite of test slates cover different bio-components such as FAME, HVO, CNSL, plus the fossil fuels used in a bio-blend, eg HSFO, VLSFO, MGO.

Once again VPS customers, are seeing real benefits and added-value, as they look to use biofuels as their decarbonisation option, knowing that in VPS they have an experienced, expert fuel management partner.

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 2 October, 2024