Connect with us

Technology

Clean Marine: Exhaust gas cleaning systems in a perspective

All roads lead to Rome, but recent findings clearly indicate HFO with a certified scrubber is greenest route to take.

Admin

Published

on

5d80621556910 1568694805

The following article which describes the merits of using HSFO with scrubbers to meet IMO 2020 compliance has been written by Clean Marine CEO Nils Høy-Petersen; it has been shared with Manifold Times:

The objective of Marpol Annex VI, the SOx and NOx regulations, that comes fully into force January 2020, is to reduce the emission of particles. All roads lead to Rome, but recent findings clearly indicate that HFO with a certified scrubber is the greenest route to take.

When the regulations were debated in 2006-2010, it was said that particles caused 50.000 premature deaths per annum only in Europe and shipping had become a major contributor compared to land-based activities that had succeeded in reducing particulate emission. As for the land-based industry, it was found that the most efficient measure would be to remove the SOx and NOx gases forming a large portion of the particles when released to the atmosphere.

Shipping has for several decades been propelled by High Sulfur Fuel Oil (HSFO) – the last liquid cut in the refinery process. The large bore low-speed propulsion engines onboard ships are ideal machinery for burning HSFO and as such shipping is a very complementary user of low-end products from the oil refinery industry.

The high sulfur content in HSFO stems from the refining process. As lighter fractions are taken out the concentration of sulfur increases and end up in the HSFO. When IMO decided to reduce the sulfur emission they recognized it would be challenging and decided to open up for “all roads to Rome” – desulfurization of HSFO making LSFO (Low Sulfur Fuel Oil), reformation of HSFO to lighter distillates, other fuel type (LNG, LPG, Methanol etc) and EGCS (Exhaust Gas Cleaning System) or so-called scrubbers. For the existing fleet LSFO, MDO/MGO (Marine Diesel Oil/Marine Gas Oil) and EGCS are the most relevant alternatives.

The three alternatives have pros et cons when compared:

AIR EMISSIONS

LSFO: Ash and soot particles as of today when burning HSFO without EGCS

MDO/MGO: Less particle mass, but a larger number of nanocarbon particles. Recent research has identified increased human tissue toxicity from distillate emissions when compared to HSFO emissions.

EGCS: Ash and Soot particles are partly emitted to air and partly captured by the EGCS

WATER AND LAND EMISSION:

LSFO: The air born particles will eventually end in the sea or on land

MDO/MGO: The air born particles will be widely spread and eventually end up in the sea or on land

EGCS: The air born particles will eventually end in the sea or on land. The particles captured by the EGCS will end up in the sea close to the ship. Sulfur dioxide captured from the exhaust ends up as harmless sulfate in the sea. pH in discharge water drops to about 3 at the outlet but is subsequently raised to 6,5 at 4m from the ship side.

ADDITIONAL CO2 FOOTPRINT:

LSFO: Large scale desulfurization of HSFO is energy and resource-demanding irrespective if being a hydro process (consuming hydrogen) or other catalysts/oxidation/mechanical excitation processes. The higher CO2 footprint and consume of precious hydrogen (hydro process), make this alternative less favorable energy-wise, than the ready to use HSFO.

MDO/MGO: Reformation of HSFO to distillate is an energy-intensive process and approximately 350 kg of CO2 is generated when converting a ton of HSFO to distillate. Forced processing of more crude to produce more distillate may yield 1-2% extra CO2

EGCS: The extra CO2 footprint is in the region 3% of treated fuel. Caused by the power to run EGCS and the SO2/CO2 swap in Sea Water.

A recent study by Chief Scientist Dr. Elizabeth Lindstad, published by Norway’s SINTEF, concludes that HFO with a scrubber is the most environmentally beneficial means of meeting GHG emissions targets even when taking into account LNG as an alternative fuel. Her study concluded that “With new modern refineries set up to convert crude into higher-priced products, high sulfur fuel oil (HSFO) will, from 2020, be delivered from existing refineries where its share of energy consumption can be considered to be next to nothing. The explanation is that the heavy bunker oil coming out from the refinery is the bottom of the barrel. If we acknowledge the lower energy consumption in delivering HSFO and deduct the refining we get nine to 10g of CO2 equivalent per MJ for HFO, rather than 13 to 15 of CO2 equivalent per MJ for LSFO/MGO.” The industry body Clean Shipping Alliance 2020 Executive Director Ian Adams said the industry has long realized that there is an energy penalty differential in the production of fuels. “Using higher sulfur fuels with an exhaust gas cleaning system will have a beneficial impact on the global reduction of sulfur and nitrogen oxides emissions and also on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.”

RESOURCE UTILIZATION

LSFO: Costly process with high consumption of energy, Hydrogen, and Catalysts.

MDO/MGO: Shipping becomes a competitor to road transport and agriculture. If shipping will be 100% propelled by distillate about 10% of the world’s diesel pool will go to shipping. More crude will have to be produced and more HSFO needs to find other users.

EGCS: As per today, shipping is the complementary taker of the last liquid cut from the refinery process.

COST:

LSFO: Large investment in refinery processes. Medium to high fuel cost.

MDO/MGO: High fuel cost.

EGCS: High investment cost onboard. Low fuel cost.

OTHER:  

LSFO: Compatibility issues threatening the safe operation of the ship. Bunkers will have to be segregated to avoid compatibility issues. Fuels from unusual streams and even unsuitable streams will be used as cutter stocks.

MDO/MGO: Viscosity and compatibility issues if switching between the two fuel alternatives LSFO and MDO/MGO to meet both 0,5% and 0,1% limits (ECAs)

EGCS: Safe operation as of today. Sensitive areas can be shielded from emission to water through a temporarily closed-loop operation.

All these alternatives come with some “pain” while meeting the objective to reduce health damages caused by particulate matters. They are all needed to achieve a global regulation together with alternatives like LPG/LNG, Methanol, hybrid solutions which are more relevant for new buildings. Collectively the efforts and extra costs to comply with Annex VI, do spur the research and development of alternative energy carriers which paves the road also for CO2 emission reductions called for. As such, none of the alternatives should be discarded. And when EGCS is accused of “transferring an air pollution problem to the sea”, then this is true for all combustion processes emitting exhaust that eventually ends up in the ocean or on land.

The difference is the capture of SO2 and the subsequent emission of sulfate to sea. When IMO considered the EGCS as an equivalent measure, thorough studies were made regarding emissions to sea and particularly the discharge of sulfate. The ocean contains large amounts of sulfate which also is a prerequisite for all life. The additional sulfate if all vessels in the world should have EGCS was found to be insignificant and absolutely harmless. The lowering of the pH in discharge water following the capturing of sulfur dioxide (SO2) is mainly a local issue which is countered by the regulation to raise pH > 6,5 at 4-meter distance from the outlet. Any discharge of low pH water is unwanted in view of the ongoing acidification when the ocean takes up CO2. But the contribution by EGCS in this context is truly negligible. When comparing the pros et cons there is no reason to say that EGCS is more “painful” than other alternatives. It simply does its job, contributing to saving the thousands of premature deaths caused by particulate matters.

Photo credit: Clean Marine
Published: 17 September, 2019

 

Continue Reading

Mass Flowmeter

TFG Marine advances global MFM rollout with two US Gulf bunker barges

“Buffalo B414” and “Buffalo B304”, were recently fitted with the equipment, with both supply barges receiving ISO 22192 certification for their newly installed MFMs last month.

Admin

Published

on

By

TFG Marine advances global MFM rollout with two US Gulf bunker barges

Global marine fuel supply and procurement firm TFG Marine on Wednesday (2 September) said it continued to expand mass flow meter (MFM) technology across its US Gulf Coast bunker fleet.

The company said two more vessels, Buffalo B414 and Buffalo B304, were recently fitted with the equipment.

“Both supply barges received ISO 22192 certification for their newly installed MFMs last month, giving customers greater confidence in bunker quantity measurement while supporting a more accurate, transparent and efficient delivery process,” TFG Marine said in a social media post. 

“This marks the latest step in TFG Marine’s ongoing investment in technology and best practice across its global bunkering operations, and forms part of a broader push by our North America team to help drive progress across the region’s bunkering industry.”

Last year, TFG Marine announced it reached a key milestone in its global digitalisation programme with the installation of an ISO 22192-compliant MFM on the Buffalo 404, a barge on time charter from American bunker barge company Buffalo Marine Service Inc.

This was the first ISO-certified MFM-equipped bunkering barge operating in the US Gulf.

The installation was part of TFG Marine’s wider strategy to equip close to 90% of its global bunkering fleet with MFMs by 2026 as a commitment towards improving data integrity, streamlining operations and strengthening trust in marine fuel transactions.

Related: TFG Marine installs first ISO-certified mass flow meter on US Gulf bunkering barge

 

Photo credit: TFG Marine
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading

FuelEU

Ahti Climate and DNV connect verified emissions data to FuelEU pooling platform

New integration connects Ahti’s FuelEU pooling platform with DNV’s verification services, Veracity, helping customers reduce manual administration and streamline compliance.

Admin

Published

on

By

Ahti Climate brings DNV-verified emissions data into FuelEU pooling platform

Ahti Climate on Monday (31 August) announced a new integration with Veracity, DNV’s independent industry cloud platform, enabling shipowners and operators to seamlessly transfer DNV-verified emissions data into Ahti’s FuelEU pooling platform. 

The integration simplifies emissions reporting by connecting operational data verification with FuelEU compliance workflows, helping customers reduce manual administration, improve data quality and confidently meet regulatory requirements.

For customers such as shipping company Bore Ltd, the integration streamlines the flow of emissions data between verification and compliance systems. Raw fuel consumption data is automatically converted into the required OVD format and submitted for DNV verification through Veracity. Once verified, the emissions figures are securely shared with Ahti’s FuelEU pooling platform, creating a more efficient workflow with less manual administration and greater confidence in reported emissions data.

“Being on one of the surplus generators of the pool, trust in the data is everything for us – we need to know the numbers we’re selling hold up to scrutiny. With verified emissions data flowing straight from Veracity by DNV into the Ahti Pooling Platform, we no longer have to manually cross-check figures before every transaction. It gives us confidence that what we’re bringing to the pool is accurate, and that our partners can rely on it too,” said Marcus Strand ICT Manager at Bore Ltd. 

The integration enables customers to:

  • Reduce manual data entry and administrative workload
  • Improve data quality and reduce the risk of reporting errors
  • Securely exchange verified emissions data across systems and stakeholders
  • Increase transparency and confidence in compliance reporting
  • Connect commercial, operational and compliance workflows
  • Reduce turnaround times for reporting and voyage settlements

“Every partnership we build comes back to the same question: does this make compliance easier for shipowners? With Veracity by DNV, the answer is clearly yes – verified data, connected systems, and one less thing for our customers to worry about,” said Risto-Juhani Kariranta, CEO of Ahti Climate. 

With connectivity to the majority of the world fleet, Veracity’s trusted partner ecosystem, combined with Ahti’s expertise in FuelEU pooling, gives shipowners a more connected approach to emissions verification and compliance. By enabling verified data to flow securely between systems, the partnership helps customers reduce complexity and get greater value from their data and access a growing network of digital solutions.

 

Photo credit: Ahti Climate
Published: 1 September, 2026

Continue Reading

Decarbonisation

NAPA: Why operational efficiency remains shipping’s golden ticket

With regulation tightening and alternative fuels still evolving, Pekka Pakkanen says operational efficiency offers shipping an immediate, scalable way to cut fuel use, emissions and costs.

Admin

Published

on

By

NAPA: Why operational efficiency remains shipping’s golden ticket

Shipping’s decarbonisation ambitions are clear but turning that ambition into commercially viable emissions reductions at scale remains a challenge.

As regulatory requirements tighten and fuel markets remain volatile, Pekka Pakkanen, Executive Vice President, Shipping Solutions, NAPA, says operational efficiency is emerging as one of the most immediate and scalable levers available to shipowners, with digital tools increasingly helping to maximise the benefits of energy efficiency technologies: 

The shipping industry’s decarbonization drive does not lack ambition – that is visible in the pace of innovation and research we see around us. But translating that ambition into action at scale and in a commercially viable way remains a different challenge altogether. The International Maritime Organization’s MEPC 84, which concluded in April 2026, reminded us of both how far we have come and how much complexity still remains.

Discussions around the Net-Zero Framework continued, with delegates agreeing to seek further consensus on key adjustments later in October 2026, while progress was made across several other fronts. Separately, the adoption of amendments designating the North-East Atlantic as a new Emission Control Area for Sulphur Oxides (Sox), particulate matter and nitrogen oxides (Nox) is a significant achievement. At the same time, the second phase of the review of the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) and the Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) began, focusing mainly on enhancing the SEEMP.

Progress, though incremental, is still being made in an environment defined by mounting regulatory obligations, volatile fuel markets, and a clean technology landscape still maturing. All these factors create a backdrop of uncertainty. It’s a word used often to describe shipping’s operating environment and still stands the test of time.

Why energy efficiency technologies remain key

Despite knowing this, the argument I want to put forward is a simple one that can help cut through the uncertainty. The single most accessible, most immediate, commercially viable and scalable lever available to shipping today for managing decarbonization is operational efficiency. Not instead of alternative fuels or new vessel technologies, but as the foundation on which everything else must be built.

Fuel price volatility has made efficiency a financial necessity as much as an environmental one. The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and FuelEU Maritime are already in effect and tightening year on year. Add to this the second phase of the CII and SEEMP review, which MEPC 84 formally commenced, and all signs point to the need for operational performance data, optimization and reporting.

In today’s market, efficiency is both a sustainability metric and a margin protection strategy. Every tonne of fuel saved reduces exposure to volatile fuel prices, emissions costs, and operational uncertainty. The question for shipping executives is, therefore, is how to maximize the impact of efficiency.

The answer increasingly lies in the intelligent combination of digital tools and energy efficiency technologies. One development that has captured significant industry attention is the growing integration of wind-assisted propulsion systems (WAPS) with voyage optimization software. Harnessing the power of the wind is not just about installing sails, wings, or kites – it is also about navigating the inherent challenges that come with wind propulsion, from complex and fast-evolving weather patterns to training crew. Operating wind-assisted propulsion vessels requires both careful pre-planning and adjustments throughout a ship’s journey. Fast-evolving wind speed and direction, as well as waves and currents, must be assessed and constantly re-assessed throughout the voyage to determine the best possible route. Wind-assisted vessels need to catch winds at the right speeds and angles to make the most of their wings, rotors, or sails, which demands continuous route and speed modelling throughout the voyage not just before it. Relying on traditional means and manual methods alone risks leaving a lot of savings on the table. Instead, understanding changes in wind patterns and using this to the vessel’s advantage requires advanced digital tools.

Classification societies have also been responding to the increase in WAPS on the market and have included specific stability rule checks, which digital tools can help comply with. WAPS typically add weight to a vessel’s upper structure, shifting its center of gravity and creating additional stability considerations to be managed. Digital tools, within NAPA Design, can be used to calculate vessel stability characteristics and help users check their design’s performance against multiple classification society rules as well. These are all essential considerations to ensure the solution continues performing optimally.

Whether the technology is wind-assisted propulsion or air lubrication technology, digital technologies can help maximize the savings they deliver. Users can measure performance, adapt operations continuously and make decisions based on reliable data, which can then inform future investments in energy efficiency technologies.

MEPC 84 makes progress on the foundations underpinning global decarbonization 

The expansion of ECAs at MEPC 84 – including the newly designated North-East Atlantic zone – adds another layer of complexity. Research has consistently shown that ECA avoidance through route deviation is rarely the optimal commercial or environmental response; the fuel costs and schedule implications of detours frequently outweigh the cost of sailing through the zone with compliant fuel. Voyage optimization tools model these trade-offs in real time to help make better decisions than human assumptions alone.

MEPC 84 also progressed a review of the SEEMP framework, which remains central to how vessels document and demonstrate their carbon intensity management. The direction of travel is towards increased expectations around the quality, granularity, and integration of performance data. As regulatory frameworks increasingly rely on verifiable performance data, the quality of operational data becomes just as important as the technologies being measured. Poor data quality can undermine both compliance confidence and optimization efforts. Shipowners who have already invested in the digital infrastructure to capture and act on operational data will find themselves significantly better positioned, both for compliance and for commercial advantage.

The case for integrated data systems – platforms that bring together performance analytics, voyage planning, regulatory compliance, and reporting in a coherent interface – is a response to genuine operational needs. When data from signals, noon reports, and logbook entries can be brought together on one platform to produce clear, actionable insights, crews spend less time managing information and more time using it. The same shared source of operational truth also supports better ship to shore collaboration to support real-time route and speed optimization, continuous hull performance monitoring, and integrated compliance management.

None of this diminishes the importance of the longer-term energy transition. Alternative fuels, new energy efficiency technologies, and next-generation vessel design all have a critical role to play in reaching net zero by 2050. But those transitions take time, capital, and regulatory frameworks that are still being finalized. In the interim, and complementing those transitions, operational efficiency represents a proven, scalable, and commercially viable path to meaningful emissions reduction. The industry does not need to wait for its decarbonization ‘golden ticket’ to arrive from future technology. It already holds one. The challenge now is not identifying opportunities for efficiency but capturing them consistently across fleets and voyages.

 

Photo credit: NAPA
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending