Connect with us

Mass Flowmeter

Feature: Other ports play catch-up while Singapore takes lead in MFM bunkering

The development further questions if trust and reliability prevails regardless of different MFM systems used when bunkering at other ports.

Admin

Published

on

MFM Bunkering ManifoldTimes

Singapore’s mass flowmeter (MFM) bunkering project, initiated by the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) and national standards body SPRING Singapore in 2009, which also resulted in the development of the Technical Reference for bunker mass flow metering (TR48:2015), has reached commercial maturity at the republic.

It has started a slew of international ports, bunkering firms and shipping companies independently studying the feasibility of using MFM systems for bunkering – in some cases – implementing their own versions of how MFM bunkering should work.

Though in the right direction, the move could introduce trust and reliability concerns due to inexperienced parties new to MFM bunkering operations entering the market.

“The use of MFM for bunkering is gaining traction at various international ports looking to emulate what Singapore has done and shipowners are putting much more trust in using the technology,” says Darrick Pang, Managing Director of Metcore International Pte. Ltd., in an interview with Manifold Times.

Pang is a member of the Technical Committee and Working Group* that developed TR 48:2015 and led its Task Group on System Integrity. 

He is also the Chairman for the National Mirror Committee** of both OIML R117 (Dynamic measuring systems for liquids other than water) and ISO 21562 (Ships and marine technology – Bunker fuel mass flow meters on receiving vessel – Requirements).

“The success of MFM bunkering is not only the meter itself but a whole framework that incorporates elements such as system set up, zero verification, periodic checks and class certification maintained to TR48 standards,” explains Pang.

“This includes having a robust system which consists of MFM compliance, monitoring and control, the creation of a formalised MFM dispute handling process, and structured training to ensure all parties understand and know how to work within the MFM framework.”

The increasing use of MFMs for bunkering at other ports had Pang questioning the trust and reliability of these non-TR 48:2015 compliant systems – especially when the human element applies.

“MFM systems can be breached by dishonest operators of MFM-equipped bunker tankers,” he shared.

“Security of the MFM system is the hardest challenge. Generally, MFMs can be easily setup and used in other industries but for the ‘creative’ bunkering industry there is still some way to go in maintaining system integrity.

“Singapore has a port regulator which proactively takes steps to enforce fair bunkering practises; what about the other countries?

“For our overseas clients, we work closely with Lloyd’s Register to ensure overall system integrity complies with TR 48:2015.”

Moving on, Pang highlights TR 48:2015 to be only applicable to MFM systems being installed on a bunker tanker.

“MFMs are not plug and play where you can simply install a MFM unit on a shipowner’s receiving vessel and say that the results are as accurate as TR 48:2015 approved bunker tankers, even if it is the same model used in Singapore.”

“Shipowners keen on installing MFM on their vessels for use as a check meter during bunkering operations should instead explore implementing guidelines from ISO (International Organization for Standardization) which oversees the installation of MFMs on receiving ships.

“This ISO standard is still under development and will take a while before it can be used on receiving vessels, due to the challenges which needs to be ironed out.

“However, it should be noted that final and binding figures [unless contractually agreed otherwise] still remains on the bunker tanker.”

Simon Neo, Regional Manager (Asia) at International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA), agrees that it is more challenging to achieve reliable measurements using MFMs installed onboard receiving ships to measure bunkered fuel.

Neo is the Project Leader for ISO 13739 (Petroleum products — Procedures for transfer of bunkers to vessels) and sits in the Technical Committee for Bunkering, MFM Working Committee and Technical Committee for LNG Bunkering.

“The biggest issue with MFM installations on the ship side is the challenge of having enough space for a proper setup to meet recommended flow requirements,” says Neo.

“The MFM is a piece of equipment that offers precise measurement of bunker fuel under the right conditions, but in the interest of good measurement practice during bunkering the MFM is always recommended to be on the bunker tanker side.”

“Basically in all bunker operations be it in Singapore or anywhere in world, unless there is a contractual agreement between the bunker seller and buyer that says something else, final and binding figures for delivered volumes will be from the bunker tanker,” explains Neo.

“Likewise in bunker deliveries via MFM in Singapore, the bunker tanker’s MFM record of delivered quantity (under the TR 48:2015) will be final and binding, even if a receiving vessel may have their own MFM onboard.

“Under TR 48, the meter will need to go through various stages of test and certifications including checks on system integrity and security and approval before they can be certified for use onboard the bunker tanker.

“MFM is not a piece of plug and play equipment as mentioned by Mr. Pang. That is why the whole system needs to be properly secured on the bunker tanker to ensure correct quantity recorded. So, it is not just a matter of installing a MFM on any ship and saying: ‘It’s the same as TR48.’

“MFM is a technology which is accurate but without a complete ecosystem that comprises of system security and integrity, the human factor can come into play.

“That is why a complete system, which encompasses the whole MFM system being installed on the bunker tanker, is crucial.”

Installing the MFM itself on a vessel, whether on a bunker tanker or receiving vessel, does not automatically make it TR 48:2015 compliant.

TR 48:2015 needs to be supported by an entire infrastructure framework ranging from meter selection, system tests, regulatory approval, down to the resolution of disputes and bunker claims procedures; but more importantly it should be supported by strict governance of the port regulator to provide shipowners with peace of mind when receiving bunkers at port. 

References
* Technical Committee for Bunkering 
Scope of the Technical Committee for Bunkering:

  • Review and development of bunkering standards
  • Monitoring of ISO/TC 28 Petroleum products and lubricants
  • Active participation in ISO/TC 28/SC 2 Measurement of petroleum and related products and ISO/TC 28/SC 4 WG 6 Classification and specifications for marine fuels

Working Groups under Technical Committee for Bunkering:

  • Working Group for Mass Flow Metering – Aims to develop a technical reference that specifies the coriolis mass flow meter equipment, the step-by-step procedures and the documentation of the flow meter based bunker delivery process
  • Working Group for SS 524 Quality Management for Bunker Supply Chain
  • Working Group for SS 600 Code of Practice for Bunkering

** National Mirror Committee (NMC) is a committee established to mirror the structure of an international policy/technical committee, with the role of determining national standards.

*** The National Technical Committee (TC) for LNG Bunkering is formed under SPRING Singapore's National Standardisation Programme. The TC for LNG Bunkering, which comprises industry stakeholders and technical experts on LNG bunkering, is the developer of Singapore Technical Reference (TR) 56 for Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Bunkering that includes LNG specifications as a marine fuel, LNG bunkering procedures and safety requirements, and crew competency requirements for LNG bunkering.

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 26 February, 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

Biofuel

Report: GCMD outlines practical approach to quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains

GCMD releases a new report, highlighting a practical approach to help shipowners verify that they receive both the total quantity of fuel and the renewable content contracted.

Admin

Published

on

By

Report: GCMD outlines practical approach to quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains

The Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) on Thursday (27 August) released its report, Quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains, outlining a practical approach to help shipowners verify that they receive both the total quantity of fuel and the renewable content contracted. 

The approach draws on evidence from GCMD’s end-to-end marine biofuel supply chain trials conducted under commercial operating conditions.

Biofuels are purchased not only for their energy content, but also for the renewable content and emissions reductions they represent. The renewable fraction determines the green premium and underpins GHG accounting and regulatory compliance, yet blend ratios, such as B24 or B30, are typically supplier-declared rather than independently verified. Closing this verification gap will strengthen confidence in marine biofuel transactions.

Ensuring reliable measurement of total quantity transferred

Mass flow meters (MFMs) have become the preferred method for custody transfer, as they provide a transparent and auditable basis for determining the quantity of fuel transferred.

However, adding fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) to conventional marine fuels, such as Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) or High Sulphur Fuel Oil (HSFO), can reduce the final blend’s viscosity, potentially pushing it outside the validated operating range of the MFM installed on the bunker barge. To maintain measurement integrity, the viscosity of the final blend should therefore be assessed under the actual transfer conditions against the applicable MFM operating range. This can be managed through appropriate transfer-temperature control or by using MFMs that have been validated for broader ranges.

Verifying the renewable fraction in biofuel blends

Verifying the renewable fraction requires appropriate analytical methods. FAME-based blends can be verified through compositional analysis, while hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)-based blends require radiocarbon analysis because renewable and fossil hydrocarbons cannot be distinguished through compositional testing. 

Interpreting analytical measurements, however, is not straightforward. Neat FAME may contain up to 3.5% non-ester material, so the measurable FAME content of a finished BXX blend may not exactly match its declared blend ratio.

Laboratory methods also have finite measurement precision. A difference between a measured result and a declared blend ratio therefore does not necessarily indicate incorrect blending or under-delivery.

Together, the three pillars of GCMD’s quality, quantity, and GHG emissions abatement assurance framework address whether the fuel is fit for use, delivers the claimed emissions reductions, and contains the contracted fuel quantity and renewable content. 

Professor Lynn Loo, CEO of GCMD, said: “Buyers need confidence that they have received both the fuel and the renewable content they paid for. This report provides a practical, evidence-backed basis for verifying renewable fuel claims, protecting commercial value and supporting credible GHG accounting as marine biofuel use scales.” 

Note: GCMD’s report can be found here

 

Photo credit: Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation
Published: 27 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Interview

Exclusive: Caroline Yang takes helm on future of IBIA Asia

The newly appointed Chair of IBIA’s Regional Board – Asia, shares her plans to strengthen bunkering standards while promoting transparency and industry collaboration across key Asian maritime hubs.

Admin

Published

on

By

Exclusive: Caroline Yang takes helm on future of IBIA Asia

Caroline Yang, CEO of Hong Lam Marine Pte Ltd, outlines her plans for IBIA Asia in her first interview with Manifold Times since becoming Chair of the Regional Board – Asia:

MT: Why is IBIA important to the bunkering market in Asia?

IBIA Asia is amongst five regional boards operating under the umbrella of London-based IBIA Global. Its presence in Asia is vital because the region, excluding the Middle East, accounts for more than 50% of global bunkering volume.

While Singapore continues to maintain its strong lead as the world’s busiest bunkering port with almost 56 million mt of marine fuel delivered in 2025, several ports in China are showing to be strong bunkering ports as well; these developments take place on the back of a forecast for China to be amongst the leading suppliers of green fuels such as methanol.

Based on this alone, IBIA Asia has to play an important role in raising and addressing issues of suppliers and shipowners and the other parties in the regional bunkering eco-system.

MT: What is the overall state of bunkering standards at major Asian ports and how can IBIA elevate this?

Singapore is the clear leader in standards, acting as a “flag bearer” with established protocols including SS 600 for bunkering, SS 648 for bunker mass flow metering, SS 524 for quality management of bunker supply chain, TR 56 for LNG bunkering, and TR 80 for meter verification using master MFM.

While other Asian ports are adopting mass flow meters – a positive step – IBIA Asia’s role is to disseminate these best practices while maintaining deep respect for local operational realities and regulatory environments.

MT: As Chair of the Regional Board – Asia, what are your plans to make this happen? Are there any topics you will be focusing on?

The IBIA Asia regional board of 10 members from comes from a diverse group of suppliers, shipowners, bunker buyers, fuels testers and bunker tanker owners. Backed by a strong secretariat, we are committed to move the needle for bunkering in Asia.

Our initial strategy is outreach-driven, progressing beyond a Singapore-centric approach. For starters, the board will be concentrating on Hong Kong, Zhoushan, and Shanghai, with potential expansion to Japan and South Korea.

The core objective is to promote the quality, transparency, and integrity of bunkers lifted in Asia. This includes building on existing MOUs such as the collaboration with Hong Kong Shipowners Association (HKSOA) to explore alternative bunker fuels, and participation in regional maritime week programmes.

MT: Do you expect to encounter any challenges? What do you think are the solutions?

Challenges, without a doubt; these include macro-level standards and topical quality issues, such as those highlighted in a recent FOBAS report.

We are aware most solutions will not have instant results, but produce short-term, mid-term and long-term responses.

The solution lies in structured communication and feedback loops involving industry, regulators, and experts. Success requires an altruistic approach where stakeholders prioritise the health of the bunkering ecosystem to achieve win-win outcomes, even at the compromise of individual sectors.

MT: Is participation of local/regional IBIA members included within your plan? How will they be involved?

Member participation is the foundation of an association’s strength. The plan involves active outreach – meeting members where they operate and integrating them into meetings to ensure the board’s positions reflect representative industry views. We must push out credible, strong messages to encourage active engagement. If there is anyone in the maritime bunkering in these areas and reading this interview, reach out to us so we can start our conversations!

The Secretariat and some board members have scheduled to visit and attend bunkering events in Hong Kong and China. In November 2026, IBIA will participate in the Hong Kong Maritime Week by organising a one-day conference. We hope to be also participating in the Shanghai Pudong Maritime Conference and the 9th International Petroleum and Natural Gas Enterprises Conference (IPEC 2026), also known as the “Zhoushan Bunker Oil conference”, in late October.

MT: How will previous experience gained at SSA, ICS, MPA, SMF, and Hong Lam Marine contribute to your role at IBIA?

As CEO of Hong Lam Marine, our bunker tankers supply about 10% of bunkering volume in Singapore, so we are an involved and relevant stakeholder. My experiences in the above-mentioned organisations have taught me how to crystallise and articulate important issues, engage effectively with diverse stakeholders, and leverage on pre-existing professional connections to engage more effectively for IBIA Asia.

Related: IBIA announces Caroline Yang as new Regional Board Chair for Asia
Related: IBIA and Hong Kong Shipowners Association to collaborate on alternative bunker fuels
Related: FOBAS report warns of growing operational risks from ISO-compliant bunker fuels

 

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 6 August 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending