Off-specification bunkers at Singapore port were affected by excess aluminium and silicon content, also known as cat fines, between 15th and 30th April 2018, according to Lloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) data.
In total, the report identified 83 instances where a result was outside the 95% confidence limit of either ISO 8217:2017 test parameter.
At Singapore port, there were 21 cases of off-spec bunkers; seven of these recorded excessive cat fines.
A local source with knowledge of the matter notes recent off-spec cases have caught the eye of the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA).
“Quality issues for the past weeks in Singapore are widely reported and is pretty serious,” he told Manifold Times.
“I do believe MPA is looking into this. But understand from the industry this could be a thing in the past as we heard that new on spec stocks are or have arrived Singapore.
“The past two to four weeks there was lots of debunker carried out in Singapore or overseas due to these off specs.”
An industry veteran, meanwhile, points out the majority of Singapore bunker contracts are currently based on ISO 8217:2005 standards.
“The ISO 8217:2005 standard specifies a limit of 80 mg/kg for cat fines and Singapore bunker suppliers mostly guaranteed specs based on 2005,” he states.
“Taking this into consideration, the cat fine off-spec cases highlighted by FOBAS are all within spec under ISO 8217:2005 standards.”
The top three off-spec bunker ports for the period between 15th and 30th April 2018 are as follows:
| Port | Characteristic | ISO 8217 Limit or Advised Value | Final result | Unit |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 75 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 79 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 74 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 79 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 79 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 74 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Aluminium + Silicon | 60* | 76 | mg/kg |
| Singapore | Density at 15oC | 0.9902** | 0.9937 | kg/l |
| Singapore | Flash point | 60.0*** | 35.00 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 9 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 9 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 9 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 9 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 9 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 6 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 6 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 6 | oC |
| Singapore | Pour point | 0* | 6 | oC |
| Singapore | Viscosity at 50oC | 369.2** | 414.4 | cSt |
| Singapore | Viscosity at 50oC | 369.2** | 403.7 | cSt |
| Singapore | Water | 0.50* | 0.70 | % Volume |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 379.8** | 426.7 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 691.4** | 733.7 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 691.4** | 738.4 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 367.0** | 401.3 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 380.0** | 402.2 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 369.0** | 398.7 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 377.0** | 402.4 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 376.6** | 403.2 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 367.0** | 397.7 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 379.3** | 405.2 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 699.7** | 735.1 | cSt |
| Rotterdam | Viscosity at 50oC | 380.0** | 400.2 | cSt |
| Antwerp | Viscosity at 50oC | 177.0** | 204.5 | cSt |
| Antwerp | Viscosity at 50oC | 377.0** | 399.1 | cSt |
| Antwerp | Viscosity at 50oC | 691.4** | 734.8 | cSt |
| Antwerp | Viscosity at 50oC | 380.0** | 399.8 | cSt |
Related: INSIGHT: Off-spec issues reveal 'missing piece' of Singapore bunker supply chain
Published: 8 May, 2018
With 0.5% marine fuel, HSFO, ULSFO contracts, operators do not just have to accept whatever costs the 2020 changes throw at them, advises Freight Investor Services.
Shipowners and marine fuel buyers can protect themselves by requesting for COQ of the purchased product directly from the bunker supplier, William Tan of Miyabi Industries tells Manifold Times.
Panellists covered several marine fuel related topics including bunker fuel quality testing, COVID-2019, and long term storage of VLSFOs experienced during the first 100-day period.
‘At these high concentrations there is an increased risk of the fuel losing its stability and breaking down leading to deposits in fuel system filters and purifiers,’ it said.
The majority of off-spec cases at Fujairah port were related to sulphur issues, says recent industry report.
Several residual fuel samples bunkered against RMK700 grade exceeded viscosity at ARA ports.
‘We need to keep in mind the saying “penny wise pound foolish”,’ says Captain Rahul Choudhuri, the Managing Director AMEA at VPS, who stresses on the essential role of the Bunker Surveyor.
Legal representatives met at the High Court on Tuesday to discuss the discharge of KPMG liquidators from all liability in respect of conduct in the course of winding up, show court documents.
Global sentence adjusts to 80 month’s imprisonment term for both Chang and Koh under application of the Masui sentencing framework; fine of SGD 6.2 million against Chang remains unchanged.
Company has been ranked EIGHTH for 2020; ‘we are humbled and proud to be placed amongst the top ten winners of the Enterprise 50 Awards,’ says Satnam Singh, COO, Sing Fuels.
Mads Bjornebye, Manager of Bunker Services at Teekay Tankers Ltd, shares about the company’s perspective of e-BDNs, bunker purchasing & planning tools, while offering his thoughts on future marine fuels.
Maritime sector may find it increasingly challenging to manage bunker prices, Dennis Ho, Managing Director at ElbOil Singapore tells Singapore bunkering publication Manifold Times.
