Connect with us

Fuel Consumption

Fuelre4m: Difference between bunker fuel efficiency and efficiency of fuel

Rob Mortimer of Fuelre4m says instead of abandoning fossil-based bunker fuels prematurely in favour of less-proven technologies, the focus should be improving its efficiency with better measurements.

Admin

Published

on

Fuelre4m: Difference between bunker fuel efficiency and efficiency of fuel

Rob Mortimer, Managing Director of Dubai-based clean-fuel technology firm Fuelre4m, shared an article with Singapore-based bunkering publication Manifold Times detailing how the measurement of bunker fuel consumption can affect how true efficiency of fuel is measured:

My background is in telecoms, data, and radio communication, where everything from speed to capacity is logical, measurable, and provable. However, venturing into the world of combustion engines and renewable-based hybrid generator sets was an eye-opener. Unlike the precise measurements in telecoms, the shipping industry still measures fuel consumption in liters and gallons, ignoring the crucial fact that fuel is consumed in weight. This disparity affects how we measure the true efficiency of fuel.

In shipping, operators have advanced in measuring vessel performance with technology, yet they still overlook the efficiency of the fuel itself. The industry commonly uses Specific Fuel Oil Consumption (SFOC) to measure fuel usage per unit of energy produced. SFOC is calculated as the mass of fuel consumed per hour divided by the engine’s power output during that period. While this metric has been used for decades, it doesn’t account for the varying quality of fuels.

For instance, a 1% variation in fuel quality, seemingly negligible, can have a significant impact when burning 600 metric tonnes (mt) of fuel per month. Over a year, this 1% difference equates to 72mt of fuel, which, according to the International Maritime Organization (IMO), translates to 226mt of CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions. The assumption that one metric tonne of fuel will always produce the same power, regardless of slight quality differences, is flawed.

The problem is rooted in using SFOC as an average reference for engine performance, not fuel performance. Engine manufacturers provide data based on ideal conditions with a specified fuel quality. These numbers are then normalized and used as averages for future calculations, overlooking the variations in fuel quality from bunker to bunker.

It’s akin to assuming that fuel from different gas stations is identical, when in reality, it can vary significantly due to factors like mixing, contamination, and aging.

The key issue with SFOC is that it doesn't account for the fact that different fuels, even of the same type, have varying energy densities. For example, Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) has an energy density of 40-42 MJ/kg, while Methanol has only 21-23 MJ/kg. This variance can be as much as 5-6% within the same fuel type, leading to substantial differences in power output and fuel efficiency.

To accurately measure fuel efficiency, we need to consider the mass of fuel in relation to the power it produces. This requires precise measuring equipment, such as torque or shaft power meters. These devices don't directly measure torque but instead gauge minute changes in the propeller shaft as it twists with varying forces. By calibrating these meters to account for the quality of the fuel, we can more accurately assess the energy released and adjust power readings accordingly.

Power cards, another essential tool, allow engineers to evaluate the combustion process and measure cylinder power output. These measurements can then be used to fine-tune the torque meter readings, ensuring that they reflect the true efficiency of the fuel being used. This method moves us beyond relying solely on the engine’s power rating and towards a more scientific approach to evaluating fuel performance.

The recent drive towards alternative fuels, spurred by the global push to reduce fossil fuel consumption, has highlighted the need for a balanced approach. While alternatives like biofuels and LNG have their place, they often come with challenges and trade-offs. For example, biofuels have lower energy densities, requiring more fuel to produce the same power and potentially increasing emissions. Dual-fuel engines, designed to switch between traditional and alternative fuels, can be complex and problematic in operation.

The reality is that fossil fuels will remain a significant part of the energy mix for the foreseeable future. Rather than abandoning them prematurely in favor of less-proven technologies, the focus should be on optimizing the fuels we currently use. By improving the efficiency of fossil fuels through better measurement and treatment, we can achieve significant environmental benefits without the risks associated with untested alternatives.

Fuelre4m is at the forefront of this optimization effort with its Re4mx fuel reformulator technology. This technology conditions fossil fuels pre-combustion, enhancing atomization and energy release while reducing particulate matter and pollutants. Coupled with advanced measuring tools like mass flow meters, torque, and power meters, Fuelre4m offers a comprehensive system for improving fuel efficiency and reporting, helping ships achieve IMO emissions targets without incurring additional costs.

 

Photo credit: Fuelre4m
Published: 11 September, 2024

Continue Reading

Financial Result

ZeroNorth achieves first operating profit in Dec with nearly USD 40 mil revenue in 2024

Firm achieved its first month of positive earnings before EBITDA in December 2024, after four and a half years of operations and reached just under USD 40 million in annual recurring revenue for 2024.

Admin

Published

on

By

ZeroNorth achieves first operating profit in Dec with nearly USD 40 mil revenue in 2024

Digital bunkering platform solutions provider ZeroNorth on Thursday (30 February) said it achieved its first month of positive earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA) in December 2024, after four and a half years since its launch. 

The firm said the achievement comes on the back of significant growth, with the company reaching just under USD 40 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR) for the year, a 38% increase from 2023.

“This marks an important milestone for ZeroNorth, particularly at a time when rising interest rates have put increasing pressure on startups and scaleups to prioritise financial sustainability over top-line growth. Despite the challenging economic climate, ZeroNorth has managed to balance growth and profitability, showing its ability to adapt to changing financial conditions,” the company said.

Founded in 2020, ZeroNorth has rapidly become a leader in the maritime industry’s digital transformation, helping more than 230 shipping and energy companies navigate the energy transition with solutions that optimise fuel consumption and reduce emissions. 

ZeroNorth has scaled from a team of six to 600 employees across 10 global locations and completed six strategic acquisitions, including joining forces with Singapore-based Alpha Ori Technologies in February 2024. 

Powered by AI-driven technologies developed in-house, the company has built a unified platform with a significant impact on sustainability and efficiency for customers. In 2024 alone, it optimised 72,000 voyage legs by generating 1.5 million routes, reducing more than one million metric tonnes of CO2 emissions.

ZeroNorth expects to achieve positive EBITDA for the full year 2025, while continuing to execute its growth strategy.

Søren Meyer, CEO of ZeroNorth, said: “Achieving operating profit is an important milestone for ZeroNorth and a reflection of the dedication of our team and the trust of our customers. Reaching this point highlights our ability to build a sustainable business model while scaling rapidly.” 

“More importantly, it reflects the critical role of data and technology as the shipping industry tackles the complexities of the energy transition.”

“With this foundation, we are strongly positioned to accelerate our growth, and continue to enable our customers to make informed decisions, boost efficiency and cut emissions.”

Related: ZeroNorth and Singapore-based Alpha Ori Technologies close deal to merge

 

Photo credit: ZeroNorth
Published: 4 February, 2025

Continue Reading

Classification Society

LR: Risk sharing key component to viable emissions reduction

When major change is introduced on a ship, there are numerous aspects to consider by all stakeholders involved which all add risk.

Admin

Published

on

By

Elina Papageorgiou

Shipping must be open to sharing the risks associated with emissions reduction to enable the uptake of energy savings devices and technologies (ESDs/ESTs) and digital applications, stated classification society Lloyd’s Register (LR) representatives during a presentation at Athens during early December.

The responsibility of investing in and driving the uptake of new solutions must be borne by all relevant stakeholders and not sit solely with the shipowner. This extends not only to financial exposure, but also new vessel design and data sharing.

When major change is introduced on a ship, there are numerous aspects to consider by all stakeholders involved which all add risk. Energy producers, the energy consumers, the associated supply chains, and the investors, insurers, regulators, class societies and governments – all have critical, but different and highly inter-related roles to play within the transition.

“We are in a new era of shipping that comes with a different set of rules, including shipping companies’ approach risk and risk sharing,” shared Elina Papageorgiou, Global Strategic Growth Director and VP Greece and Cyprus at LR at the Powering Progress: Innovation and Energy in Maritime event.

“Longer-term investment decisions should also be informed by the decisions of shipping’s clients’, clients – the cargo owners – and align with their emissions reduction ambitions.”

David Lloyd, Director, Energy Transition at LR, meanwhile noted: “Smart vessel operation and well-informed, data-led investment decisions can significantly support vessel compliance. What’s more, investments don’t have to be extensive to achieve results.”

“Whilst uncertainties around bigger challenges such as alternative fuels and future requirements are resolved, ESDs and digital solutions can support the commercial viability of vessels as we approach 2030 with often surprisingly low levels of investment. But these investments should be shared across all stakeholders and not be limited to owners and financiers.”

Fotis Belexis, Technical Director of Starbulk Carriers, were amongst speakers discussing risk sharing across stakeholders for complex capital investments.

He pointed out that as existing vessels age, they cannot be replaced by newbuilds as there is insufficient global shipbuilding capacity to replenish the fleet with newer tonnage.

As such, older vessels may therefore remain in the market for longer than expected and not depreciate in value as has been the case in the past. Banks and other lenders must realise this and adjust their depreciation and lending models to suit when ship owners want to finance retrofits of ESDs on their older ships.

Moving forward, the room agreed energy saving devices (ESDs), such as wind-assisted ship propulsion, digital solutions and smart operations should all be considered as the in-service fleet using traditional marine fuels seeks to shave its bunker fuel consumption to comply with IMO’s Carbon Intensity Indicator, EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) and FuelEU regulations – the latter will which be in effect as of 1 January 2025.

As emissions reduction targets increase, with steeper increments than currently planned potentially being announced at the Marine Environment Protection Committee meeting in May next year, data-led insight and scenario planning will become more important to understand where efficiencies can be gained.

 

Photo credit: Lloyd’s Register
Published: 31 December 2024

Continue Reading

FuelEU

Baltic Exchange launches free FuelEU Maritime calculator to help shipowners

Tool will help shipowners understand the potential cost implications for their vessels, while also enabling operators and charterers to evaluate whether they are being charged fairly.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash

The following is an article by Baltic Exchange, which was shared to Singapore-based bunkering publication Manifold Times, on the launch of its new free FuelEU Maritime calculator for the maritime industry.

Martin Crawford-Brunt, CEO of Lookout Maritime and Emissions Lead of Baltic Exchange, also discusses the complexity of the regulatory and the need for greater benchmarks:

​​From 1 January 2025, voyages that include port calls in the European Union will have to account for the new FuelEU Maritime regulation. This new regulation is designed to accelerate the uptake of renewable and low-carbon fuels in maritime transport to drastically reduce onboard greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Europe. 

FuelEU Maritime is the latest regulation designed to help shipping’s decarbonisation journey. However, these types of emissions regulations are becoming increasingly complex and increasingly regional. Due to the sheer number of new regulations, tightening goals and deadlines, access to reliable data and insights to inform decision making is increasingly requested. Furthermore, the regulations may not consistently address the nuances of different trade patterns or vessel types, thereby introducing ambiguity which increases the uncertainty and challenges for the shipping industry.

In order for shipowners to better understand the financial costs, as well as the wider commercial impacts of complying with FuelEU Maritime, particularly when it comes to the specific regulations of their own fleets, what is needed is a clear market benchmark for defining good emissions performance. Crucially, this type of standard needs to come from a trusted source in the market. This is where Baltic Exchange and its Emissions Calculators have a vital role to play. 

“While the latest emissions regulations are a net positive for the industry, there is a degree of ambiguity around what constitutes strong commercial performance in this evolving landscape. It all gets very real when you put dollar numbers on the penalties and fuel alternatives. What is needed right now is an clearer understanding of the commercial implications of the various regulations and how these will affect the operational decisions of shipowners,” said Martin Crawford-Brunt, Emissions Lead at Baltic Exchange.

“Baltic Exchange is offering market-related baselines to help educate and inform the market on the financial implications of the cost of emissions in freight for shipping players who need to factor them into their business decisions.

“This includes providing the means to calculate the cost and potential penalties of carbon emission regulations, such as EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime, so these can be included into voyage costs,” he added.

Baltic Exchange FuelEU Calculator

Launched earlier this year ahead of the regulation coming into force, Baltic Exchange’s Emissions Calculator now includes a specific FuelEU Maritime feature. This tool helps shipowners understand the potential cost implications for their vessels, while also enabling operators and charterers to evaluate whether they are being charged fairly. By offering insights based on Baltic standard ships and standard route data, it creates a win-win scenario for all parties involved.

This new tool provides a vital comparison for a vessel’s journey and fuel consumption, comparing standard low sulphur heavy fuel oil to other greener options such as LNG or methanol. By entering the vessel’s deadweight tonnage, type, speed and consumption against Baltic standard ship data, shipowners are able to quickly understand the potential financial penalties of operating that vessel on voyages which include EU port calls. This will enable the market them to factor these additional costs into the cost of freight, expressed in dollar per tonne,  or the target time charter rate. 

Only fossil-based variants of alternative fuels are included in the calculator, for the time being, as these will be available first and are expected to be more competitively priced, than green alternatives. The tool is set to include bio-fuel blends, for diesel and LNG, which have a known well-to-wake factor, in future updates. 

Note: The full article by Baltic Exchange can be read here.

 

Photo credit: CHUTTERSNAP from Unsplash
Published: 17 December, 2024

Continue Reading
Advertisement
  • Sea Trader & Sea Splendor
  • Consort advertisement v2
  • Zhoushan Bunker
  • SBF2
  • v4Helmsman Gif Banner 01
  • EMF banner 400x330 slogan
  • Aderco Manifold Website Advert EN
  • RE 05 Lighthouse GIF

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

  • SEAOIL 3+5 GIF
  • E MARINE LOGO
  • Triton Bunkering advertisement v2
  • Singfar advertisement final
  • HL 2022 adv v1


  • Mokara Final
  • PSP Marine logo
  • Auramarine 01
  • Golden Island logo square
  • Kenoil
  • Synergy Asia Bunkering logo MT
  • intrasea
  • endress
  • pro liquid
  • CNC Logo Rev Manifold Times
  • LabTechnic
  • Advert Shipping Manifold resized1
  • 400x330 v2 copy
  • VPS 2021 advertisement
  • Headway Manifold

Trending