Connect with us

Environment

IBIA: IMO needs to first define ‘HFO’ before Arctic ban

IMO needs to first define what is meant by ‘HFO’ as it isn’t clear what type of fuel the ban might apply to.
Admin

Published

8 years ago

on

5aebc768717e4 1525401448

The below is a statement from the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA):

The IMO has agreed to start work to develop a ban on the use and carriage of heavy fuel oil (HFO) for combustion purposes by ships in Arctic waters, but first it needs to define what is meant by ‘HFO’ as it isn’t clear what type of fuel the ban might apply to. Fuel blends complying with the upcoming 0.50% sulphur limit may contain both distillate and HFO blend components, so it will be critical to have a clear definition.

The decision was made at the 72nd session of the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 72), following majority support for a ban under the agenda item on “Development of measures to reduce risks of use and carriage of heavy fuel oil as fuel by ships in Arctic waters” which was added to the organisation’s work programme at MEPC 71.

A group of countries put forward a proposal to MEPC 72 to ban HFO use and carriage for use as fuel by all ships to which MARPOL applies when operating in Arctic waters no later than 2021, with a five-year delay in implementation for ships that have fuel tank protections in place. The ban would not apply to HFO carried as cargo.

Such a ban was resisted by some countries which were ready to identify measures to reduce and mitigate the risk HFO fuel spills, but not a carriage ban. There was also discussion on the potential impact of such a ban on maritime trade, in particular on Arctic communities and economies. MEPC 72 agreed that this should be assessed before adopting a future ban.

MEPC 72 agreed on the scope of work for the Sub-committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR), which meets for 6th session in February 2019. PPR 6 has been tasked to develop a definition of HFO; prepare a set of guidelines on mitigation measures to reduce risks of use and carriage of heavy fuel oil as fuel by ships in Arctic waters; and on the basis of an assessment of the impacts, develop a ban on HFO for use and carriage as fuel by ships in Arctic waters, on an appropriate timescale.

What is ‘HFO’?
It has been widely reported that the use and carriage of HFO is already banned in the Antarctic (including as cargo). This is not strictly speaking correct: the Antarctic ban in Regulation 43 of MARPOL Annex I applies to heavy grade oil (HGO), which is defined as follows:

.1 crude oils having a density at 15°C higher than 900 kg/m3 ; 
.2 oils, other than crude oils, having a density at 15°C higher than 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity at  50°C higher than 180 mm2/s; or 
.3 bitumen, tar and their emulsions

PPR 6 has been instructed to take Regulation 43 of MARPOL Annex I into account when developing a definition of HFO. The key would be .2 in Regulation 43 (above).

For bunker fuels, the current HGO ban in the Antarctic would not apply to products with a density at 15°C below 900 kg/m3 or a kinematic viscosity at 50°C below 180 cSt.

This means all the grades meeting current ISO 8217 marine distillate (DM) specifications would be allowed for carriage and use in the Antarctic, while residual grades (RM) have a maximum density limit under ISO 8217 in excess of 900 kg/m3, which would not be allowed.

However, a number of RM grades sold today are below 180 cSt and it is possible that, despite a density limit above 900 kg/m3 at 15°C, some of these fuels could in fact have densities below this threshold.

With extensive blending of various components to meet the 0.50% sulphur limit in 2020, it is anticipated that many products will have viscosity below 180 cSt. Density may also be lower than we see for most RM grades today, though most fuels designated as RM grades would most likely have densities above the 900 kg/m3 at 15°C threshold.
If the IMO agrees to use the current HGO definition for the Antarctic ban to define what constitutes ‘HFO’, density would become the key differentiator between fuels that can be used globally, including the Polar regions, and fuel that cannot be used or carried for use in the Arctic.

Photo credit: International Maritime Organization
Published: 4 May, 2018
 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Methanol

GENA Solutions: Total renewable and low-carbon methanol project pipeline increases from 61.8 to 62.2 Mt by 2032

Information shared by MI – the Global Methanol Alliance meant to assist the maritime industry in the adoption of methanol as a mainstream marine fuel heading into IMO 2030/2050.
Admin

Published

3 days ago

on

September 4, 2026

By

28 1

MI – the Global Methanol Alliance recently shared with Manifold Times the renewable and low-carbon methanol project pipeline August 2026 release produced by GENA Solutions Oy.

Information from the release is meant to provide the bunkering publication’s readers with insight on renewable methanol availability, and to assist the maritime industry in the adoption of methanol as a mainstream marine fuel heading into IMO 2030/2050.

Key takeaways from GENA’s August 2026 Methanol release are as follows:

  • As of the end of August 2026, GENA tracks 286 renewable and low carbon methanol projects, representing 62.2 Mt of capacity by 2032. This includes 25.1 Mt of e-methanol, 25.9 Mt of biomethanol, and 11.2 Mt of low carbon methanol capacity.
  • Two new projects were added to Project Navigator last month, while one frozen project was excluded. The project pipeline increased by 0.4 Mt month on month.
  • Four new offtake agreements were registered during August, including two biomethanol and two e-methanol agreements.
  • About 8% of the cumulative renewable methanol project pipeline capacity has reached FID so far, with another 11% at the FEED stage.
  • Considering the current uncertainty around regulatory developments and demand growth, GENA projects that renewable methanol capacity could reach 6 Mt to 12 Mt by 2031.

Note: The full article can be viewed here.

Renewable methanol project pipeline 4 Renewable methanol by feedstock 8 Renewable methanol by region 7 Project pipeline by status Methanol capacity scenarios

 

Photo credit: GENA Solutions
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Singapore: MPA urges maritime firms to prepare for potential haze with plan

MPA encourages all maritime companies, especially those with workers performing outdoor work to maintain a business continuity plan for haze.

Admin

Published

7 days ago

on

August 31, 2026

By

RESIZED SG bunker tanker

The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) on Monday (31 August) issued Port Marine Circular No. 9 of 2026 on steps for maritime companies to take for potential haze affecting Singapore:

BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN FOR HAZE

This circular supersedes Port Marine Circular No. 09 of 2023.

With reference to the National Environment Agency’s (NEA) joint media release issued on 9 August 2026, hotspots were observed in parts of Sumatra and Kalimantan, with prevailing winds potentially bringing smoke haze towards Singapore. The dry conditions may further increase the likelihood of haze affecting Singapore. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) encourages all maritime companies, especially those with workers performing outdoor work to maintain a business continuity plan for haze.

MPA advises all maritime companies to monitor the PSI level through the media and the NEA’s website (www.haze.gov.sg), keep at least a one-week supply of N95 masks for workers especially those who work outdoors, and observe the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) Haze guidelines and advisory for work which can be found on their website (www.mom.gov.sg/haze). The latter include guidelines to ensure that stocks of N95 masks are periodically inspected, remain serviceable, and not expired.

The visibility in the Singapore Strait and port waters could be significantly reduced in the event of haze. During periods of restricted visibility, shipmasters are advised to keep a proper lookout and navigate with caution. They are also advised to comply with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea and in particular Rule No. 19, Rule No. 20 and Rule 35 concerning conduct of vessels in restricted visibility, exhibition of navigation lights and sound signals in restricted visibility, respectively.

In the interest of safety of navigation and life at sea, the Port Master may restrict the movement of harbour craft and pleasure craft in the port waters during reduced visibility conditions.

 

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 31 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

DNV report: Regulatory uncertainty demands fleet strategies built for multiple futures

Report examines four regulatory scenarios, ranging from adoption of IMO NZF in its current form to its outright rejection, energy efficiency uptake, and long-term bunker fuel and technology strategies.
Admin

Published

1 week ago

on

August 28, 2026

By

DNV report: Regulatory uncertainty demands fleet strategies built for multiple futures

Regulatory uncertainty is increasing pressure on shipowners to make investment decisions that remain viable across multiple future scenarios, said classification society DNV on Thursday (27 August). 

According to DNV’s 10th Maritime Forecast to 2050, stronger global regulatory signals could accelerate the uptake of energy-efficiency measures, enabling the global fleet to consume up to 25% less energy by 2050 compared to a scenario where regulation is driven by regions.

The report examines four regulatory scenarios, ranging from adoption of the IMO Net-Zero Framework (NZF) in its current form to its outright rejection, which could lead to a period of prolonged regulatory gridlock, and explores the implications of these outcomes for fuel demand, energy efficiency uptake, and long-term fleet fuel and technology strategies.

Cristina Saenz de Santa Maria, CEO Maritime, DNV, said: “Ships ordered today will operate well beyond 2050, but many of the factors shaping their future performance remain uncertain. Regulatory requirements are advancing faster than the fuel, infrastructure, and technological systems needed to support them, making long-term investment decisions increasingly complex. The industry therefore needs greater clarity and alignment among all stakeholders to provide the confidence required for long-term investment. In the meantime, shipowners need strategies that deliver benefits today while remaining resilient across a range of regulatory and market outcomes.”

Energy efficiency is one of the most immediate and practical levers available to shipowners, delivering value across regulatory outcomes whether implemented at the newbuild stage or as a retrofit. A case study of a hydrodynamic measures retrofit on a 5,000 TEU container vessel showed potential annual fuel savings of 16%, with a payback time of around one to four years depending on future fuel prices. Retrofits can add similar value across many ship types and with sufficient planning can typically be completed during a standard class-renewal dry docking.

The development of the marine low-GHG fuel market remains a key challenge. While significant progress has been made in expanding alternative-fuel capabilities of vessels, scaling fuel production depends on confidence that demand will materialize. DNV projects shipping demand for low-GHG fuels to range from 4 to 22 Mtoe by 2030 and 33 to 185 Mtoe by 2050, depending on regulatory outcomes, with uptake also shaped by future uptake of shore power, plug-in hybridization, nuclear power, and onboard carbon capture systems.

Current project pipelines indicate a maximum global supply of 270 Mtoe by 2030, although actual volumes are likely to be lower due to project delays and other uncertainties, and shipping will need to compete with other industries for its share. However, the cost of reducing emissions varies significantly between fuel pathways, with abatement costs ranging from about 180 to 1,290 USD per tonne of CO₂ avoided, highlighting the importance of regulation and market incentives in enabling low-GHG fuel markets to develop.

Øyvind Sekkesæter, lead author of Maritime Forecast to 2050, said: “Scenarios explored in this year’s report show how different regulatory futures can lead to very different outcomes in energy efficiency uptake, fuel demand, and consequently, GHG emissions. By testing fuel and technology choices across multiple scenarios, shipowners can identify strategies that create value today while preserving flexibility as regulation, fuel availability, prices, and technologies evolve. Strategies that each owner chooses will also be dependent on their fleet type and operating context.”

Key findings from the report: 

  • Several regulatory futures remain possible as the IMO continues negotiations on the Net-Zero Framework, with these outcomes shaping investment decisions, low-GHG fuel uptake, and energy-efficiency deployment across the global fleet.
  • With global regulatory incentives in place, the world-fleet could consume 25% less energy by 2050 than under a scenario limited to regional regulations.
  • Energy efficiency can pay off regardless of regulatory outcome – 5,000 TEU container ship case study shows 16% annual fuel savings from hydrodynamic measures retrofit.
  • Shipping demand for low-GHG fuels could range from 4 to 22 Mtoe by 2030, and 33 to 185 Mtoe by 2050, depending on regulatory outcomes and the availability of these fuels in a competitive global market.
  • Current project pipelines indicate that a maximum of 270 Mtoe of supply could be available by 2030, though actual volumes are likely to be lower due to project delays and other uncertainties, and shipping will need to compete with other industries for its share.
  • Testing fuel and technology strategies across different scenarios can help shipowners identify robust choices for an uncertain transition. Testing, piloting, and verifying technologies can provide the trusted performance data needed to make investment decisions with greater confidence.

Note: DNV’s 10th Maritime Forecast to 2050 can be found here. 

 

Photo credit: DNV
Published: 28 August, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending