The Hamburg Port Authority (HPA) and integrated energy company MB Energy on Tuesday (21 July) said they have completed a comprehensive risk analysis and developed a dedicated safety concept for ship-to-ship ammonia bunkering.

MB Energy said the analysis lays the groundwork for the safe introduction of ammonia as a future marine fuel.

“With our planned ammonia import terminal in Hamburg-Blumensand, MB Energy intends to provide the reliable land side supply infrastructure needed to support this transition across northern German ports,” it said in a social media post. 

Mabanaft Group was renamed to MB Energy last year and merged over 50 existing brands under one identity. 

Separately, HPA said the Port of Hamburg will become “bunker ready” for ammonia, laying the groundwork for safe and reliable ammonia bunkering in the future.

“The focus is in particular on container ships, cruise ships as well as RoRo and ConRo (Container/RoRo) ships,” it said. 

“We expect ammonia to establish itself as an alternative marine marine fuel in the coming years. With our preparatory work, we are already creating the conditions to welcome the first ammonia-powered ships in Hamburg and to bunker them safely.:

HPA added that the import terminal for ammonia planned by MB Energy from 2029 will make a decisive contribution to ensuring the reliable availability of ammonia as a bunker fuel in northern German ports in the long term. 

“The use of an ammonia bunker barge is considered a possible addition to the landside infrastructure to enable ship bunkering in the port and beyond in the future,” it said.

Related: Mabanaft Group renames as MB Energy, merging over 50 brands under one identity

Photo credit: Hamburg Port Authority
Published: 22 July, 2026

Neil Chapman, Managing Director of Americas, and Steve Bee, Group Marketing and Strategic Projects Director of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Monday (13 July) said regular fuel testing, correct fuel selection, and proactive fuel management are essential to ensure lifeboats are ready when they’re needed most: 

Performance when its most critical

In an emergency, a lifeboat engine is not simply a mechanical asset, it is a life-saving system. If the fuel in that system is of poor quality due to degradation, contamination, or simply unsuitable for the operating environment, then the result may be failure to launch, manoeuvre, or sustain operation, when human lives depend on it. Fuel failures in lifeboats onboard Cruise Liners are high-consequence life-safety risk as the engine may be the only power source available during an emergency. It is a key SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) requirement that lifeboats should hold sufficient fuel to enable them to run at 6 knots for no less than 25 hours.

The primary consequence of a lifeboat failure is not the commercial  loss, but the potential failure of a safety-critical system during an abandon-ship scenario. Financial, legal and reputational consequences will undoubtedly follow but the immediate risk is to life.

Now with the inclusion of Biofuels and FAME in the marine fuel mix and assuming the same fuel used in the main engines may be used in the emergency systems, how do you verify the operability of the lifeboats in times of crisis?

Fuel grade DMX within the ISO8217 specification is specifically intended for use within emergency equipment. However, since this is not a mandatory requirement, marine gas oil (MGO grade DMA) used for other purposes on board, is often used to fill up lifeboat fuel tanks. This could lead to hazardous outcomes as the DMA grade fuel might not be suitable for its intended use. DMA fuel whilst acceptable for general machinery use, will unlikely provide the same assurance of low-temperature operability, ignition quality, storage reliability, or starting reliability required for emergency craft. The quality of the fuel in the lifeboat tanks may also deteriorate during storage. Hence it is essential to test and ensure that the quality of the fuel being taken into the tanks is ’fit for purpose’ and monitored at regular intervals. DMX fuel should be chosen due to its ability to operate at a lower temperature, superior ignition quality and  improved starting capabilities. However, this fuel only accounts for approximately 1-2% of the global supply, compared to the regular DMA grade.

Failure Modes in Emergency Operations

SOLAS compliance should not be viewed only in terms of carrying the required quality of fuel. The fuel must also remain fit-for-purpose regarding stability, cleanliness and be capable of supporting reliable engine operation throughout the vessel’s operation. Lifeboat failures are rarely a singular dramatic event, rather a chain of events. These are typically caused by degraded fuel, filter blockages or storage issues.  Incorrect handling and storage can result in the ingress of water, which with modern fuels, can promote the growth of filter blocking bacteria rendering the engine inoperable.  So rather than the issue being no fuel, it is more likely to be an issue of fuel that is of poor quality. As lifeboat engines may sit idle for long periods it potentially allows the fuel to degrade, if the correct due care and attention is not paid to this key piece of emergency equipment.

The handling and storage of fuel, coupled with the observance of quality operating procedures can lessen the risk of these failures, but are unlikely to eliminate them completely. However, the failure to follow established procedures can result in issues that are likely to cause catastrophic financial and reputational damage to the cruise line operator.

The most common failure modes in emergency lifeboats can be categorised as follows:

• Fuel Starvation
• Contamination
• Degraded Fuel
• Blocked Filter/Injectors

Contamination in the engine due to the presence of water, as previously mentioned, can be catastrophic as this can induce corrosion and oxidation, along with promoting microbial growth which results in filter blocking and fuel starvation to the engine.

If an engine fails to start, or runs poorly under load, due to fuel related issues this would likely cause a secondary emergency, compounding the reason the lifeboat was required in the first instance.

The danger with degraded fuel is that the risk is often hidden. A lifeboat may appear available, inspected and compliant, whilst he fuel inside its tank is steadily losing the properties required for reliable emergency operation.

IMO guidelines indicate that inspectors and regulators are increasingly looking at emergency systems for fuel compliance, highlighting its importance in the operation of a vessel.

Seasonal & Regional Fuel Requirements

Often overlooked are the cold flow properties of diesel and biofuels.  While hydrocarbon-based diesel has very good (low temperature) cold flow properties, this is not the case for biofuels, so lifeboats fuelled in the Caribbean for the summer season may be completely inoperable if the vessels are transferred to the Northeast or higher location, for a winter period.

Root Cause Failure Mechanisms

The failure to follow the appropriate standards which result in engine failure can be categorised as follows:

The Effect of Biofuels on Marine Fuel Quality

In a study recently completed by a major shipping line, blends of biofuels were tested for a wide range of parameters.  The findings were:

Biological growth appeared within the first month, increasing rapidly with exposure to light.

Within 3 months oxidative corrosion started to occur requiring regular monitoring.

46 CFR § 169.837 states:

“(2) The fuel tanks of motor propelled lifeboats have been emptied, and fuel changed once every twelve months.”

Yet the evidence shows fuel stability effectively starts to deteriorate within the first month and can be unusable by month 3.

Prevention Strategy

Fuel testing should be viewed as part of the vessel’s safety assurance programme. It provides evidence that the lifeboat fuel remains fit-for-purpose, not only on the day it was supplied, but throughout storage and across changing operational conditions. A strong housekeeping policy requires a multi-pronged approach to ensure operability in times of crisis; such steps include:

• Housekeeping – ensuring the fuel system remains closed when not in use to eliminate the ingress of water.
• Operation – frequently run the engines so that fuel and lubricants are cycled through the units.
• Testing program – likely to be cheaper and more efficient than changing out the fuel. A well-developed fuel testing program can eliminate the need to change the fuel.
• Documentation – by recording all the actions taken to protect the emergency systems historic data can be tracked.

Advanced Testing Programs

Due to the importance of these emergency assets several different tests should be considered to ensure the suitability of the fuel.  Testing should include:

• Cold-Flow properties using Pour Point, Cold Filter plugging Point, Cloud Point
• Water content for moisture
• BYF for Microbial testing
• Acid Number for corrosion tendencies
• FAME for biofuels content
• Sulphur for MARPOL Annex VI compliance
• Visual Appearance
• Viscosity for flow properties
• Density
• Flash Point for SOLAS compliance
• Cetane Index

Conclusion

It is possible to avoid engine failures, but this can only be achieved with a well-documented and well-followed operating procedure.  Regular fuel sampling and testing along with general good housekeeping techniques will ensure these units are ready go when they are most needed. Once they are seen as an active safety-critical asset rather than a dormant emergency component the value in this process will be realized.

Lifeboat fuel quality is not a housekeeping detail, it is a Safety of Life at Sea issue. Emergency craft must be capable of starting manoeuvring and operating for the required duration whenever called upon. Sub-standard, degraded, contaminated, or unsuitable fuel can compromise that capability and turn an emergency response into a secondary emergency. Regular testing, correct fuel choice, controlled storage and documented fuel management provide the evidence and assurance that lifeboats remain ready when lives depend on them.

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 14 July, 2026

International Maritime Organization (IMO) Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez on Wednesday (8 July) issued a statement, calling for maximum restraint and de-escalation in the Strait of Hormuz following new attacks on ships transiting the area. 

According to reports, at least three vessels transiting the strait have been attacked in recent days.  

“I regret that once again I am compelled to speak out following attacks on commercial ships and innocent seafarers, due to geopolitical circumstances beyond their control,” he said. 

“I condemn the attacks over the past two days against several ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

“These reckless attacks have again placed innocent seafarers in grave danger. No seafarer should have to risk their life simply for doing their job.”

He urged flag states, shipowners, operators and all relevant authorities to avoid exposing seafarers to unnecessary danger by transiting the Strait while the safety and security of crews cannot be assured. 

“The situation in the region remains volatile. These attacks further intensify the fear, uncertainty and psychological strain already being endured by the nearly 6,000 seafarers who remain stranded on board vessels unable to depart the Persian Gulf safely,” Dominguez added. 

“I call on all States concerned to exercise maximum restraint, de-escalate the situation without delay, and facilitate the safe departure of the ships still trapped in the Gulf since the crisis began.

“The safety of seafarers must remain our foremost priority.”

According to IMO’s website, a total of 136 vessels and 2,900 seafarers have been evacuated through the Strait of Hormuz before IMO paused its evacuation plan on 25 June. 

Photo credit: International Maritime Organization
Published: 9 July, 2026