Connect with us

Fuel Testing

Singapore: CTI-Maritec shares testing protocols ahead of mandatory enhanced bunker fuel checks

In light of mandatory enhanced checks for marine fuel delivered at Singapore port coming into effect on 1 June, CTI-Maritec shares recommendations for fuel testing protocols, primarily focused at COCs and SAN detection for bunker supply in Singapore.

Admin

Published

on

Louis Reed from Unsplash

With mandatory enhanced checks for marine fuel delivered at Singapore port coming into effect on 1 June, bunker fuel testing and marine surveying business Maritec Pte Ltd (CTI-Maritec) has published a newsletter providing recommendations on vital pre-emptive fuel testing measures vessels should be taking as part of their routine fuel testing and also recommendations on optimal testing options available when deep-dive analysis is required to determine a root cause: 

Introduction

On 8 February 2024 the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) issued a Port Marine Circular No 3 of 2024 regarding the implementation of enhanced testing parameters for marine fuel batches intended to be delivered as bunkers in the Port of Singapore in addition to the existing quality assurance measures.

In accordance with the MPA’s Port Marine Circular No 3 of 2024, from 1 June 2024 onwards, bunker suppliers in the Port of Singapore must ensure that:

  • Residual & Bio-residual bunker fuel do not contain Chlorinated Organic Compounds (COC) above 50mg/kg and are free from inorganic acids.
  • COC must be tested using the EN 14077 accredited test method and shall be reported in the “Certificate of Quality” (COQ) provided to receiving vessels.
  • Inorganic acids must use the ASTM D664 accredited test method as prescribed in ISO 8217 and the Strong Acid Number (SAN) (in addition to the Total Acid Number (TAN) shall be reported in the COQ (i.e. SAN = 0) provided to receiving vessels. For distillate / bio-distillate bunker marine fuel batches, SAN must be tested as per ASTM D664 test method and reported in the COQ.
  • Residual marine fuels are free from polystyrene, polypropylene & polymethacrylate. These can be tested by filtration, microscopic examination, & Fourier-Transform Infrared spectroscopy analysis.

Testing Recommendations in line with MPA Enhanced Parameters to Protect Your Vessels:

In view of the above, CTI-Maritec recommends fuel testing protocols as depicted in the chart below (as routine pre-emptive measures and/or for deep dive requirements to detect the root cause) to help safeguard vessel health.

Our recommendations are primarily focused at COCs and SAN detection for bunker supply in Singapore, while recommendations for testing Polymers are advised for requirements of reported problem cases or when highly abnormal GCMS findings of chemical compounds like Styrene, DCPD and Indene are detected.

COC & SAN GCMS testing Packages A to E

Related: Singapore: CTI-Maritec publishes whitepaper on upcoming mandatory enhanced bunker fuel tests
Related: Singapore: Marine fuel quality testing agencies applaud move for mandatory enhanced bunker fuel tests
Related: Singapore: MPA tightens testing parameters to reduce contaminated bunker fuels
Related: MPA: Glencore and PetroChina supplied contaminated bunkers to about 200 ships in the Port of Singapore

 

Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 29 May 2024

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Quality

FOBAS: Off-spec Total Sediment Potential bunker fuels in ARA region

FOBAS has tested several VLSFO samples from ARA (Antwerp, Rotterdam and Amsterdam) with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO 8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m.

Admin

Published

on

By

Louis Reed from Unsplash

Lloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) on Friday (7 February) released a bulletin regarding FOBAS testing several samples from ARA (Antwerp, Rotterdam and Amsterdam) with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO 8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m:

In recent days, FOBAS has tested several samples from ARA (Antwerp, Rotterdam and Amsterdam) with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO 8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m. The samples were all 0.50% sulphur (VSLFO) fuels and TSP results ranged from 0.16% m/m to 0.38% m/m.

In recent days, FOBAS has tested several samples from ARA (Antwerp, Rotterdam and Amsterdam) with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO 8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m. 

The samples were all 0.50% sulphur (VSLFO) fuels and TSP results ranged from 0.16% m/m to 0.38% m/m.

Fuels with high sediments can result in excessive sludge deposition in tanks and throughout the fuel handling, treatment, and injection systems. 

Furthermore, in certain cases the attempted use of such fuels may result in highly compromised combustion leading to engine and turbocharger damage.

In view of the above, if your ships are planning to bunker in these ports, we recommend that suppliers are advised of your concerns regarding the stability of the fuel in the area, and that they provide you with additional reassurance that they will adhere to the ISO 8217 requirements for the grade ordered.

Additional attention should be given to the collection of bunker samples. It should be ensured that all parties have witnessed the sampling process and have signed witness forms accordingly, and that the supporting documentation includes records of all the samples considered representative of the fuel as Loaded.

 

Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 10 February, 2025

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel

IBIA: Dutch authorities to enforce ISO 13739 bunker sampling in Rotterdam by 2026

IBIA Secretariat has received information that Netherlands’ Inspectorate for Environment and Transport is planning for the port to strictly enforce rules for fuel oil sampling on board the receiving vessel.

Admin

Published

on

By

IBIA: Dutch authorities to enforce ISO bunker sampling standard in Port of Rotterdam

International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA) Secretariat on Tuesday (3 February) said it was informed by Port of Rotterdam that the Inspectorate for Environment and Transport in Netherlands is planning for the port to strictly enforce the rules for fuel oil sampling (the MARPOL sample) on board the receiving vessel via drip sampling to conform with ISO 13739.

“If both parties agree on a different sample point (that is other than the receiving vessel’s manifold), then the Inspectorate will have to be informed, and can issue a waiver,” IBIA secretariat stated. 

“Other samples may be taken via the bunker barge sample point.”

All seal (numbers) and counter seals have to be noted on the BDN.

“As this rule is not currently standard practice in ARA, the Dutch Inspectorate are initially expected to be flexible, but are likely to start to enforce this rule during this year and no later than the beginning of 2026,” it added. 

This will coincide with the obligation of  mass flow meter (MFM). 

Manifold Times previously reported that the use of a bunker measurement system for bunker vessels in the ports of Antwerp-Bruges and Rotterdam will be mandatory from 1 January 2026.

Related: MFM bunker measurement system to be mandatory in Antwerp-Bruges and Rotterdam

 

Photo credit: International Bunker Industry Association
Published: 5 February, 2025

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

VPS explains how to engineer and manage green bunker fuels

Stanley George, Group Technical and Science Manager, shares key insights on how to engineer and manage green shipping fuels—covering VLSFO, biofuels, and the impact of new regulations.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED VPS logo

Stanley George, Group Technical and Science Manager at marine fuels testing company VPS, recently shared key insights on how to engineer and manage green shipping fuels—covering VLSFO, biofuels, and the impact of new regulations: 

Effective management strategies and insights for evolving fuel use.

Back in 2020, the IMO 2020 regulations, which reduced the global upper limit on the sulphur content of ships' fuel oil from 3.5% to 0.50%, posed significant challenges for the marine industry.

Beyond compliance, ship operators faced difficulties stemming from very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) blends. Key issues included poor cold-flow properties, short shelf life, sludge formation, stability concerns, and, most critically, liner scuffing in large two-stroke engines.

Liner scuffing, a significant contributor to main engine damage, was initially thought to be unrelated to fuel quality, engine maintenance, or fuel compatibility. However, further investigations identified interactions between VLSFO blends and cylinder oils as the root cause.

Cylinder oil plays a vital role in maintaining engine health through:

  • Lubrication: creating an oil film to minimise friction and wear between cylinder liners and piston rings.
  • Deposit removal: detergent properties clean combustion deposits from critical engine components.
  • Acid neutralisation: additives in the cylinder oil neutralise acidic byproducts of fuel combustion.

With the introduction of VLSFO, oil majors and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) recommended a shift from high Base Number (BN) cylinder oils (70/100 BN) to lower BN oils (40 BN). This change reduced calcium-based additives, which are crucial for neutralisation and detergency, leading to increased deposit formation and, in some cases, resulting in liner scuffing.

Addressing liner scuffing

By mid-2020, OEMs introduced Category II (CAT II) cylinder oils designed to enhance cleaning and deposit control. Alongside improved cylinder lubrication practices, close monitoring of liner wear helped mitigate scuffing issues. Some operators successfully adopted blend-on-board techniques, enabling customisation of cylinder oil properties such as neutralisation and detergency. This flexibility significantly reduced engine issues, demonstrating the importance of tailored cylinder lubrication strategies.

VLSFO also exhibited poor cold-flow properties, leading to wax precipitation and reduced stability in colder climates. These challenges emphasised the importance of proper fuel storage, handling, and management practices to maintain fuel integrity and engine reliability.

The evolving landscape of marine fuels, driven by regulatory and environmental pressures, demands better understanding and management of both traditional fossil fuels and emerging alternatives like biofuels. International standard ISO8217:2024 is seen as a major step forward in terms of setting specifications for marine fuel quality.

Biofuel alternatives

With the industry looking to decarbonise, and a view to introducing low- to zero-carbon fuels, biofuels such as methanol and various fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) blends currently account for approximately 1% of the fuel mix. The more traditional fossil fuels are continuing to satisfy the day-to-day demand in terms of fuels supplied to vessels at this time.

Among these, cashew nutshell liquid (CNSL) and FAME have been explored as drop-in fuel options alongside several other alternatives. CNSL is a renewable resource with potential as a ready drop-in fuel. Its key phenolic compounds include:

  • Anacardic Acid (60–75%): a major contributor to CNSL's high acidity. Thermal decarboxylation converts this to cardanol, reducing acidity and enhancing stability.
  • Cardanol (5–15%): a stable phenolic compound derived from anacardic acid with improved combustion and lubricity properties.
  • Cardol (15–20%): A dihydroxybenzene derivative with surfactant-like behaviour.

While CNSL improves lubricity and energy content, its limitations include high acidity, poor combustion properties, and corrosive tendencies.

In 2022, CNSL-blended fuels caused operational challenges, particularly in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) region. Reported issues included:

  • Accelerated wear of fuel pump components.
  • Cracks and scratches in fuel systems.
  • Poor engine performance and power loss.

These issues were primarily attributed to CNSL's high acidity leading to corrosion of fuel systems and polymerisation tendencies, which in turn led to sludge formation. With regards to combustion characteristics, CNSL exhibited late ignition and extended period of combustion leading to after burning, high exhaust temperatures, carbon deposits in the exhaust system and less power developed. Even at low concentrations, CNSL requires careful management to avoid significant impacts on engine components.

Thermal decarboxylation – converting anacardic acid into cardanol, reducing acidity and increasing stability – and distillation – separating cardanol from other components to create a product better suited for fuel blending – can be applied to enhance CNSL characteristics.

While these treatments are known to improve CNSL's usability, further research is necessary to fully understand its long-term effects on engine performance and reliability.

FAME is the most widely used biofuel in marine applications. Although relatively new to the shipping industry, its extensive use in road transportation provides valuable insights.

Meanwhile, between 2023 and 2024, the use of used cooking oil methyl ester (UCOME) increased significantly.

Many operators tested B100 blends to prepare for regulatory requirements, including the GHG Strategy [greenhouse gas], EEDI [Energy Efficiency Design Index], CII [Carbon Intensity Indicator], and EEXI [Energy Efficiency existing ship Index]. In 2024, at Veritas Petroleum Services we noticed an uptake of B30 blends, a rise considered consistent with MARPOL Annex VI, Regulation 18.3.2, which mandates verification of NOx impacts for blends exceeding 30%.

The impending implementation of FuelEU Maritime is expected to further boost the adoption of biofuel blends.

Operational considerations for FAME blends

There are some important operational considerations to consider for FAME blends. First, it has a tendency to absorb water, potentially leading to microbial growth. Proper storage and a first-in, first-out approach are critical to address this.

Second, at higher concentrations (B100, for example), there could be material compatibility issues. Third, FAME's solvency can dissolve deposits in fuel systems, potentially clogging filters. Lastly, due to its limited stability, FAME should be consumed promptly.

However, despite these considerations, when managed correctly, FAME blends can be used effectively alongside conventional fuels without significant operational issues.

The evolution of marine fuels, from VLSFO to alternative options like CNSL and FAME, underscores the need for comprehensive fuel and lubrication management strategies.

Addressing challenges such as liner scuffing, cold-flow properties, and compatibility is critical to maintaining engine reliability and operational efficiency. With increasing regulatory demands, the marine industry must continue to innovate and adapt to ensure a sustainable and efficient future.

Related: VPS shares review and position on new ISO 8217:2024 marine fuel specs
Related: VPS observes increase in demand for bio bunker fuel based on samples received in labs
Related: VPS appoints Steve Laino as new Americas Managing Director
Related: GCMD, VPS provide innovative means to detect fraud in sustainable biofuel supply chain
Related: VPS examines methanol as a marine fuel for decarbonisation

 

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 31 January, 2025

Continue Reading
Advertisement
  • RE 05 Lighthouse GIF
  • Sea Trader & Sea Splendor
  • Aderco advert 400x330 1
  • Consort advertisement v2
  • Zhoushan Bunker
  • v4Helmsman Gif Banner 01
  • EMF banner 400x330 slogan
  • SBF2

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

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


  • Auramarine 01
  • PSP Marine logo
  • Central Star logo
  • Mokara Final
  • Energe Logo
  • endress
  • intrasea
  • Synergy Asia Bunkering logo MT
  • pro liquid
  • Cathay Marine Fuel Oil Trading logo
  • LabTechnic
  • 400x330 v2 copy
  • VPS 2021 advertisement
  • Headway Manifold
  • Advert Shipping Manifold resized1

Trending