Connect with us

Bunker Fuel Quality

The Shipowners’ Club: Introducing maritime technology to bunker fuel supply chain

Georgia Maltezou of The Club and Darren Shelton of FuelTrust share on how maritime technology can help shipowners and charterers ensure bunker fuel quality and quantity.

Admin

Published

on

RESIZED Chris Pagan

Mutual insurance association The Shipowners’ Club on Thursday (28 September), together with FuelTrust, published an article on how shipowners and charterers can ensure bunker fuel quality and quantity through technology to reduce the financial impact of off-spec bunkers.

By Georgia Maltezou, LCC Manager - London, the Shipowners' Club and Darren Shelton, VP & Co-Founder, FuelTrust

Bunkering is one of the most common shipping operations occurring daily worldwide, irrespective of the type or size of the vessel. Supplying or receiving fuel happens on every single sea voyage but despite it being such a routine operation, there are still several disputes arising from it, especially with regards to the quality or quantity of the bunkers stemmed.

The possibility of placing off-spec bunkers onboard the vessel remains a constant worry for shipowners and the ship’s charterers, as its consequences can be detrimental. Burning off-spec bunkers raises immediate safety concerns and leaves the owners facing not only fuel system failures and engine breakdowns, but also loss of time, underperformance and delay claims, arrests, and the eventual cost of de-bunkering.

Bunker quality and quantity claims are usually quite complex and fact sensitive, so owners must be vigilant and act fast. Preserving evidence such as the consumption documentation, the relevant logbooks and checklists, the damaged parts and most importantly the fuel samples, is essential; cases are won or lost on evidence and the owners’ ability to prove a sufficient causal link between the bunkers and the damage to their vessel. Accurate and complete documentation is, therefore, crucial.

“Cases are won or lost on evidence and the owners’ ability to prove a sufficient casual link between the bunkers and the damage to their vessel,” said Georgia Maltezou.

Furthermore, owners and charterers will be aware that bunker supply contracts are typically drafted on the bunker suppliers’ terms and conditions which limit or even exclude entirely the supplier’s liability for quality or quantity claims. Bunker supply contracts often impose a very short timeframe for notification of claims (sometimes as short as seven days from the day of the supply of the bunkers) and failure to notify the potential quantity or quality issue within this timeline means that the claim is deemed waived. Whilst these short time frames can be contested in some jurisdictions, they may leave the owners or their time charterers with no avenue of recouping their losses.

In the event of a bunker related dispute, we recommend Members approach the Club’s LCC Team at an early stage. The team has considerable experience in handling these types of claims and will be able to provide prompt and accurate guidance to Members on how to deal with what can be time-consuming and challenging disputes.

In the following article, the latest in our Technology in Shipping series, the Club has invited FuelTrust, a GreenTech SaaS Company, who say they can assist shipowners and charterers to ensure the quality, quantity and compatibility of the fuel purchased, to explain how they feel they can harness technology to reduce the financial impact of bad fuel, mitigate the regulatory risk and empower greener fleets.

At the beginning of the 21st century, the idea of tracing fuel origins by measuring molecules seemed inconceivable. However, today we not only know it is possible, but also that there's significant value in examining the digital DNA of fuels. Understanding carbon intensity by individual parcels of fuel can help predict a vessel's emissions based on its unique engine combustion. This information is crucial for calculating potential taxes and credits, which have financial implications for ship owners and charterers.

Equally relevant is the issue of fraud, which has been prominent throughout maritime history. Advanced technology now allows principals to detect fuel quality disparities before making a purchase, minimising harm. If a problem arises after receiving the fuel, they can resolve it swiftly using machine learning atop lab analyses for evidence.

To address these concerns, FuelTrust has patented AI technologies that create chemical digital twins to track fuel lifecycles and identify molecular disparities. Certificates of quality reports from accredited labs ensure integrity for the machine learning and reliable data-driven calculations.

Modelling of fuels is key to reducing instances where contaminated fuels impact the market. FuelTrust's research reveals that between 2019 and 2022, over 39% of fuels globally had a content difference of 2% or more when comparing lab reports to delivery receipts. The primary cause was water introduced during delivery, resulting in average losses of US$ 14,910 per affected delivery. At scale this is costing the industry hundreds of millions of dollars, the majority of which is avoidable.

“Fuel quality assurance is achievable and risk can be mitigated, without question, by using the right solutions to source fuels from transparent suppliers,” said Darren Shelton.

Although the implementation of electronic mass flow meters has fortunately curbed fraud in the paper trail, the introduction of transitional and alternative fuels has created new challenges. FuelTrust's technology offers new confidence to principals, ensuring that sourced fuels are not only suitable for the engine but also align with what was paid for. When purchasing premium fuels to achieve sustainability goals, it’s critical buyers receive exactly what they ordered.

Fuel quality assurance is achievable and risk can be mitigated, without question, by using the right solutions to source fuels from transparent suppliers. If a claim does arise, stakeholders can resolve it quickly by working with a single, unbiased source of truth.

Detecting fraud remains a concern due to human predictability. Dilution of fuels, whether by water or some form of chemical contaminant as seen in recent cases in Houston and Singapore, will unfortunately continue. FuelTrust technology identifies fuel supply chains that introduce risks, enabling informed buying decisions by operators. Prudent procurement processes can safeguard against questionable suppliers and facilitate deals with trustworthy ones, benefiting everyone involved.

In the event contaminated fuel enters the market, FuelTrust's software alerts operators immediately if the AI detects a disparity in a lab analysis. Whether it's an alarming level of metals, a surprising amount of water or a significant disparity between side-by-side supplier and ship certificates of quality, this tool is considerably valuable for risk-averse buyers.

For this to work, fuel suppliers can seamlessly share their lab reports with buyers on the FuelTrust platform. This not only helps clients clearly identify fuel qualities but also validates the value of the suppliers' products. It's a win-win situation, preventing fraud, helping achieve Net Zero goals and supporting transparent suppliers of low-carbon fuels.

Many fuels that are considered "on-spec" still have quality issues that harm engines. Due to the broad nature of fuel specifications, numerous ships have suffered losses as a result of on-spec products, impacting the global supply chain. Ensuring fuel quality is a massive burden on the ship’s crew and shore staff, made more challenging by the difficulty of detecting disparities and filing related claims within contract deadlines.

A large portion of P&I claims are categorised as “machinery” issues and damage to main engines caused by off-spec bunkers has been identified as a common root cause for those claims. Reducing these impacts benefits all stakeholders in the supply chain.

Not only can fuels be sourced with minimal risk of fraud, but savvy buyers can also employ this technology to reduce their risks and improve their emissions profiles. This presents a new challenge for stakeholders: how to compare different fuels effectively.

Many alternative fuels that are being marketed show growing promise, but shipowners struggle to decide which dual-engine combination is the best investment. FuelTrust's technology enables a side-by-side comparison of fuel types and utilises existing data on a ship's historical performance to offer true by-ship, by-fuel, by-voyage insights taking into consideration carbon intensity, consumption and compliance. This detailed exploration helps owners determine the best path forward for their vessels.

Tracing a fuel's lifecycle solves major problems in the shipping industry. FuelTrust's patented technology allows a fuel to be tracked digitally, through its unique DNA, using lab data from stakeholders along the energy supply chain. It can be safely shared cryptographically offering transparency and provenance.

In addition to mitigating risks and resolving disputes, traceability provides much needed visibility into the Scope 3 supply chain, addressing a significant problem for the shipping and energy industries. FuelTrust's blockchain solution allows principals to see beyond the limitations of Scope 1 and 2 datasets, providing robust metrics to meet sustainability goals while satisfying regulators, boards and consumers’ concerns.

Through the invention of new technology, organisations like FuelTrust are not only helping shipowners to solve an age-old problem but also assisting the shipping industry as a whole to achieve Net Zero goals while mitigating risk from fraudulent fuels.

Photo credit: Chris Pagan on Unsplash
Published: 3 October, 2023

Continue Reading

Decarbonisation

VPS on IMO 2028: A new legislative measure for the decarbonisation of shipping

Steve Bee and Emilian Buksak break down what the newly approved IMO framework means for ship operators and how VPS can support compliance through fuel testing, emissions measurement, and strategic advisory.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED VPS logo

Steve Bee, Group Marketing and Strategic Projects Director, and Emilian Buksak, Decarbonisation Advisor of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Wednesday (16 April) broke down what the newly approved IMO net-zero framework means for ship operators and how VPS can support compliance through fuel testing, emissions measurement, and strategic advisory:

On Friday 11th April 2025, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) achieved another important step towards establishing a legally binding framework to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships globally, aiming for net-zero emissions by or around 2050.

The IMO Net-zero Framework is the first in the world to combine mandatory emissions limits and GHG pricing across an entire industry sector.   Approved by the Marine Environment Protection Committee during its 83rd session (MEPC 83), the measures include a new fuel standard for ships and a global pricing mechanism for emissions.

These measures, set to be formally adopted in October 2025 before entry into force in 2027, will become mandatory for large ocean-going ships over 5,000 gross tonnage, which emit 85% of the total CO2 emissions from international shipping.  This Net-Zero Framework will be included in a new Chapter 5 of MARPOL Annex VI.

With an estimated 900 renewable-fuel-ready vessels expected to be sailing the seas by 2030, it is felt necessary to implement global regulation to deliver renewable fuels at a commercially viable price, as current pricing for “green fuels” is 3-4 times the price of fossil fuels. Such regulations will make it possible for ships to operate on green fuels and also incentivise fuel and energy providers to invest in new production capacity.

Under the draft regulations, ships will be required to comply with: 

Global fuel standard: Ships must reduce, over time, their annual greenhouse gas fuel intensity (GFI) – that is, how much GHG is emitted for each unit of energy used. This is calculated using a well-to-wake basis, meaning total emissions are measured from fuel production through to its use on board.  

Global economic measure: Ships operating above GFI thresholds will need to acquire remedial units to balance their excess emissions, while those using zero or near-zero GHG  fuels or technologies will be eligible for financial rewards for their lower emissions profile.

Two-tier Compliance Targets: Each ship will have to meet both a Base Target and a Direct Compliance Target for its annual GFI. Vessels that stay under the stricter Direct Compliance Target are eligible to earn surplus units, whereas those over the thresholds face a compliance deficit that must be remedied.

Data Collection & Reporting: Operators must calculate and report their attained annual GFI each calendar year, verifying it against their target annual GFI. This includes rigorous recordkeeping and submission to the IMO GFI Registry, which tracks each vessel’s emissions performance and any remedial or surplus units.

IMO Net-Zero Fund Contributions: Ships that exceed their GFI limits are required to make GHG emissions pricing contributions to the new IMO Net-Zero Fund. Collected revenues will be used to reward ships using zero/near-zero fuels, support research and technological innovation in cleaner shipping, and help ensure a just and equitable transition for the maritime sector.

Net-Zero Framework Implementation and Green Balance Mechanism

From 2028 to 2030, ships will be subject to a tiered levy linked to their well-to-wake (WtW) carbon intensity. Based on a 2008 baseline of 93.3 gCO₂eq/MJ (the industry average in 2008), operators will face no charge for fuel emissions at or below approximately 77.44 gCO₂eq/MJ, a moderate levy of $100/mtCO₂eq for emissions between 77.44 and 89.57 gCO₂eq/MJ, and a higher rate of $380/mtCO₂eq for emissions exceeding 89.57 gCO₂eq/MJ. These thresholds and levies align with the overarching goal of driving down overall carbon intensity by a minimum of 4% by 2028 and 17%for direct compliance targets—with further, more stringent reductions taking effect in subsequent years. 

Surplus Units and Over-Compliance

A ship’s carbon intensity below the lower threshold (77.44 gCO₂eq/MJ) constitutes “over-compliance,” generating surplus units that can be banked or traded. Conversely, exceeding thresholds will require the purchase of remedial units to cover the compliance deficit.

Sustainable Fuel Certification Scheme (SFCS) and Fuel Lifecycle Label (FLL)

Under the new framework, all fuels must carry a Fuel Lifecycle Label (FLL), which documents their GHG intensity and other sustainability attributes on a well-to-wake basis. These values must be certified by a recognized Sustainable Fuel Certification Scheme (SFCS), ensuring accurate, transparent calculations and preventing any misrepresentation of environmental impact. 

Zero or Near-Zero GHG Technologies, Fuels, and Energy Sources

Recognising the importance of incentivising advanced solutions, the regulation sets specific lifecycle emission thresholds for what qualifies as a zero or near-zero GHG (ZNZ) fuel or technology: Initial threshold (valid until 31 December 2034): ZNZ fuels must not exceed 19.0 g CO₂eq/MJ on a well-to-wake basis. Post-2035 Threshold: Starting 1 January 2035, the permissible GHG intensity tightens to no more than 14.0 g CO₂eq/MJ.

Ships adopting fuels and technologies below these thresholds can earn financial rewards through the IMO Net-Zero Fund, effectively offsetting some of the initial costs of transitioning away from conventional fossil fuels. By gradually lowering the allowable GHG intensity, the regulation encourages ongoing innovation, investment, and broader adoption of advanced, low-emission solutions across the global fleet.

Green Balance Mechanism

Central to this approach is the Green Balance Mechanism, which integrates closely with the GFI. In essence, it applies a fee on higher-intensity fossil fuels and allocates those proceeds to green fuels, balancing costs across a diverse energy mix. The greater the well-to-wake emission reductions a fuel delivers, the larger the financial allocation it receives—effectively levelling the playing field and stimulating a shift to sustainable alternatives.

VPS on IMO 2028: A new legislative measure for the decarbonisation of shipping

Disbursement of Revenues

All revenues from levies and remedial unit purchases will be directed to the IMO Net-Zero Fund, which will then distribute the funds to:

  • Reward low-emission ships
  • Support innovation, research, infrastructure, and just-transition initiatives (particularly in developing countries)
  • Fund training, technology transfer, and capacity-building aligned with the IMO GHG Strategy
  • Mitigate impacts on vulnerable States, such as Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
  • By steadily lowering the permissible carbon intensity and introducing financial incentives for clean fuels, the new framework aims not only to reduce overall emissions but also to accelerate the maritime sector’s transition to sustainable energy solutions.

Note: The full article, including on how VPS can support compliance through fuel testing, emissions measurement, and strategic advisory, can be found here

Related: IMO MPEC 83 approves net-zero regulations for global shipping

 

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 17 April, 2025

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Quality

VPS highlights importance of regular fuel system checks in preventing vessel engine damage

Steve Bee explores how regular checks can play a vital role in protecting a vessel’s engine, stressing that even bunker fuels meeting ISO 8217 standards can lead to severe engine damage if not properly managed post-delivery.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED VPS logo

Steve Bee, Group Marketing and Strategic Projects Director of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Monday (14 April) explored how Fuel System Check Monitoring can play a vital role in protecting a vessel’s engine as engine damage can be a very costly risk for vessel operators:

Statistically, data indicates that a vessel will suffer between one and two incidences of main engine damage over the course of its operational lifetime. The average damage costs have been estimated at around $650,000 per incident, with even more damaging incidents costing up to $1.2 million per claim. Therefore, it is important to identify the main causes of this damage and understand how it can be prevented.

Prevention of damage is, of course, preferable to cure. Fuel quality and handling issues remain a leading contributor to critical main engine failures. VPS frequently observe that such issues could have been prevented through the implementation of a robust and well-structured fuel management programme onboard vessels.

A common misconception is that a fuel meeting the international marine fuel quality standard, ISO 8217, means it is “fit for purpose”. But this is definitely not the case as even fuels that are “on specification”, at the point of delivery to the vessel, can cause major engine damage if not properly managed post-delivery. ISO 8217 specifies the requirements for petroleum fuels for use in marine diesel engines and boilers, prior to appropriate treatment before use, which means that fuels should then be treated onboard between delivery and being burnt

Catalysts used in petroleum refining are made of Aluminium Silicates, which over time breakdown. The resulting, coarse, dense fragments composing of aluminium and silicon, eventually reside in the residual portion of the refining stream. Known as “Cat-Fines”, these particles are highly abrasive and can cause severe damage to vessel engine parts.

Major marine engine manufacturers recommend a fuel should contain less than 10-15 mg/kg Aluminium plus Silicon (Al+Si) at the engine inlet. However, assuming a delivered fuel meets the stringent ISO8217:2024 limits of 40-60 mg/kg Al+Si, dependent upon the fuel grade, the fuel treatment plant would have to operate at an efficiency level capable of removing 75%-83% of these highly abrasive particles in order to meet the engine manufacturers’ requirements.

Furthermore, the International Council on Combustion Engines' (CIMAC’s) recommendation regarding fuel quality states “Fuel analysis is the only way to monitor the quality of fuel as delivered at the time and place of custody transfer, before and after the fuel cleaning onboard and at the engine inlet. Regular monitoring of the fuel cleaning plant will provide information, which will help to make decisions about the maintenance cycles of the equipment as well as potential engine problems resulting from malfunctioning or inadequate operation.”

Yet one of the most important, but often overlooked processes, is that of regular Fuel System Checks (FSCs) in order to assess the level of aluminium and silicon catalytic fines within fuel. The presence of “cat-fines” within fuel can be extremely damaging, causing rapid engine-part wear. Monitoring cat-fine levels before they can enter vessel engines, can prevent such damage. Therefore, sending samples for analysis which are taken Before & After purification processes, on a quarterly basis is the most effective way to monitor cat-fine levels. FSCs will also help comply to the engine manufacturers general recommendation of a maximum of 10-15 mg/Kg level of cat-fines in the fuel, entering the engines and assess purifier efficiency.

There are numerous reasons why regular fuel system checks are critical:

  • Help identify potential risks & operational issues before major damage occurs.
  • Confirm that the system’s flow rate, temperatures, discharge cycles are properly adjusted to handle the specific fuel that is being treated
  • Verify that the fuel treatment system is properly maintained
  • Reduce operating cost and increase lifecycles of critical components
  • Identify presence of unusual components that can enter fuel post- delivery.

Periodic sampling from the fuel treatment system will also identify problems such as water ingress from ballast systems, leaking heating coils and cargo contamination. The last thing anyone wants to see is a purifier working as a pump!

A prime example and case study is highlighted below:

An LPG Tanker bunkered HSFO in Fujairah where its fuel met ISO 8217 specifications. However, after using the bunkered fuel, the Chief Engineer reported the main engine expansion tank low level alarm, with the main engine exhaust gas temperature high on cylinder unit 2 & 4. The vessel commenced a gradual slowdown of the main engine. The Chief Engineer reported the vessel was unable to run the engine due to suspected leaks on the main engine cylinders. The vessel drifted for about 10 hours before dropping anchor off the coast of India.

Upon dismantling the engine, the following findings were made:

144251

The VPS Technical Advisor recommended the vessel submit fuel system samples and upon checking, the results from the system, these indicated that the purifier was in fact only working like a pump.

Sampling

The screening size of Al+Si on the before engine sample further confirmed why the vessel was having problems, as the physical size of Al+Si particles ranged: 5-45 µm.

cat fine 1

The ideal particle size range of cat-fines that can be effectively removed by a marine vessel's purifier system typically falls between 5 to 15 µm. Purifiers are designed to target these smaller particles, as they are the most common size found in heavy fuel oil and can cause significant wear and damage to engine components

If the particle size of catalytic fines is greater than 15 µm, it can pose significant risks to marine engines. Larger particles are more abrasive and can cause severe wear and damage to critical engine components such as cylinder liners, piston rings, and fuel injectors.

Note: The full article by VPS can be found here

 

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 15 April, 2025

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Quality

FOBAS: Off-spec Total Sediment Potential bunker fuels found in Civitavecchia, Italy

FOBAS has tested several samples from Civitavecchia with TSP results exceeding the ISO8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m; samples were all high sulphur residual fuels.

Admin

Published

on

By

Louis Reed from Unsplash

Lloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) on Friday (11 April) released a bulletin regarding its testing of several samples of high sulphur residual fuels from Civitavecchia withTotal Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m:

In recent days, FOBAS has tested several samples from Civitavecchia with Total Sediment Potential (TSP) results exceeding the ISO8217 specification limit of 0.10% m/m. The samples were all high sulphur residual fuels and TSP results ranged from 0.83% m/m to 1.05% m/m.

Further analysis on these fuels suggests a possible mix of both asphaltenes and some extraneous dirt.

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

In view of the above, if your ships are planning to bunker in this port, 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. Ideally including providing full TSA, TSE and TSP sediment test results.

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: 14 April, 2025

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

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS

  • HL 2022 adv v1
  • Singfar advertisement final
  • Triton Bunkering advertisement v2
  • MFT 25 01 E Marine Logo Animation
  • SEAOIL 3+5 GIF


  • NW Logo advertisement
  • Cathay Marine Fuel Oil Trading logo
  • PSP Marine logo
  • Synergy Asia Bunkering logo MT
  • Energe Logo
  • Auramarine 01
  • Mokara Final
  • pro liquid
  • Innospec logo v6
  • CNC Logo Rev Manifold Times
  • Advert Shipping Manifold resized1
  • VPS 2021 advertisement
  • LabTechnic

Trending