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.
Published
1 year agoon
By
AdminMutual 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
Bunker Fuel Quality
VPS: Is your vessel fully protected from dangers of poor-quality bunker fuel?
VPS have issued 21 Bunker Alerts this year, which have highlighted witnessed quality issues with the three main fuel types of HSFO (6 alerts), VLSFO (9 alerts) and MGO (6 alerts), says Steve Bee of VPS.
Published
1 week agoon
October 2, 2024By
AdminSteve Bee, Group Commercial Director of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Tuesday (1 October) wrote about mitigating fuel quality risks and safeguarding vessel operations against poor-quality bunker fuels:
As the global marine fuel mix grows, becoming more varied and consequently more complex in terms of fuel management, there is a potential increasing risk to vessels, crew and the environment, from the possible impact of poor-quality fuels.
Yet, whilst shipping looks to decarbonise, with a view to introducing low-to-zero carbon fuels, such as biofuels and methanol, these fuels 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, with almost 230 million MT of marine fuels being bunkered last year.
The VPS database shows for all fossil fuels tested the following current Off-specifications have been identified:
VPS Bunker Alerts, are also a good indication of current fuel quality and so far to date, VPS have issued 21 Bunker Alerts this year. These alerts have highlighted witnessed quality issues with the three main fuel types of HSFO (6 alerts), VLSFO (9 alerts) and MGO (6 alerts). The 2024 alerts show significant off-specifications for 8 different test parameters, from 11 different locations, across Europe, Middle-East, Asia and the Americas. This proves fuel quality issues can arise anywhere at any time, for any fuel type or test parameter.
June 2024, saw the 7th revision of the marine fuel standard ISO8217, released to the industry. ISO8217:2024 is seen as a major step forward in terms of setting specifications for marine fuel quality. This latest revision has moved from two fuel specification tables, to four. It now includes, for the first time, specifications for VLSFO and ULSFO fuels containing 0.50% or 0.10% sulphur respectively, plus biofuels containing FAME, HVO, GTL, BTL, bio-components.
Acknowledging that ISO8217:2024, is an improvement on previous revisions of the standard, it still does not cover enough of the further potentially problematic issues of chemical contamination, cold-flow properties, microbial-growth, plus wider bio-components such as Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL), to name but a few areas of concern.
In addition, the industry has a very poor track record of purchasing fuel against the very latest revision of the ISO8217 standard. To date, VPS as the world’s largest marine fuel quality testing company, still see 12.6% of samples received for quality testing, being purchased against the 2005 revision of the standard. So, vessels are purchasing fuel against a standard which is actually only 3 months off being 20 years old? That revision has since been replaced by four further revisions of the standard over the years and it bears very little relevance to today’s fuels. Therefore, these vessels are really operating at a significantly increased level of risk, if they are relying on ISO8217:2005 to fully protect them.
The most common revision against which marine fuel is purchased today, is still ISO8217:2010. 48% of all fuel samples received by VPS, are being tested against this revision. Again, ISO8217:2010 is almost 15 years old, so why is almost half of the fuel being purchased to it? There is no consideration of VLSFO, or ULSFO fuels, with FAME also being classed as a contaminant.
The 2017 revision, still only accounts for 20% of the fuel samples VPS receive for testing, even though its nearly eight years old. However, it does consider the presence of FAME within certain distillate grades, but still offers no specification for the lower sulphur grades of residual-based fuels, where VLSFOs are the most widely purchased fuel type.
All this means is the global fleet is buying fuel and testing its quality against a standard which is between 8-20 years old?
To date, VPS have not received a fuel sample, fossil fuel, or biofuel, purchased to the 2024 revision. Based on past history it maybe sometime before such a sample is received? Even then ISO8217:2024, whilst a major improvement to previous revisions, is not an all-encompassing standard.
As far back as 2018, The Swedish Club released their independent report, “Main Engine Damage”. This report highlighted how to avoid engine damage, including information showing the average cost of a single fuel management incident onboard a vessel was $344,069. It also stated the average cost of a single lubrication failure was $763,320.
The Swedish Club’s advice and recommendations were:
Back in 2019, in the lead up to IMO2020 and the reduction in the global sulphur cap to 0.50%, VPS foresaw potential quality issues with the new incoming VLSFO fuels. These fuels would be of higher paraffinic content, leading to poorer cold-flow behaviour, potential wax precipitation and major stability issues. VPS recognised that the ISO8217 standard did not provide sufficient protection to a vessel, when using VLSFO, or even HSFO and MGO fuels.
Therefore, the VPS Additional Protection (APS) service was launched prior to 2020. This service offers the full ISO8217 test scope, plus a number of additional tests, in one package offering, at a significantly reduced price, in order to ensure a greater level of protection to vessels and enhanced peace-of-mind to the, now more informed operator, using this service.
The APS Package is customised by fuel type, to cover, HSFO, VLSFO, or Distillates. The additional tests included, will provide much more information and greater understanding of the fuel in relation to stability, chemical contamination, cold-flow properties, lubricity and microbial-activity. The package can also be further customised to individual customer requirements. Many VPS customers have used and continue to use APS, to mitigate the potential risks from poor quality fuel and benefit from the added-value and cost savings, the service delivers.
In 2022, the incoming range of marine biofuels, warranted VPS to research a number of different additional tests to assist in identifying biofuel management issues and understanding their behaviour and operational risks. As a consequence, VPS launched the APS-BIO packages. Once again, these include the ISO8217 as a base test slate, but also include additional tests to measure energy content, stability, renewable content, microbial-activity, corrosivity and cold-flow properties. The APS-BIO suite of test slates cover different bio-components such as FAME, HVO, CNSL, plus the fossil fuels used in a bio-blend, eg HSFO, VLSFO, MGO.
Once again VPS customers, are seeing real benefits and added-value, as they look to use biofuels as their decarbonisation option, knowing that in VPS they have an experienced, expert fuel management partner.
Photo credit: VPS
Published: 2 October, 2024
Bunker Fuel Quality
NorthStandard includes VPS bunker fuel quality data in new platform
Fuel Insights app, powered by VPS PortStats, offers NorthStandard account holders with a view on fuel quality trends, based on data generated by VPS in key bunkering hubs across the globe.
Published
4 weeks agoon
September 11, 2024By
AdminMarine fuels testing company VPS on Tuesday (11 September) said it has been collaborating with global marine insurer NorthStandard over the past few months on incorporating fuel quality analytics into NorthStandard’s new Get SET! digital portfolio.
This collaboration has culminated into the launch of the NorthStandard Fuel Insights platform.
The NorthStandard Fuel Insights app, powered by VPS PortStats, offers NorthStandard account holders with a customised and exclusive view on fuel quality trends, based on the data generated by VPS’ laboratories located in key bunkering hubs across the globe.
Bunker procurement professionals can use this data to improve decision-making, by including off-specs and calorific value to the rationale, whilst technical managers can use the data to anticipate fuel quality risks to avoid bad bunkers.
The digital platform also provides insights beyond off-specs, by highlighting cautionary cases that may require additional treatment or operational advice.
With the advent of various types and blends of biofuels in the marine industry, VPS is committed to enriching this platform with relevant and actionable insights now and in the future.
“This is a unique collaboration in marine insurance,” said Colin Gillespie, Global Head of Loss Prevention, NorthStandard.
“It offers NorthStandard members easy access to global fuel statistics, as well as the tools to trade with confidence by managing risk and reducing claims in one of the most challenging areas of ship management.”
John Oosthoek, VP Operations Digital & Decarbonisation, VPS, said: “The launch of the Fuel Insights platform is the culmination of a growing partnership between NorthStandard and VPS over the past few years. By utilising reliable fuel quality data owners and operators can anticipate and mitigate the risks associated with fuel quality, such as cat fines, cold-flow, and stability.
“Testing remains essential for verifying quality, but accumulated data also helps vessel owners and operators make informed fuel procurement decisions,” said Steve Bee, Group Commercial & New Business Development Director, VPS.
“VPS services provide help in ensuring engines and fuel delivery systems do not suffer damage, crews stay healthy and safe, and ships achieve the required environmental legislation demands. For NorthStandard, Fuel Insights, powered by VPS will help ensure members and shipowners know what to look out for and subsequently enhance their ability to plan preventive maintenance.”
“Beyond mitigation, data could be invaluable to a claim or contract dispute,” added Gillespie. “For example, if substandard fuel was repeatedly linked to a single port, or if fuel issues on board had an onward impact of cargo delays. Shipowners and operators also need full transparency on fuel availability and quality, especially given the rapid rise of alternative fuels,” he said.
VPS controls shipping’s largest and most comprehensive marine fuel quality database, including the most extensive analysis of newer products, such as biofuels and methanol.
“Given that NorthStandard and VPS have the same forward-looking position on digitalisation, this partnership is a natural fit,” commented Bee.
“Accurate monitoring and reporting also help reduce emissions and will improve vessel performance against carbon intensity indices to ensure owners are on the right side of history.”
Photo credit: NorthStandard
Published: 11 September, 2024
Fuel Testing
FOBAS: Joint circular from MSC and MEPC on bunker fuel oil sampling guidelines
Joint circular extends the use of the MARPOL Delivered Sample to also be available for checking of the flash point requirement under SOLAS Chapter II-2/4.2.1.
Published
4 weeks agoon
September 11, 2024By
AdminLloyd’s Register Fuel Oil Bunkering Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) on Tuesday (10 September) released a bulletin on IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) jointly approving the fuel oil sampling guidelines during recent sessions (MSC 108 and MEPC 81):
IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) during recent sessions (MSC 108 and MEPC 81) jointly approved the fuel oil sampling guidelines MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.18 for compliance verification with MARPOL Annex VI and SOLAS chapter II-2.
This joint circular from MSC and MEPC was issued 11 July 2024 and revokes the previous MEPC resolution 182(59) titled ‘2009 Guidelines for the sampling of fuel oil for determination of compliance with the revised MARPOL Annex VI’.
In essence, this Circular simply extends the use of the MARPOL Delivered Sample to also be available for checking of the flash point requirement under SOLAS Chapter II-2/4.2.1 where it is referred to as the Representative Sample. The basic requirements as given by the 2009 Guidelines as regards the sampling location, arrangements and procedures are unchanged apart from the minimum sample size has been increased from 400ml to 600ml. Also unchanged are the sample labelling and sample storage aspects.
The joint circular now provides explicit references in the text to the need that personnel undertaking the sampling and the subsequent MARPOL Delivered Sample preparation, should be familiar with the use of the equipment and the Guidelines. Also, that the sampling operation itself should be witnessed by both the ship’s and supplier’s representatives.
The one particular addition is the new Section 10 which covers the procedures and documentation requirements in those instances where the fuel oil’s flash point is to be checked. This in no way impacts on the MARPOL Annex VI Appendix VI requirements in respect of the sulphur verification procedures which are unaltered.
Moreover, with regard to the key point of keeping track of these MARPOL Delivered Samples, this is now given as being the company’s responsibility rather than the ship’s master as previously. This will be important where samples are taken off the ship for testing, but the remaining material is not subsequently returned.
It should be noted that it is the sole prerogative of the representatives of the Parties to either MARPPOL Annex VI or SOLAS, as applicable, to take a MARPOL Delivered Sample for testing. Those sample cannot be opened or tested for any other purposes such as the resolution of commercial quality disputes.
Photo credit: Louis Reed from Unsplash
Published: 11 September, 2024
SIBCON 2024: Singapore bunker suppliers must provide e-BDN from 1 April 2025
Singapore: Liberia-flagged tanker “Fair Star” placed under Sheriff’s arrest
Singapore-based Metcore and LR team up for MFM certification service
Seaspan Energy takes delivery of first LNG bunkering vessel
Avenir LNG, Eni ink multi-year charter for LNG bunker vessel “Avenir Aspiration”
Baltic Exchange: Bunker Report (8 October 2024)
ENGINE: East of Suez Bunker Fuel Availability Outlook (8 Oct 2024)
Nunchi Marine: Big opportunities and challenges await bunker trading sector
Sea Trader subsidiary opens third Asia bunker trading office in Singapore
DNV on IMO CCC 10: Interim guidelines for ammonia and hydrogen as bunker fuel
SLNG and Gate terminal join Singapore-Rotterdam Green and Digital Shipping Corridor
VPS on new EU regulations: What offshore vessel owners need to know
Trial against Hin Leong Trading Founder and children draws to an end
Europe’s largest LNG bunkering barge on maiden voyage to ARA
Trending
-
Interview1 week ago
Nunchi Marine: Big opportunities and challenges await bunker trading sector
-
Bunker Fuel1 week ago
Sea Trader subsidiary opens third Asia bunker trading office in Singapore
-
Alternative Fuels2 weeks ago
DNV on IMO CCC 10: Interim guidelines for ammonia and hydrogen as bunker fuel
-
Shipping Corridor2 weeks ago
SLNG and Gate terminal join Singapore-Rotterdam Green and Digital Shipping Corridor
-
Port & Regulatory2 weeks ago
VPS on new EU regulations: What offshore vessel owners need to know
-
Legal1 week ago
Trial against Hin Leong Trading Founder and children draws to an end
-
Newbuilding1 week ago
Europe’s largest LNG bunkering barge on maiden voyage to ARA
-
Legal2 weeks ago
Reed Smith: Legal ramifications of Baltimore Bridge collision