Maritime protection and indemnity (P&I) club Gard on Friday (19 June) released a report on practical observations from recent cases of bunker-related claims, highlighting recurring challenges and essential considerations for managing fuel quality issues effectively:

Key findings

• Sharp rise in bunker claims and geopolitics: Bunker-related claims increased significantly in early 2026, with over 70 cases recorded – a 50% rise compared to 2025. Most claims involved fuel quality, with a noticeable uptick following the escalation of the Middle East conflict.
• Global risk profile with concentration driven by supply volumes: Bunker quality incidents were recorded worldwide, reflecting a broadly dispersed and global risk environment rather than a localized issue. Higher numbers of claims at major hubs such as Singapore, Houston, and ARA mainly reflect their large bunkering volumes
• VLSFO remains the primary source of claims: Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) accounts for the vast majority of bunker quality claims. Its complex blended nature increases the likelihood of variability and contamination, making it more prone to quality issues. This reinforces that VLSFO continues to be the key technical risk area in marine fuel usage.
• ISO 8217 compliance does not guarantee fuel suitability: A significant proportion of cases involved fuels that met ISO 8217 Table 2 parameters but still caused operational issues and damage to machinery. This underscores the growing importance of Clause 5, which focuses on whether fuel is fit for use and free from harmful substances. Standard testing alone is often insufficient, requiring more advanced analysis to identify problematic contaminants.
• Claims are driven by both technical and contractual challenges: Bunker disputes are often complex due to misaligned contractual relationships between owners, charterers, and suppliers. Issues related to binding sample, parameter(s) to be tested, time bars and evidentiary requirements frequently complicate claims resolution.
• Operational impact is often underestimated compared to headline casualties: While no major casualties were directly linked to poor fuel in this dataset, several vessels were disabled or required towage. These incidents can create high exposure when occurring in congested or coastal waters. The absence of catastrophic outcomes should not obscure the underlying operational risk.

This report draws on Gard’s claims data from the first five months of 2026, with additional data contributions from VPS.

Note: The full report titled ‘Beyond Specification: Bunker claims insights in early 2026’ can be found here. 

Photo credit: Shaah Shahidh on Unsplash
Published: 22 June, 2026

Captain Rahul Choudhuri, President of Strategic Partnerships at marine fuels testing company VPS, on Monday (8 June) offered insight and advice on how to manage fuel quality onboard idle vessels in the Gulf region: 

The Current Situation

Since the closure of the Strait of Hormuz to most commercial shipping in late February 2026, an estimated 1,550 vessels, carrying approximately 20,000 seafarers, have been unable to transit, or have chosen to remain at anchor in the Arabian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, and approaches. Traffic through the Strait, which normally averages around 138 vessels per day, has fallen to near-zero on most days. The conflict began on 28 February 2026, resulting in vessels being idle for approximately 90 days. Many are expected to remain idle until a navigable resolution to the situation emerges, which cannot be predicted at this time.

For vessel owners and operators responsible for such vessels, there is a need to focus on the technical consequences of extended idle upon fuel quality and what needs to be done in order to protect the vessel, crew and the environment.

Fuel Quality Deterioration During Extended Idle

Fuel deterioration in idle vessels is caused by a combination of time, temperature, water ingress, and inactivity. Each mechanism reinforces the others. The Arabian Gulf summer (June–September) is one of the most demanding storage environments in global shipping, with bunker tank temperatures on unshaded anchored vessels regularly reaching 50–55°C.

Biofuel Blends

The UAE, principally Fujairah and Jebel Ali, has begun supplying ISCC-certified marine biofuel blends, primarily FAME (UCOME) blended into VLSFO, at concentrations typically ranging from B10 to B30 (10–30% FAME by volume). Vessels that bunkered Biofuel blends before going idle face additional degradation risks that do not apply to conventional fuel:

FAME (UCOME) blends, may exhibit reduced storage stability. Although storage life varies, a typical shelf life is often considered to be around 3 to 4 months, after which the risk of oxidation, acid formation and microbial contamination may increase, particularly under elevated ambient temperatures.

FAME is hygroscopic and absorbs water from tank atmospheres, promoting microbial growth at rates significantly higher than conventional VLSFO. Here, the free-water monitoring frequency should be doubled for any tank containing a biofuel blend.

FAME can cause filter blockage. Depending on feedstock composition, may be susceptible to crystallisation at lower temperatures. Therefore, Wax Appearance Temperature testing should be performed before re-activation for any vessel sailing to cooler latitudes post-Gulf.

Note: The full article by VPS can be viewed here.

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 9 June, 2026

Marine insurer Skuld on Monday (27 April) wrote an advisory after it has seen several vessels receiving bunkered fuel, mostly from Southeast Asia, that meets ISO 8217 specifications but reveals significant contamination with unusual chemical compounds under advanced testing: 

Recently, Skuld has seen several vessels reporting bunkered fuel that is on specification as per ISO 8217 parameters. Still when advanced tests were carried out, Gas Chromatography MassSpectrometry (GCMS) showed a high presence of hydrocarbon compounds, phenolic compounds, and other alkylresorcinol derivatives.

Most of these bunkered fuels stem from Southeast Asia, particularly in Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia. The results mentioned above are similar to those reported by fuel testing laboratories, i.e., that it include levels of shale oil components. Some bunker suppliers may intentionally supply blended, low-quality marine fuels amid sharply rising bunker prices due to the war in the Middle East.

Some of the GCMS reports we saw, which contained hydrocarbon compounds like dihydro-dicyclopentadiene and indene, had a concentration level between 5,000 ppm – 14,000 ppm, and Alkylresorsinol concentration between 4,700 ppm – 6,000 ppm. We have previously seen very high concentrations of such compounds, which are commonly associated with Estonian shale oil, and in 2019, we saw a number of VLSFO fuels from the ARA region containing such compounds.

Whilst shale oil is not considered a contaminant and is an acceptable blend component under the ISO 8217 standard, at high concentrations it can cause operational challenges onboard as the presence of hydrocarbon compounds, phenolic oxygenated compounds, and other alkylresorcinol derivatives is not typical of marine fuels.

There is a risk that these compounds may result in sludge formation, filter and purifier fouling, and fuel injection system issues, and that poor engine performance may be experienced, but this is not certain, and in general, most vessels using fuels with these unusual compounds do not experience problems. A risk assessment should be performed, and the GCMS report must be taken as a warning.

When GCMS is performed as part of a troubleshooting exercise in which the vessel has reported problems, we can link the problems and the detected chemical compounds. In case the fuel is not free from material that renders the fuel unacceptable for use in marine applications because the fuel contains any added substance or chemical waste that jeopardises the safety of the ship, adversely affects the performance of the machinery or is harmful to personnel or contributes overall to additional air pollution, then the fuel does not meet the requirements of clause 5 of ISO 8217.

Skuld advises its members and assureds to always perform due diligence when ordering or procuring bunkers and follow precautionary measures when handling this kind of fuels.

• It is very important always to conduct a vetting procedure when selecting a good bunker supplier. Clarification should be sought from their supplier regarding the blended component used.
• A fuel analysis should always be carried out before using the bunkered fuel. As these phenolic compounds cannot be detected in the standard ISO 8217 test, an extended advanced GCMS test from a reputable fuel laboratory is recommended.
• Perform correct fuel handling and enhanced monitoring of the fuel treatment machinery onboard, such as purifiers and filters.
• Good record keeping should be carried out, such as tank sounding records, fuel transfer and consumption, correct temperature settings in the fuel tanks, purifiers and main and auxiliary engines.
• Fuel System Check is recommended to check the fuel quality of the fuel entering the engine.

Photo credit: Hans Reniers on Unsplash
Published: 28 April, 2026