Connect with us

Bunker Fuel Quality

VPS: How proactive chemical screening of bunker fuel can save thousands of dollars

Steve Bee of VPS highlighted the importance of proactive chemical screening which can help ship operators avoid costly engine damages and legal claims that could take years to resolve.

Admin

Published

on

RESIZED VPS logo

Steve Bee, Group Marketing and Strategic Projects Director of marine fuels testing company VPS, on Thursday (10 April) highlighted how proactive chemical screening can help ship operators avoid costly engine damages and legal claims that could take years to resolve: 

Over the past six years a number of high-profile, chemical-contamination cases relating to marine fuel have been witnessed. Hundreds of vessels have experienced costly engine damages during these events, for example, Houston (2018 and 2023), Europe (2022) and also in Singapore (2022). In addition to these highly publicised contamination events, there have been many single cases of vessel damage across the world, due to the presence of chemical contaminants within fuel. All of these cases, large or small, have shown numerous different chemical contaminants, or combinations of contaminants, which have been identified as being responsible for these damages.

VPS is at the forefront of vessel protection in relation to detecting chemical contaminants in fuel and as such, protecting its customers, assets and crew, as well as wider environmental protection. On numerous occasions, such cases result in legal action, where fuel quality testing and the resulting laboratory findings, provide key evidence in support of such claims. However, the wheels of justice turn slowly and it can be years before such claims reach a successful judicial outcome and are finally settled.

One example relating to such cases occurred back in 2023, where one claim is only just being tried in a court of law, two years later. VPS initially informed its customers via a Bunker Alert, of the presence of Dicyclopentadiene (DCPD) isomers at significantly high levels within VLSFO bunker fuel delivered in Houston. The contaminants were detected using in-house GC-MS (Gas Chromatography – Mass Spectrometer) analytical methodologies.

However, 14 vessels suffered serious levels of damage due to the presence of DCPD, in the form of:

  • Dihydro dicyclopentadiene (CAS No. 4488-57-7) 
  • Tetra-hydro dicyclopentadiene (CAS No. 6004-38-2)

Whilst it’s not uncommon to find cyclopentadiene, dicyclopentadiene, dihydro-DCPD, or tetrahydro-DCPD in some fuels, as they’re known to originate from ethylene cracker residue in a refinery. However, the major contaminants in this case were hydronated DCPDs, which can polymerise and oxidise under certain conditions.

Almost 20,000 ppm (2%) was the maximum concentrations detected of combined Di & Tetra Dicyclopentadiene.

The issues reported were mainly in auxiliary engines and consisted of:

  • Fuel leakage in the Injection Control Unit (ICU)
  • Fuel pumps unable to develop the required pressure:

Fuel pumps

Purifiers unable to remove cat-fines giving rise to high cat-fines at the purifier outlet

Sludge formation and filter blockages:

Sludge formation

VPS did not record any particular engine type being more susceptible than others.

Risks from chemical contamination of fuel can be significantly mitigated through pre-burn screening of fuels using the VPS Chemical Screening Service. This low-cost test, utilising Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GCMS) analysis, will warn of the presence of over 75% of all volatile chemicals within fuel.

Focusing specifically on this as a damage prevention service, over 20% of applicable marine fuel samples received by VPS undertake this rapid, pre-burn protection service, with an average 8% of samples tested, giving rise to a “Caution” result, indicating the presence of at least one chemical contaminant and thus the notified vessel has avoided any damages and placed the supplier on notice, within the agreed time-bar, pending further investigation. All of which saves time and money, in relation to engine damage, lost operation time, costly spares, plus the lengthy expensive, time-consuming, claims process, which can follow when having burnt contaminated fuel.

Now VPS has further improved it’s chemical screening power, by developing a unique and highly innovative GCMS-Headspace Screening method, which not only detects volatile organic chemicals (VOCs), but also, semi-volatile organic chemicals (SVOCs) and non-volatile organic chemicals (NVOCs). A further paper covering this specific new method, will follow this article.

A single GCMS-HS screening test to check for the presence of contaminating chemicals within that one fuel delivery, can equate to less than 0.01% of the cost of a 1,000mt stem of fuel. Yet this service will provide a much greater level of protection to the vessel and avoid the risks of damage claims, associated with such chemicals within marine fuel.  Which raises the question, can you afford not to screen your fuel for chemicals?

 

Photo credit: VPS
Published: 11 April, 2025

Continue Reading

Fuel Testing

BV enters exclusive talks to sell fuel testing business to Triton Partners

Bureau Veritas has entered exclusive negotiations with Triton Partners regarding the sale of its Oil & Petrochemicals and Coal testing and inspection business, BVF.

Admin

Published

on

By

BV enters exclusive talks to sell fuel testing business to Triton Partners

Classification society Bureau Veritas (BV) on Tuesday (30 June) announced that it has entered exclusive negotiations with Triton Partners regarding the sale of its Oil & Petrochemicals and Coal testing and inspection business, BVF. 

This strategic divestment is in full alignment with the Group’s LEAP | 28 strategy.

The proposed transaction would include the Oil & Petrochemicals and Coal testing and inspection activities. In 2025, this business generated approximately EUR 450 million in revenue operating a global network across multiple countries, with a significant footprint of operational sites and employees. 

This business grew at a lower rate than the Group and is margin dilutive. It is included within Bureau Veritas’ “Optimize value and impact” portfolio and reported under the Agri-Food & Commodities division. 

“The transaction supports the strategic objective to increase exposure to higher growth and margin businesses,” BV said.  

This transaction represents a significant milestone in Bureau Veritas’ portfolio transformation. Following completion and taking into account other recent acquisitions year-to-date, the Group will have executed approximately 20% portfolio rotation since the launch of LEAP | 28. 

“This divestment is fully aligned with our LEAP | 28 strategy and our commitment to actively manage our portfolio,” said Hinda Gharbi, Chief Executive Officer of Bureau Veritas. 

“The Oil & Petrochemicals and Coal business operates in established and mature markets, and is led by a global team. Under the leadership of Triton Partners, we are confident that this business will continue to develop successfully. This transaction will create shareholders value as Bureau Veritas accelerates its planned portfolio pivots towards higher growth and higher margin activities.” 

The transaction, based on an enterprise value of EUR 470 million, implies an EV/EBIT multiple of 11.1x on 2025 results post IFRS16. The disposal will have a positive impact on the Group’s organic growth profile, adjusted operating margin and return on capital employed. The deal is anticipated to be broadly neutral to earnings after closing. 

Bureau Veritas intends to redeploy the proceeds towards higher-growth and higher-margin businesses, in line with LEAP I 28 portfolio ambitions.

 

Photo credit: Bureau Veritas
Published: 1 July, 2026

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Quality

Fuel quality issues drive 50% rise in bunker claims, says Gard

Gard says bunker-related claims increased significantly in between January and May 2026, with over 70 cases recorded – a 50% rise compared to 2025 and notes that most claims involve fuel quality.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Shaah Shahidh on Unsplash

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

Continue Reading

Bunker Fuel Quality

Bunker flash: High concentrations of catalytic fines, elevated acid numbers found in Singapore

Maritec-Naias issued an alert regarding high levels of catalytic fines and elevated acid numbers present in multiple VLSFO bunker samples from deliveries in the Singapore port.

Admin

Published

on

By

RESIZED Hans Reniers on Unsplash

Bunker fuel testing and marine surveying business Maritec-Naias on Friday (12 June) issued an alert regarding high levels of catalytic fines and elevated acid numbers present in multiple VLSFO bunker samples from deliveries in the Singapore port: 

During the period of 20 May 2026 and 02 June 2026, Maritec Pte. Ltd. (hereafter referred to as Maritec-Naias) conducted testing on five samples representing Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) deliveries from two suppliers in the Singapore port. The analyses revealed Aluminium and Silicon (Al+Si) concentrations ranging from 61 mg/kg to 68 mg/kg.

It is important to note; these values exceed the ISO 8217:2010/2017 specification limit of 60 ppm but remain within the permissible tolerance limit of 72 ppm under ISO 4259 for a single test result. In this regard, Catalytic Fines content, (Aluminium+Silicon), above 60 ppm is regarded as high. Of the five samples, three originated from one supplier, while the remaining two were from another.

Aluminium and Silicon constitute the principal classes of abrasive solids in fuels. Elevated concentrations of such particles at the engine inlet can precipitate abnormal wear and tear of fuel system components, piston rings, and cylinder liners. To safeguard against this, many engine manufacturers stipulate a maximum threshold of 15 mg/kg Al+Si at the engine inlet.

The primary method of mitigating Catfines is through an efficiently operating fuel purification system. Monitoring Aluminium and Silicon levels both before and after centrifugation provides a reliable measure of the system’s effectiveness in removing these contaminants.

During a similar period, Maritec-Naias also tested fifteen bunker fuel samples representing VLSFO that exhibited elevated Acid Numbers, ranging from 2.0 mg KOH/g to 2.5 mg KOH/g. While these values remain within specification limits, they are nonetheless considered at higher side. Elevated Acid Numbers may stem from contamination with acidic compounds such as Phenolic compounds and Alkyl Resorcinols, often associated with Estonian Shale Oil. Such contaminants can lead to operational complications including sludge formation, fuel pump seizures, and compromised injection equipment cleanliness.

Maritec-Naias Recommendations

  • High Catfines monitoring: Maritec-Naias advises collecting samples at critical points within the fuel system — including the fuel oil tank transfer pump, before and after centrifuge, service tank, and after fine-filter — to evaluate the efficiency of fuel cleaning.
  • Elevated Acid Numbers: For fuels with elevated Acid Numbers, Maritec-Naias recommends conducting Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) using the Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) method to identify the specific acidic compounds present or upgrading your marine fuel testing package to MFTP Plus, which enables pre-emptive monitoring to detect major harmful substances prevalent in the market, such as Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL), Phenolic compounds and Alkyl Resorcinols that cause damage to equipment.

Maritec-Naias states, while all data and findings presented in this document are true, it does not reflect on the overall quality of fuel being supplied in Singapore region. If you intend to bunker at this region, please request for a Certificate of Quality (CoQ) prior to loading.

 

Photo credit: Hans Reniers on Unsplash
Published: 15 June, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending