An uncertain future for marine fuels
Bunkers need to be carefully monitored to ensure owners get what they pay for
Martin Lucas, managing director, Kittiwake Developments, looks at the likely future difficulties facing users of marine bunker fuels
Fuel, the lifeblood of the shipping industry and 90% of the world’s trade, is becoming increasingly inconsistent. Each week, the industry is hit with news of rising crude oil prices, supply disruption in the Middle East and talk of different models for regulating emissions standards and meeting low sulphur caps, which in turn has led to an ever-evolving composition in fuels and a higher risk of incompatibility for ship operators.
Most recently, DNV has warned of the major impact on fuel supply in 2012 when the revised MARPOL Annex VI global sulphur cap will be reduced to 3.50%, with as much as 10% of global heavy fuel oil supply currently above 3.50% sulphur. The global sulphur average of residual fuels supplied to ship is currently around 2.4% according to the IMO marine fuel sulphur monitoring programme, but in some markets in the Middle East and Asia, supplies are dominated by HFOs with much higher sulphur content.
As product quality and composition is increasingly inconsistent, there has been a surge in the use of higher viscosity and density grades that sell for the lowest prices, where the various impurities carried in the crude stock are not extracted with the more valuable hydrocarbon fractions and are concentrated in the residual fuel grades. Today the engine designer has to develop machines capable of operating on the worst grades of fuel available - not an easy task as the properties of these fuels are constantly varying.Fuels that are unstable due to incompatibility between the blend components, poor ignition and combustion, excessive sedimentation and chemical contamination are undoubtedly becoming more common, even if they appear to have met the ISO 8217: 2005 specification, let alone the revised ISO 8217: 2010. There has also been an increase in bunkers with elevated levels of abrasive fines and a low flash point.
By comparison, distillate fuels have historically been regarded as relatively problem-free, but there is a lack of independent market research that confirms whether consistent performance from these types of fuels is possible.
Adapting to these ever-shifting sands and equipping the crew with the most up to date knowledge, monitoring tools and best practices is therefore critical to future-proofing vessels, avoiding expensive errors and potential catastrophic damage. As bunker fuel quality varies and engine health risks rise, so the benefits of troubleshooting using online tools and technology can equate to millions of dollars in savings.
Careful handling and pre-treatment of the fuel can solve or alleviate most problems and the engineer should have good information to hand about each fuel on board (such as a compatibility or stability rating). Some problems will require the addition of fuel treatment chemicals, which can prove extremely cost effective, and regular testing allows for the timely application of lubricity additives and stability improvers, available from the larger marine suppliers.Enforcing best practice during the bunkering operation to ensure that a representative sample of the fuel is obtained to meet IMO MARPOL Annex VI is the first step, but underpinning all of this good practice is on board testing.BOnboard test equipment is advancing at a steady pace to meet the evolving needs of ship operators, and today’s microchip technology can deliver fast and accurate results, automatic self calibration, correction of measured results to standard reference conditions and estimation of derived parameters such as the calculated carbon aromaticity index (CCAI).
Onboard testing will provide very accurate results for water, density, viscosity, salt, compatibility, as well as stability, and results are available immediately and before the fuel has to be used. In the event of problems it is therefore possible to mitigate the eventual cost, a very good position in instances of legal actions and liability.
To back this up, onshore laboratory testing is a great ‘insurance policy’, although should not be solely relied upon, as it is a slow process that can take weeks – inadequate when you consider the time-critical wear and tear to engines that can occur. Kittiwake’s sampling services and onboard testing kits and those from the likes of FOBAS and DNV provide both test results and thorough analysis. Should problems arise, they are on hand to provide detailed technical support that is often beyond the capabilities of a hard-pressed marine superintendent.
Protecting against ‘off spec’ incidents and complying with emissions regulations should naturally be the minimum standard to adopt. Monitoring and fuel testing must now be seen as key to operational – as well as regulatory - success and the foundation for maintaining high performance standards, driving further efficiencies and maintaining competitive advantage.
Images for this article - click to enlarge
Unless otherwise stated, all images copyright © Mercator Media 2012. This does not exclude the owner's assertion of copyright over the material.
