As tighter regulations on greenhouse gases loom even closer to the maritime market, options are still open as to what fuel will meet with these regulations the best, writes Samantha Fisk
North P&I club has recently announced that shipowners and operators are still no clearer about which fuel they will[ds_preview] be opting for in the future to meet with legislation that will be impacting the industry in the coming years. The insurance firm believes that this question could roll on past the 2020 sulphur cap deadline for some, whilst the industry settles into the regulatory requirements, which will not come as a surprise looking at the cost factor for implementing more environmental propulsion solutions.
Alvin Forester, deputy director, North P&I club hastens to add that: »It is not just the 2020 sulphur cap, but also regional and domestic legislation has also been thrown into the mix. The 1st January 2020 deadline will definitely happen with prohibition of non-compliant fuels expected to come in to effect on 1st March 2020.«
Hybrid technology is looking to be a very real solution for the maritime world, at a time where hesitancy to jump into new technology is still apparent. Hybrid offers the market the important step forward, whilst still being able to use the technology that it already knows – just that it is a little bit more efficient.
However, fuels to power these hybrid solutions have recently taken off with more blended fuels looking to come on the market early next year. Whether this will be a help or a hindrance to the maritime market is yet to be seen, but Forster notes that even with these blends »can refineries meet the demand« of the market.
With the likelihood that blended fuels will be a certainty in the future, many questions still remain about these fuels coming on to the market. The IMO is due to discuss blended fuels at one of its conventions later this year with topics such as ISO8217 and whether this standard will cover these new fuels.
Ian Crutchley, account manager, Veritas Petroleum Services (VPS) also highlights concern about the quality of the current distillate fuels being used on the market. »We are seeing more exotic fuel contaminates coming in. Recently we had an issue at Houston and in the space of January to May 100 vessels suffered with fuel pump problems due to this,« Crutchley says. He also warns that as demand for the fuel increases, quality goes down to keep up with supply.
VPS have started to invest in more sophisticated testing facilities in order to test fuels and to pick up these new contaminates that are starting to appear. However, he notes that 2020 will not be the first time that the market has seen a shift in marine fuel, highlighting the 2015 ECA (emission control area) sulphur cap.
Further to this, VPS also sees that ultra-low sulphur fuel oil (ULSFO) and the latest very-low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) with meets with the 0.5% requirement will also present further options for the market. LNG, although, originally thought to be the fuel of the future, still seems to be lagging behind in uptake due to infrastructure and storage, and with the latest developments from the IMO on its GHG deal also putting a stumbling block in the way for LNG.
The oil majors are looking into developing their own blended fuels to meet with the demands of the future, BP so far has been the first in stepping forward with developments in this area. Crutchley notes that the other oil majors are working towards producing a fuel for the market.
Whilst, deciding on what technology to have and the fuel that will power the ships are creating enough of a headache for the maritime industry, charter parties and policy makers have their hands full keeping up with the latest jargon and for most the »devil is in the detail«.
Tieja Smith, deputy director (FD&D), North P&I club says that the charter parties and the terminology need to be reviewed in order to create clarity and consistency across the board. Smith notes that if the terminology is not set then this could cause issues with contracts in the future. Without this clarity, Smith opines that there could potentially be an extra hidden cost factor for shipowners and charterers.
Samantha Fisk
