Håkon B. Thoresen, DNV Petroleum Services, Norway 31 Jan 2011 Fuel Quality - Update INTERTANKO Bunker Sub-committee, London.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MARPOL Annex VI TRIPARTITE TOKYO 20th SEPTEMBER 2007.
Advertisements

ASTM INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS DECEMBER 9, 2009
Overview MARPOL Annex VI Non- MARPOL Actions
How will the regulation work? How to follow up the regulation?
Framework Analysis International European Spain – Barcelona Italy – Genoa, Venice France – Marseille Greece - Thessaloniki 2.
Håkon B. Thoresen 24 September 2009 Fuel changeover considerations HFO-MGO INTERTANKO Bunker Sub-committee, Nafplia, Greece.
Hellenic Forum Athens 6 March 2007 Peter M. Swift.
USE OF MDO BY SHIPS PART OF A HOLISTIC APPROACH BUNKER SUMMIT – GREECE 2007
OGC 1. BUNKER FUELS Regulation and practice David Springett SGS MARINE SERVICES October 2012 © SGS Group Management Ltd. Geneva Switzerland 2012 Not to.
CLEAN and CLEAN DESIGN Environmental Class Eivind Haugen, Det Norske Veritas Norske Sivilingeniørers Forening Økonomisk og Miljøvennlig drift av skip.
Environmental Bunker legislation and the Potential Impact on the Vancouver Market May 2014 May
UPDATE ON THE REVISION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI LATIN AMERICAN PANEL March 12-13, 2008 Miami Beach, Florida.
UPDATE ON THE REVISION OF MARPOL ANNEX VI NORTH AMERICAN PANEL March 17, 2008 Stamford, CT.
| 1 | 1 REDUCING THE IMPACT OF SHIPPING ON THE ENVIRONMENT DECARBONISATION.
BUNKER FUEL REGULATIONS Latest updates/status & an INTERTANKO VIEW
Air Emissions from Ships. Society is driving the requirement for ships to reduce harmful air emissions from engine exhausts.
1 MARPOL – Annex VI Control of Air Pollution from Ships from Ships and its Current Revision process Dr. Tim Gunner, Technical Consultant, Intertanko.
MARPOL ANNEX VI AMENDMENTS PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES Tripartite Meeting Beijing CCS Headquarters November 8/9, 2008.
NAMEPA 2014 Annual Conference New York City Canada and North American Emission Control Area RDIMS #
NAMEPA 2014 World Maritime Day Observance Cozumel, Mexico Canada's Experience with the North American Emission Control Area RDIMS #
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN EMISSION CONTROL AREA IN THE UNITED STATES Walker B. Smith, Director Angela Bandemehr, Project Manager U.S. EPA Office.
AIR EMISSIONS from OCEANGOING VESSELS INTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007 AIR EMISSIONS from OCEANGOING VESSELS INTERTANKO Houston Tanker Event 2007 Keith.
IMO requirements to reduce emission to air from ships by Manager Research and Projects Gdansk April 2008 ‘
Air pollution from ships: recent developments by Lex Burgel by Lex Burgel.
Leading the way; making a difference North American Panel March 17, 2014 BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Environmental Landscape A burden or opportunity? Tony Field South East Europe Marine Business Manager.
CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION CUSTOMER SERVICE MEETING OCTOBER 28, 2009 MARINE AIR EMISSION CONTROL AND FUEL SWITCHING JOE ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Leading the way; making a difference Latin American Panel November 6, 2013 BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
North American Emission Control Area
Maritime Law Association Spring Meeting April 28-30, 2015
Name:Goh Choong Leoong Student No: P Date: 30/08/06.
GWS SMS INTRODUCTION EMS Manual. 3. PROCEDURES FOR BILGE AND WASTE OIL MANAGEMENT OF MACHINERY SPACES As far as possible, the OWS must not be used.
Spotlight on Marine Fuel Issues
Canadian Experience in Implementing the North American Emission Control Area (ECA) Mexico City, Mexico May 19, 2015.
0 Office of Transportation and Air Quality Update for Air Directors: Transportation and Air Quality Christopher Grundler Deputy Director NACAA Spring Meeting.
Tanker performance and Annex VI compliance Manager Research and Projects St. Petersburg 25 November 2008 Vostoc Capital’s The.
Marine Fuels Where are we? Where are we going? How will we get there?
MARPOL Annex VI Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships INTERTANKO LATIN AMERICAN PANEL November 16, 2005 Miami Beach, Florida.
IBC 2009 APRIL 23, 2009 FACING THE CHALLENGES TO REDUCE AIR EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
The Product Tanker Market and Phase-Out Implications by Manager Research and Projects 4th Annual Combined Chemical & Product.
NORTH AMERICAN PANEL OCTOBER 7, 2009 INTERTANKO OVERVIEW REPORT JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Air Emissions Regulations INTERTANKO Strategy NORTH AMERICAN PANEL MEETING 24 OCTOBER 2006.
Leading the way; making a difference GHG EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING LATIN AMERICAN PANEL Buenos Aires.
Leading the way; making a difference EXPONAVAL – TRANSPORT 2014 December 3, 2014 Environmental Regulatory Challenges Facing the Maritime Industry JOSEPH.
IBIA ANNUAL CONVENTION SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS JOSEPH ANGELO DIRECTOR, REGULATORY AFFAIRS AND THE AMERICAS.
Leading the way; making a difference Lunchtime Seminar October 10, 2012 Ballast Water Management JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
AIR EMISSIONS FROM SHIPPING Reducing Atmospheric Pollution Globally: Kristian R. Fuglesang The distillate solution.
Hellenic Forum 27 March 2008 Athens Peter M. Swift.
AIR EMISSIONS LATIN AMERICAN PANEL Buenos Aires 5th November 2014
Leading the way; making a difference North American Panel October 29, 2014 AIR EMISSIONS/ FUEL QUALITY JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
BUNKERWORLD – MARINE FUEL SUSTAINABILITY FORUM OCTOBER 25, 2007
Leading the way; making a difference NOx Tier III requirements 1. 1.The NOx Tier III enforcement date of 1 January 2016 is kept for already designated.
Leading the way; making a difference BUNKER QUALITY LATIN AMERICAN PANEL Buenos Aires 5th November 2014 Dragos Rauta INTERTANKO.
Anti-Trust/Competition Law Compliance Statement INTERTANKO’s policy is to be firmly committed to maintaining a fair and competitive environment in the.
Leading the way; making a difference Ballast Water Management State of Affairs Hong Kong, 26 November 2013 Tim Wilkins INTERTANKO Senior Manager - Environment.
Tanker performance and Annex VI compliance Manager Research and Projects St. Petersburg 25 November 2008 Vostoc Capital’s The.
Greek Shipping Summit 2007 Athens 8 November 2007 Peter M. Swift.
5.3 Fuel Switching Tripartite, Tokyo, 15 th & 16 th October 2010.
INTERTANKO North American Panel RDML Paul Thomas Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy March 2016.
Maritime Environmental Issues and Regulatory Status Seog Tae, KANG Marketing Manager, Global Marketing & Customer Support, DNV Maritime KNECC, 20 October.
EEB Clean Air Seminar 20 Nov Lisbon Air Pollution from ships Portuguese perspective.
NORTH AMERICAN PANEL OCTOBER 22, 2007 REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS JOSEPH ANGELO DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR.
MARITIME AIR EMISSIONS Lloyd’s List events 11 December 2007 Distillates THE Solution THE holistic solution for the revision of MARPOL Annex VI Peter.
The Shipboard Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP)
CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS: ANALYSIS AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE REVISED MARPOL ANNEX VI Presented by capt. Evaldas Zacharevičius, director of Lithuanian.
PREVENTION OF AIR POLLUTION FROM SHIPS
“The Environmental Challenge”
Presented by Lydia Ngugi
North American Emission Control Area
IMO work to address GHG emissions from ships
Presentation transcript:

Håkon B. Thoresen, DNV Petroleum Services, Norway 31 Jan 2011 Fuel Quality - Update INTERTANKO Bunker Sub-committee, London

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Fuel Quality - update Enforcement Experience Legislation

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Revised MARPOL Annex VI – Entered into force 1 July 2010 Sulphur limit for fuel oil Sulphur contentEnforcement Global4.50% 3.50% 0.50% [Prior to 1 January 2012] [1 January 2012] [1 January 2020]* ECA (SECA)1.50% 1.00% 0.10% [Prior to 1 July 2010] [1 July 2010] [1 January 2015] Abatement technology (eg Scrubbers) is an "equivalent measure". This means that an Administration may allow abatement technologies, but the Administration (and not the ship) have to acknowledge that:  They have equivalent efficiency in terms of SOx, PM and NOx emissions.  That they operate within the requirements of the IMO guidelines  That they do not harm the environment. Adopted 9 October IMO MEPC58 -– Entered into force 1 July 2010 * Subject to a review of fuel availability in 2018, with the option to delay the 0.5% sulphur global cap by five years

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan North American ECA (US + Canada) - 1 August nautical miles  Annex VI entered into force for the U.S. on January 8, 2009  ECA application from US and Canada submitted in March  North American Emission Control Area adopted at IMO MEPC 60 in London, 26 March  Expected to enter into force 1 August 2011 (pending US & Canadian domestic legislation) with 1 year grace period as per MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14.7 (1 August 2012) and it will require all ships within 200 nautical miles to use low sulphur fuel according to Marpol Annex VI ECA limits.

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Californian regulations - CARB Fuel requirements apply to ocean-going vessel main (propulsion) diesel engines, auxiliary diesel engines, and auxiliary boilers when operating within the 24 nautical mile regulatory zone off the California Coastline. Effective dateFuel* July 1, 2009 Phase I Fuel requirement Marine gas oil (DMA) at or below 1.5% sulfur; or Marine diesel oil (DMB) at or below 0.5% sulfur January 1, 2012 Phase II Fuel requirement Marine gas oil (DMA) or marine diesel oil (DMB) at or below 0.1% sulfur *DMA and DMB are marine grades of fuel as defined in Table I of International Standard ISO 8217:2005

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan MEPC 61 - US ECA proposal for Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands Puerto Rico U.S. Virgin Islands

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan IMO - Fuel quality on agenda  A particular driver behind the development of ISO 8217:2010 marine fuel specification has been the request by IMO MEPC 57 in April 2008 (to ISO) for recommendations on specific parameters related to air quality (environment), ship safety, engine performance and crew health as well as specific values for each ; and  to have a new ISO 8217 Specification for marine fuels ready by the entry into force of the Revised MARPOL Annex VI on 1 July  ISO 8217:2010 English edition was published on 15 June 2010  IMO MEPC 61 (27 Sep – 1 Oct 2010) instructed the BLG Sub-Committee to review the revised specification of marine fuels ISO 8217:2010 taking into account the proposals made in documents MEPC 61/4/7 (Norway and INTERTANKO) and MEPC 61/4/9 (OCIMF) as well as comments raised at MEPC61 with 2011 as the target completion date (BLG 15).

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Fuel Quality - update Enforcement Experience Legislation

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Average sulphur content North Sea ECA ARA -Distillates (trend)

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Average sulphur content Baltic Sea ECA - HFO (trend)

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Average sulphur content georegion LSHFO/HSHFO (July-Oct 2010)

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan HEAVY FUEL OIL QUALITY - RECENT DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES Blending to meet required sulphur limits results in :  Increased average density  Increased average catfines level (Al+Si)  Increase in sludging problems  Reduced ignition and combustion quality.  Increased problems with chemical contamination of fuel.

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Average Al+Si - LSHFO/HSFO georegion(July-Oct 2010)

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Development off-spec FP and marginal on-spec FP fuels - ARA

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan On board experience with the EU 0.1% S requirement  Experience for AUX engines and boilers only (at berth):  Change over (Switch over”) take longer times than expected

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Fuel switching cause major pump detoriation ”Tanker Operator” 24 Sep 2010 : A warning has been given by a leading pump manufacturer about high wear in pumps on vessels switching fuels (Allweiler) : - ”The majority of pump problems occur on vessels in global operation.” - “When two different fuels are mixed there is a risk of incompatibility, which may cause clogging of fuel filters and separator, sticking of fuel injection pumps and considerable pump deterioration,” - “When switching from HFO to diesel, oil temperatures must drop from 150 deg to 40 deg C. This process is extremely difficult to manage, due to the resulting low viscosity of diesel caused by too high temperatures or the very high viscosity HFO levels caused by too low temperatures.”

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Fuel Quality - update Enforcement Experience Legislation

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan NEW APPENDIX VI - Fuel Verification in force 1 July 2010 Procedure for MARPOL Annex VI Fuel Samples  The representative fuel oil sample, which is required by paragraph 6(a) of regulation 18 (the “MARPOL sample”) shall be used to verify the sulphur content of the fuel oil supplied to a ship.  The laboratories responsible for the verification process set forth in this appendix shall befully accredited in accordance with ISO or an equivalent standard for the purpose of conducting the test method(s).  Two sub-samples should be tested in succession, in accordance with the specified test method referred to in Appendix V. For the purposes of this verification process, the results of the test analysis shall be referred to as “A” and “B”.  If the test results of “A” and “B” are valid, an average of these two results should be calculated thus giving the result referred to as “X”.  If the result of “X” is equal to or falls below the standards required by Annex VI the fuel oil shall be deemed to meet the requirements  If the result of “X” is greater than the standards required by Annex VI, Verification Process Stage 2 should be conducted  If the result of “X” is greater than the specification limit by 0.59R (where R is the reproducibility of the test method), the fuel oil shall be considered non-compliant and no further testing is necessary.  The results obtained from the verification process are final.

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan ….fuel samples were taken from circulating fuel line of main engine at the booster pump, showing a sulphur content of 1,68% Most probably this vessel was following an “old” change- over procedure, that did not account for the max 1,00% sulphur contents requirements, applicable in ECA from 1 July This was considered evidence that the environmental protection policy of the company is not fully implemented and the vessel was requested to update the change-over procedure before departure Recent PSC detentions: ECA max 1,00% Sulphur

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan This vessel had 1,17% sulphur content in the fuel that was measured in the daytank. The vessel’s bunker delivery note (BDN) stated 0,95% Recent PSC detentions: ECA max 1,00% Sulphur

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved. Fuel Quality - Update 31 Jan Safeguarding life, property and the environment