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

Håkon B. Thoresen, DNV Petroleum Services, Norway31 Jan 2011

Fuel Quality - Update

INTERTANKO Bunker Sub-committee, London

© Det Norske Veritas AS. All rights reserved.


31 Jan 2011

2

Fuel Quality - update

Enforcement

Experience

Legislation



31 Jan 2011

3

Revised MARPOL Annex VI – Entered into force 1 July 2010

Sulphur limit for fuel oil Sulphur content

Enforcement

Global 4.50%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 2008 - 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



31 Jan 2011

4

North American ECA (US + Canada) - 1 August 2012

200 nautical miles

Annex VI entered into force for the U.S. on January 8, 2009

ECA application from US and Canada submitted in March 2009.

North American Emission Control Area adopted at IMO MEPC 60 in London, 26 March 2010.

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.



31 Jan 2011

5

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 date Fuel*

July 1, 2009Phase 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, 2012Phase 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



31 Jan 2011

6

MEPC 61 - US ECA proposal for Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands

Puerto Rico

U.S. VirginIslands



31 Jan 2011

7

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 2010.

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).



31 Jan 2011

8


Enforcement

Experience

Legislation



31 Jan 2011

9

Average sulphur content North Sea ECA ARA -Distillates (trend)



31 Jan 2011

10

Average sulphur content Baltic Sea ECA - HFO (trend)



31 Jan 2011

11

Average sulphur content georegion LSHFO/HSHFO (July-Oct 2010)



31 Jan 2011

12

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.



31 Jan 2011

13

Average Al+Si - LSHFO/HSFO georegion(July-Oct 2010)



31 Jan 2011

14



31 Jan 2011

15

Development off-spec FP and marginal on-spec FP fuels - ARA

Flash Point trends 2008

5%14%

20%61%

% off specs development % Samples FP 60 - 61 % Samples FP 62 - 64 % Samples 65 and above

Flash Point trends 2009

7%

18%

26%

49%


Flash Point trends 2010 (Jan - Sept)

4%

20%

37%

39%


Flash Point 1 Oct 2010 to 31 Jan 2011

4%13%

36%

47%

<60 60-61 62-64 >65



31 Jan 2011

16



31 Jan 2011

17



31 Jan 2011

18

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

Vessel 1 Change over 2010.06.28-29

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Boiler20:00

Boiler22:00

Boiler24:00

Boiler02:00

Boiler04:00

Boiler06:00

Boiler18:00

Time & Place

Vis

c

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Su

lph

ur

Visc

S



31 Jan 2011

19

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.”



31 Jan 2011

20


Enforcement

Experience

Legislation



31 Jan 2011

21

NEW APPENDIX VI - Fuel Verification in force 1 July 2010Procedure 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 17025 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.



31 Jan 2011

22

….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 2010. This was considered evidence that the environmental protection policy of the company is not fully implemented and the vessel was requested toupdate the change-over procedure beforedeparture

Recent PSC detentions: ECA max 1,00% Sulphur



31 Jan 2011

23

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



31 Jan 2011

24

Safeguarding life, property and the environment

www.dnv.com

Documents

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