IMO 2020 everything you need to know
BIMCO, ICS, INTERCARGO AND INTERTANKO LAUNCH SURVEY TO IDENTIFY IMO 2020 FUEL OIL ISSUES – Bunkerspot
BIMCO, ICS, INTERCARGO and INTERTANKO are calling on fleet- and vessel managers, as well as technical superintendents, to share their insight and experiences with the new IMO 2020 compliant fuels by taking part in a new online survey.
The big four shipping associations are asking participants to answer 13 questions about their experiences with fuel oil quality since the change to 0.50% sulphur compliant fuel oils.
In a statement issued today (25 February), the associations said: ‘The survey’s main focus is on problematic properties of the IMO 2020 compliant fuel oil that may lead to problems such as increased sludge discharge, clogging of fuel pipes, preheaters, fuel separators and fuel filters, fuel pumps getting stuck, problems with fuel injection and poor ignition of fuel oil. It also focuses on other issues regarding incomplete combustion, wax appearance and increased wear and tear of cylinder liners; all problems that in the end may lead to loss of propulsion and/or black out.’
The survey can be accessed via the following link https://form.jotform.com/200162453649958
Air pollution-busting ship fuel in climate backlash – Euractiv
New rules aimed at reducing air pollution from shipping may worsen the sector’s climate impact, according to new research, which warns that low sulphur fuels could end up producing more climate-bashing emissions, known as black carbon.
On 1 January, International Maritime Organisation (IMO) rules came into force, lowering the legal sulphur limit of boat fuel from 3.5% to just 0.5%, in a bid to improve air quality and reduce the causes of acid rain.
But new figures submitted to the IMO by Finland and Germany, ahead of an annual meeting of its pollution prevention committee meeting in February, warn that the tweaked fuels have the potential to do serious climate harm.
According to the study, the hybrid fuels tested contained between 70% and 95% more aromatic compounds, which led to 10% to 85% more BC compared to standard heavy fuel oil (HFO), a widely used shipping fuel.
Lloyd’s List – IMO urged to consider market-based measures for emissions
Economic incentives have been a controversial topic for governments previously. But with increasing industry acceptance that eventually they will be necessary, will the IMO manage to agree to one? The UK wants fellow governments to think about that prospect – subscription required
World Fuel Services expects to move more low sulphur fuel – Tradewinds
World Fuel Services expects the majority of the marine fuel it supplies in the first quarter to be of the IMO 2020 compliant variety. The Miami company’s finance chief Iran Birns said Thursday that, come quarter-end, the fuel provider’s bunker sales will be 85% low sulphur fuel or marine gasoil, up from 55% in the fourth quarter before the global emissions regulations kicked in.
NWE VLSFO premium over HSFO slumps to six-month low – Bunkerworld
Ample availability of VLSFO adds to dampened shipping demand from the coronavirus outbreak. S&P Platts Bunkerworld subscription required https://www.bunkerworld.com/news/156453
Listen: Post-IMO 2020: Asia Marine Fuel 0.5% valuations on a roller-coaster ride – SP & Platts
S&P Global Platts refined oil products experts Atsuko Kawasaki, Amy Tan, and Rajesh Nair examine the rapidly changing fortunes of the Asian Marine Fuel 0.5% market, which has seen a fundamental shift since International Maritime Organization’s mandate to limit sulfur in marine fuels to a maximum of 0.5% kicked off from the start of the year. https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/podcasts/oil/022820-asia-marine-fuel-valuations
DRY BULK SECTOR PAYING THE PRICE FOR IMO 2020 – Bunkerspot
BIMCO’s Chief Shipping Analyst Peter Sand reports that the higher fuel costs associated with low sulphur fuels have taken their toll on dry bulk sector earnings. In an analysis of the dry bulk market posted on the BIMCO website yesterday (26 February), Sand noted that fuel costs have significantly risen since the 2020 sulphur cap was implemented. Sand commented: ‘The steep drop in earnings illustrates that passing on the extra fuel cost has been near-impossible to implement on voyage charters.’
In comparison, Sand highlights that earnings on scrubber-fitted vessels remain higher because of the lower cost of high sulphur fuel. https://www.bunkerspot.com/global/50000-global-earnings-paying-the-price-for-imo-2020
Sinopec QiLu Petrochemical delivers first batch of low sulphur fuel – Seatrade
Sinopec QiLu Petrochemical Company has delivered its first batch of low sulphur marine heavy fuel oil to Bingang liquid chemical terminal at Longkou port in Shandong.
The company started the research and development of low sulphur marine heavy fuel oil in 2017 and successfully produced the low sulphur marine heavy fuel oil product at the end of 2019 in time for IMO 2020 coming into force.
Hafnia says low-sulphur fuels help sustainability – Lloyd’s List
Hafnia, one of the largest product tanker companies, said low sulphur fuels is a sustainable choice. It posted a surge in profits in the fourth quarter
Royal Arctic Line CEO wants heavy fuel ban pushed back to 2040 – Shipping Watch
A coming ban on sailing with high-sulfur fuel oil in the Arctic should not come into force until 2040, says Royal Arctic Line CEO Verner Hammeken. NGOs want the company’s management replaced following the statement. https://shippingwatch.com/secure/carriers/Container/article11964081.ece
Are Market Based Measures the most feasible way to limit GHG emissions now? – Seatrade
LNG is basically playing with methane and won’t limit CO2 emissions, open loop scrubbers double the pollution problem with food chain and under water marine life, low-sulphur fuel is limiting sulphur emissions yet wont address black carbon emissions. So, is the industry worst-off because of regulations? Or should the market solve this program via MBMs?
Out of many understandings of MBMs, the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD) defines MBMs to address the market failure of ‘Environmental Externalities’ either by incorporating the external cost of production or consumption activities through taxes or charges on processes or products, or by creating property rights and facilitating the establishment of a proxy market for the use of environmental services. MBMs are useful tools for environmental policy making. These measures would give an economic cost to the polluters which can reduce GHG emissions and develop future markets towards a sustainable way. https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/opinions-analysis/are-market-based-measures-most-feasible-way-limit-ghg-emissions-now
The Lloyd’s List Podcast: Why the EU won’t wait for IMO on climate change – Lloyd’s List
We have a climate emergency, we can’t wait for the IMO, claims Jutta Paulus, the European Parliament’s maritime emissions rapporteur. This week’s Podcast catches up with the controversial MEP in Brussels to discuss her sweeping proposal. It would effectively force ships to operate under an emissions cap and trade system, increase their carbon intensity performance and contribute to a European maritime decarbonisation fund. “If you wait for consensus, you’ll never get anywhere,” she says. “We need ambitious influencers.”
Maersk to Raise HSFO Bunker Fuel Consumption to 25% – Marine Link
Danish shipping group A.P. Moller-Maersk plans to raise the proportion of high sulphur fuel oil it consumes from 10% to 25% by the year-end, CEO Soren Skou says.
The world’s largest container shipping firm consumed a total of around 11.80 million tonnes of shipping fuel last year.
EU committed to introducing CO2 quotas on shipping – Shipping Watch
Despite shipping companies doing everything in their power to avoid it, the European Commission stands firm. CO2 quotas must be imposed on shipping, and the proposal will be introduced in a few months, says top official. The European Parliament widely supports the use of quotas. https://shippingwatch.com/secure/regulation/article11961422.ece