2020 fuels: Vigilance still necessary

Adrian Tolson of Blue Insight said: “There’s been quite a pressure not to screw up, so apart from a few, fairly isolated incidents, the vast majority is coming in on spec and most problems are being resolved before the fuel gets onboard – but whether that persists is a different story”.

He added: “These first streams into the market have been from sources worked on since at least midway last year… so I think if we are going to see problems, it will be later on, when there’s more likelihood of pressure on feedstock.”

Certainly, the number of off-spec fuel test results processed by Lloyd’s Register’s FOBAS fuel testing service has doubled, senior analyst Naeem Javaid told MS. “Historically, we’ve seen around 4% of fuel tests failing the ISO fuel standard specification, but with VLSFO it’s doubled, to 8%”. That might not be a concern in itself, but Javaid added: “Before, the fuels were off-spec on comparatively minor issues, such as high water content or viscosity.” However, now “sulphur and sediment are responsible for over 80% of the total off-spec results”.

Looking first at the sulphur limits, the problem is that test results from different samples are “naturally variable” says Paul Collier of Clyde & Co: “While the result stated on the Bunker Delivery Note could be just within spec, another test carried out by a Port State Control officer on fuel onboard could fall outside it,” he said. This has the potential for resulting in detention and maybe even a debunkering demand.

Moreover, Collier believes we might yet see a rise in sulphur-content troubles in the spring: “when the 1 March 2020 carriage ban on HSFO comes into force, there is the potential that Port State Control Officers might become more interventionist,” he said. After this, if there is HSFO carried onboard a vessel without scrubbers “it will be an obvious and identifiable breach of MARPOL Annex VI”. Further, as PSCOs will most likely have found their feet in the new low-sulphur regime by then, there may be a consequent rise in tests – especially if the PSCOs suspect something amiss.

Added to this are stability issues which, for some, are just as worrying.

In fact, the several thousand VLSFO samples analysed by FOBAS have indicated a distinct rise in these concerns “especially with lower viscosity VLSFO” said Javaid. He added: “When it comes to fuel stability, I think that a lot of the industry is learning fairly fast.”

However, longer term issues with the potential to cause trouble still lurk beneath the surface.

While most of the industry is currently exercising diligence in the supply of these fuels, Javaid pointed to a central issue within the bunker industry itself: “We still have a problem with control of the upstream supply chain. There are many, many sources of feedstock… but until it gets to the last few hands, most of the suppliers don’t know where or how it’s to be used.” Therefore, while there’s a lack of consistency around the exact nature of the component sources and how they have been treated, there’s still the potential for compatibility issues to arise further down the line.

Moreover, the issues don’t end with sulphur and stability. According to Javaid “We’ve already started to see some problems around onboard VLSFO handling.” He explained that in lower temperatures, more paraffinic blends may cause wax deposition: “There have already been cases where ships were unable to keep enough heat in the fuel storage tank in cold ambient conditions, resulting in fuel solidification.”

He underlined while the advice is to keep the fuel 10°C above the pour point, overall, this temperature is higher with the new fuels. He added: “Realistically, ships that don’t plan well might find it’s not easy for them to heat fuels appropriately for cold conditions.”

Those with scrubbers don’t altogether avoid the fuel issues: it seems there’s pressure on availability, not just on VLSO but HSFO according to Svend Stenberg Mølhol, COO of Monjasa. As a result “infrequent supply issues” are beginning to push up the cost of HSFO in smaller bunker ports. Although it’s been expected, it’s also exacerbated by ship owners increasing the size of their bunker parcels (up 32% year-on-year), resulting in some smaller ports raising and even doubling their HSFO delivery premium.

By Stevie Knight