Fuel Management Challenges

Similar documents
Index 1. ISO 8217 :

Our reputation is the wheel of our success.

GUIDELINES FOR USE OF LOW SULPHUR FUEL OILS IN SHIPS

all engines Diesel engine fuels Issue

New Regulatory Environment

Bunker Fuel Quality Management Today & Tomorrow

Bunkering With New Fuels Building on Strong Foundations.

FUEL QUALITY TESTING YOUR FUEL MANAGEMENT PARTNER

LSFO (0.10%) Chris Fisher Mobile: Brookes Bell Group

TECHNICAL BULLETIN. Oct Applicability: All Brightoil clients ISO 8217:2010 VS ISO 8217:2010 Major Changes

ANNEX 3 REFERENCE FUELS. Parameter Unit Limits (1) Test method Minimum Maximum Research octane number, RON

ANNEX 2, REFERENCE FUELS

Desulphurizing Bunker Fuel/HFO Utilizing IUT Technology

THE IMPACT OF REGULATIONS ON MARINE FUEL QUALITY

FUEL LUBE OIL. and. By Charlotte Røjgaard MAN Diesel. MAN Diesel / Charlotte Røjgaard MAN Diesel A/S 1

Desulphurizing Marine Fuel/HFO Utilizing IUT Technology. November 19, 2017 International Ultrasonic Technologies Inc.

ULSFO (0.10) and RM (VLSFO) Category Potential future trends

products 22 º C Ventilation Air Conditioning Refrigeration MGO Cooler - The reliable solution towards lower sulphur emissions Inside

REBCO (RUSSIAN EXPORT BLEND CRUDE OIL) SPECIFICATION GOST

Marine Fuels & Environment

SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL STANDARD

Bunker Claims. How an Engine Works. How an Engine Works. Alex Macinnes Sept 2018

Global Greenship, September 2009 Low Sulfur Fuel and Emissions Advances

Supply of Services for Detailed OEB Crude Assay Analysis

ISBN SANS 342:2006 Edition 4 SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL STANDARD Automotive diesel fuel Published by Standards South Africa 1 dr lategan roa

Bunkers: Qualifying Quality

INFINEUM WORLDWIDE WINTER DIESEL FUEL QUALITY SURVEY

ISO 8217:2010 Dr.r.Vis, Viswa Lab

ISO Petroleum products Fuels (class F) Specifications of marine fuels

Marine Fuel Management. Mark Pearson ASGL Marine Fuel Manager Athens, 9 April 2014

Sampling & Test Accuracy under the umbrella of emissions legislation

Fuel Related Definitions

Biodiesel Specification in Indonesia

E/ECE/324/Rev.2/Add.119/Amend.1 E/ECE/TRANS/505/Rev.2/Add.119/Amend.1

Changing Scene of Marine Fuel Quality

MT MODULAR MONITORING SYSTEM

Bunker Fuel Quality: 2020 Outlook North of England P&I Athens, November

Specifications Of Straight Run Naphtha for Exportation

Rim price assessments indicate the current range in which a standard spot transaction could take place on the day of publication.

Alternative Automotive Fuels - Biodiesel

Bunkers. KIVI 30 oct 2012 Anton Spierings (VNPI)

HMP. International Association of Independent Tanker Owners. October 2018 INTERTANKO. Leading the way; making a difference

ISO 8217 INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Petroleum products Fuels (class F) Specifications of marine fuels

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Bunker Fuel Quality. Ian Workman Account Manager VPS Testing & Inspection Inc

Neste. Cimac Cascades 2017 Helsinki. Teemu Sarjovaara, D.Sc.(Tech) Neste R&D, Products

Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures ~ Fuels & Lubricants

Tanker Operator Hamburg Conference Cases of increased wear due to Cat Fines avoidable by on-board fuel condition

10K98MC-C and 6S35MC on the same Testbed

People - Ideas - Solutions

Container MBW12K90MC Thursday 25 Jan 2007

Louis Dreyfus Claypool Holdings, LLC. Biodiesel Production Plant Claypool, Indiana

Economic and Social Council

The Importance of Biodiesel Meeting the ASTM D6751 Standard. Barbara E Goodrich Manager, Engine Fluids John Deere Power Systems 6 February 2008

People - Ideas - Solutions Marine

A Comparison of Boat Introduction and Direct Injection using the Thermo Scientific ipro 5000 Series Combustion Analyzer

Crude Assay Report. Crude Oil sample marked. Barrow Crude Oil. On Behalf Of. Chevron Australia Pty Ltd. Laboratory Supervisor. Crude Assay Chemist

ISO 8217 INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. Petroleum products Fuels (class F) Specifications of marine fuels

A multi-fuel future: the impact of the IMO sulphur cap

LNG. DME Ethane. Coal Slurry MSAR. Biofuel ULSFO (Ultra Low Sulphur Fuel Oil) Methanol Glycerine Hydrogen

Bunkers Regulatory and Practical Considerations. Athens, Greece, 2 nd February 2018 Capt. Simon Rapley

Mack T-11 D EGR Engine Oil Test. Report Packet Version No. Conducted For

DNVGL-CP-0110 Edition March 2016

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION. Quality of petrol and diesel fuel used for road transport in the European Union

High Accuracy Bunker Blending / Bunker Control

COMPRESSOR OILS HYCOM VDL T 32, 46, 68, 100, 150, 220, 320

Test Method D5967 Mack T-8. Version. Method: Conducted For

High Accuracy Bunker Blending / Bunker Control

Recommendation for petroleum fuel treatment systems for marine diesel engines

Annex to the Accreditation Certificate D-PL according to DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025:2005

GREENER SHIPPING SUMMIT 2017

COLOMBIA. 2. Vehicle categories: 2.1. Categories for application with European limits. M = Passenger vehicle N = Commercial vehicle

Significance of Each Test. 1. Color (Visual)

Fuel handling. in Emission Controlled Areas

Technical Datasheet. Portable oil and fuel cleanliness monitor - FS9001+ The most cost effective oil and fuel cleanliness monitor on the market

Project Reference No.: 40S_B_MTECH_007

Schedule of Accreditation issued by United Kingdom Accreditation Service 2 Pine Trees, Chertsey Lane, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 3HR, UK

Module8:Engine Fuels and Their Effects on Emissions Lecture 36:Hydrocarbon Fuels and Quality Requirements FUELS AND EFFECTS ON ENGINE EMISSIONS

Multi-Parameter Certified Reference Material

Harmonization of Fuel Quality Standards in ASEAN

Production of Biodiesel from Used Groundnut Oil from Bosso Market, Minna, Niger State, Nigeria

D ISM Lubricant Performance Test. Report Packet Version No. Method. Conducted For:

ASTM D Standard Specification for Biodiesel Fuel (B 100) Blend Stock for Distillate Fuels

Sampling kits and test suites

CIMAC Position Paper

UPGRADE PROJECT SAMIR- MOROCCO BY MADHOUNI BOUCHAIB HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABORATORIES ARA, 2-3 JULY 2009, ACCRA, GHANA

Biodiesel Business Environment

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

Exceeding Expectations

Article: Sulfur Testing VPS Quality Approach By Dr Sunil Kumar Laboratory Manager Fujairah, UAE

Tennessee Department of Agriculture

OIL PT. Scheme Description. Oils and Fuels Analysis Proficiency Testing Scheme

D ISB Lubricant Performance Test. Report Packet Version No. Method. Conducted For:

Specification Requirements on Synthetic Diesel Fuel from the Perspective of a FIE Manufacturer

Phillips Texas Pipeline Company, LTD. Amarillo-Lubbock Pipeline (SAAL) Product Specifications

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17043:2010. ASTM INTERNATIONAL 100 Barr Harbor Drive West Conshohocken, PA Amy Meacock

US Gulf Coast HSFO. Recommended differential to reflect benchmark assessment specification change from January 2017

MONITORING SOLUTION FOR MARINE MAIN ENGINE CYLINDERS PROTECTION

SHIP OPERATIONS COOPERATIVE PROGRAM

NPS/003/019 Technical Specification for Electrical Insulating Fluids for use in Plant & Switchgear.

Transcription:

Fuel Management Challenges Platts Inaugural Bunker & Storage Asia Conference 29 th June 2017, Singapore Capt. Rahul Choudhuri Managing Director Asia, ME & Africa

Fuel Quality Trends

Fuel Quality Trends Bunker Alerts 2015 2016 2017 High Abrasive fuel Low Flash Point distillate High Sediment fuel High Density fuel Low Viscosity distillate High Pour Point High Abrasive fuel Low Flash Point distillate High Density fuel Low Viscosity distillate Chemical Contamination High Acid Number High CCAI High Water High Sodium ULO High Abrasive fuel Low Flash Point distillate High Density fuel Low Viscosity distillate Chemical Contamination High Sodium High Pour Point High Sediment High Sulphur

Bunker Alerts countries affected 2015 2016 2017 Belgium Belgium Argentina Brazil Cyprus Egypt France Greece Italy Korea Morocco Netherlands Norway Panama Singapore Spain Russia Turkey UAE UK USA Brazil Bahamas Columbia France Germany Hong Kong Korea Netherlands Panama Singapore Spain South Africa Russia UAE USA Australia Belgium Columbia Gibraltar Italy Netherlands Oman Russia Singapore Spain UAE USA

Distillates Exceeding Specification Limit Parameters 40.0% Distillates - Comparison of Exceeded Specification Limit Parameters (%) v Total Exceeded Specification Limits 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Pour Point Appearance Flash Point FAME Viscosity TAN Lubricity Others 2015 2016

Distillates - Flash Point Off-spec by Port 12.00% 10.00% 2017 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00%

Distillates - Sulfur Off-spec by Port 30.00% 2017 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00%

Distillates - Pour Point Off spec by Port 70.00% 2017 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

Cold Flow Properties: CP - PP 2016 2017 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 0-10 -10-20 -30-20 -40-30 -50-40 -60-50 PP CP PP CP The difference between CP & PP should be within 5 as per VPS guideline

Cold Flow Properties: CP - PP 50 40 30 20 10 0-10 -20 Number of Samples The difference between CP & PP should be within 5 as per VPS guideline

Fuel Quality Specification

Characteristics Unit Limit Kinematic Viscosity at 40 C Distillate fuels Standard ISO 8217-2017 mm2/s (a) Table 1 Distillate marine fuels Category ISO F- DMX DMA DFA DMZ DFZ DMB DFB max 5.500 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 11.00 11.00 min 1.400 2.000 2.000 3.000 3.000 2.000 2.000 Test method reference ISO 3104 Density at 15 C kg/m3 max - 890.0 890.0 890.0 890.0 900.0 900.0 ISO 3675 or ISO 12185 See also 7.1 Cetane Index - min 45 40 40 40 40 35 35 ISO 4264 Sulfur (b) mass % max 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 ISO 8754 or ISO 14596 (See also 7.2) Flash point C min 43 60 60 60 60 60 60 ISO 2719 (See also 7.3) Hydrogen Sulfide (c) mg/kg max 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 IP 570 Acid number mg KOH/g max 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ASTM D664 Total Sediments by hot filtration mass % max - - - - - 0.10 (e) 0.10 (c) ISO 10307-1 (See also 7.4) Oxidation Stability g/m3 max 25 25 25 25 25 25 (d) 25 (d) ISO 12205 Fatty acid Methyl ester (FAME)(e) Volume % max - - 7.0-7.0-7.0 Carbon residue micro method on the 10% vacuum distillation residue mass % max 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 - - ISO 10370 Carbon residue: micro method mass % max - - - - - 0.30 0.30 ISO 10370 Cloud Point Cold Filter Plugging Point Winter C max -16 report report report report Summer C max -16 - - - - - - - Winter C max - report report report report - - - ISO 3015 Summer C max - - - - - - - Winter C max - -6-6 -6-6 0 0 ISO 3016 Pour point (upper) f Summer C max - 0 0 0 0 6 6 ISO 3016 Appearance - - Clear and bright (g) c See 7.6 Water volume % max - - - - - 0.30 (c) 0.30 (c) ISO 3733 Ash mass % max 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 ISO 6245 Lubricity, corrected wear scar diameter (wsd 1.4) at 60 C (h) µm max 520 520 520 520 520 520 (d) 520 (d) ISO 12156-1 a 1 mm2/s = cst b Notwithstanding the limits given, the purchaser shall define the maximum sulfur content in accordance with the relevant statutory limitations, see Introduction. c If the sample is not clear and bright, the total sediment by hot filtration and water tests shall be required, see 6.8 and 6.12 d If the sample is not clear and bright, the test cannot be undertaken and therefore, compliance with this limit cannot be shown e See 5.1 and Annex A f Pour Point cannot guarantee operability for all ships in all climates. The Purchasers should confirm that the cold flow characteristics (pour point, Cloud Point, cold filter plugging point) are suitable for the ship s design and intended voyage. See 6.11 g If the sample is dyed and not transparent, then the water limit and test method as given in 6.12 shall apply. h This requirement is applicable to fuels with a sulfur content below 500 mg/kg (0.050 mass %) 12

ISO8217:2017 Distillate Fuel Pour point cannot guarantee operability for all ships in all climates. The purchaser should confirm that the cold flow characteristics (pour point, cloud point, cold filter plugging point) are suitable for the ship's design and intended voyage. See 6.11.

ISO 8217 : 2017 comparison

Fuel System Check

HFO - Exceeding Specification Limit Parameters 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Viscosity Density Density & Viscosity Water Al+Si Sulphur Vanadium MCR Others 2015 2016

Damage case 26,528 dwt LPG Tanker 1350 MT of heavy fuel oil received in Fujairah Al+Si = 39 ppm M/E J.C.F.W Exp. Tank low level alarm, M/E Exh. Gas temp. High on Cylinder unit 2 & 4 Commenced slow down of M/E gradually. Chief engineer reported that vessel is unable to run engine due to suspected leaks on ME Cylinders. Vessel drifted about 10 hrs before dropped anchor off cost India

Discovered upon dismantling Engine Unit No. Piston Rings Condition Cylinder Liner Condition Corrective Action 1 2, 3 - damaged 2 2, 3 - damaged 3 2, 3, 4 - damaged 4 1, 2 - damaged Good condition Good condition Good condition Cracked To renew piston rings 2, 3 To renew piston rings 2, 3 To renew piston rings 2, 3, 4 To renew cylinder liner & piston rings 1, 2 5 2, 3 - damaged 6 1, 2 - damaged Good condition Good condition To renew piston rings 2, 3 To renew piston rings 1, 2

High Cat fines (Al+Si) detected on the system samples Sampling Point Al+Si, ppm Transfer Pump 36 Before Separator 46 After Separator 31 Fine Filter Inlet 31 Before Main Engine 32

Top 10 customers - Best & worst efficiency in 2017 Top 10 Customers 70.00% 60.00% 56.80% 59.93% 63.48% 63.45% 56.35% 59.11% 57.07% 55.37% 62.50% 50.00% 45.28% 47.08% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 10.21% 4.43% 3.69% 3.59% 3.13% 2.53% 2.53% 2.12% 2.05% 1.94% 0.00%

Sampling Procedure

Port Regulations in Singapore SS 600 is new Singapore Bunkering Standard and compulsory from 1 st July 2009 Important pioneering standard and world acclaimed If sampling is not done in accordance, then sample is not valid This Standard was developed under the direction of the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore(MPA). VPS has been a part of this development.

Non-Compliance to SS600 Sampling Procedure 30% of bunkering in Singapore is NOT compliant. VPS Surveyor is 100% following SS600 procedure. 2016 2017

Mass Flow Metering

The Importance of Dispute Resolution Filling Your Car with Gasoline: Pumps are Piston & Rotary Device Accuracy +/- 0.3% Collect 50 litres of Gas: 49.85-50.15 ltr Cost $1.4/litre Net loss or gain = 21 cents Fill up 4 x month $10 loss/gain per year Loading A Vessels Bunker Tank: Delivery by MFM or Manual Measurement 1000mt at $400/mt=$400,000.00 Fill up 10 x Year = $4,000,000.00 Delivery Accuracy = +/-0.5% Net loss/gain = $20,000.00/yr

VPS Experience with MFM Vs Vessel measurement 12.5% 10.0% 2017 125.00 100.00 7.5% 75.00 5.0% 50.00 2.5% 25.00 0.0% 0.00-2.5% -25.00-5.0% -50.00-7.5% -75.00-10.0% -100.00-12.5% -125.00 % Diff (Vsl - BT MFM) MT Diff (Vsl - BT MFM) 42% within +-0.5% range 71% within +-1% range

MFM Technologist VPS has a MFM Technologist in-house and this person will look into all technical aspects of MFM. VPS will be able to provide a third party verification of the performance of the MFM, by submitting the following: M F M transmitter logged data in ASCII format over the start and the end of batch delivery. (also known as Metering Profile) Estimated quantity (ton) contained in Delivery Boom Hose i.e. start from In-Use M F M till Receiving Ship Manifold. M F M Calibration Certificate Transmitter Configuration Setting in a printed Report Stored Zero Value Verification Report (Zero Verification Report). Meter Reading Record (TR 48: Annex O) Bunker Delivery Note (TR 48: Annex P) Printed Bunker Metering Ticket. (TR 48: Annex Q) Survey time Log (TR 48: Annex R)

Case Study Singapore - Jan-17: 816mt delivery of 380CSt fuel. MFM Reading = 816.289 mt versus Vessels Received Quantity = 780.194mt -36.09mt (-4.42%) VPS Flow Technologist Investigation into Bunker Profile & MFM Transmitter ASCII file data:

Case Study (continued) During the bunkering Avg Max Flow from BT was 290mt/hr Max Flow reached during 4 mins (7:44pm-7:48pm) was 472mt/hr = 35mt The 35mt was deemed to flow back into bunker barge tank through the by-pass valve prior to official bunkering.

Quick screening of Mass Flow Meter Profile evaluation service We have customers who want field assessment of the MFM profile. Surveyor will collect MFM field documents including picture of Meter profile. This is already being done. Our office MFM Technologist will review each case for significant parameters, and give a complied or non-complied comment which will be included in the BQS final Report.

Wider Implementation of MFM Examples of Ports where MFM employed but not mandatory: Hong Kong Approximately 5 delivery barges fitted with MFM Fujairah/UAE One major supplier a keen supporter of MFM Rotterdam 5 barges with MFM. Turkey One fuel supplier has 5 barges fitted with MFM, but also insists deliveries also undertake manual measurements as a counter-check. MFM usage will increase across the globe, for similar reasons to Singapore: Port Efficiency Speed of Bunkering Operations Transparency Reduction in Malpractice Further developments such as electronic BDN will further compliment MFM Technology. Industry knowledge & experience of MFM will increase and improve

Summary MFM New technology & efficient option for bunkering. MFM is not plug & play as Uncertainty of Measurement needs control Has to work without hiccups otherwise integrity is questionable There have been fewer NOPs in Singapore, but is this more due to the MFM reading being final & binding? Disputes have not been eradicated and resolution may be complex & require MFM data verification by a specialist flow technologist. MFMs are being used outside Singapore and use of this technology will increase across the world s ports. The role of the Bunker Quantity Surveyor is as important as ever. If the people are not reliable then the technology cannot help

Chemical Screening

Contaminants related damage

Examples of Contamination & Effects Chemical Contaminants Dimethyl Esters of Butanoic, Pentanoic and Hexanoic Acids (Dimethyl Adipate = Methyl Hexanoic Acid) Impact Mechanical failure filter clogging, sticking fuel pumps, plunger & barrels leading to failure of fuel pumps, injectors and fuel handling components 1,2-Dichloroethane & 1,1,2-Trichloroethane & Naphthalene Styrene, ethylbenzene, alphamethylbenzenemethanol, phenylethanone, Benzeneethanol, Phenolic compounds Alpha-pinene, Phenolic compounds (mainly 4-(-1-methylethyl)- phenol Terpenes (mainly Pinene), Phenolic compound mainly 4-(1- methylethyl)-phenol Sludging at purifier, sticking of fuel pumps, cavitation, complete blackout, vessel towed Failures to injection pumps and nozzles. Injection pumps stuck quickly with hard black lacquer coating same condition with fuel plungers and bushings Main engine and auxiliary engines pumps seized and purifier (sludging filters and centrifuge) Main engine and auxiliary engine pumps and purifier seized (sludging at filters and centrifuge) Range of cyclic dienes (cyclohexadiene, acetylene) and Styrene Significant drop in power, Continuous drop for some days Monoterpenes (mainly pinene) & Phenolic compounds mainly 4- (1-methylethyl)-phenol Monophenols, DiPhenols (resorcinols), Alkenes These 3 groups of compounds are found at high levels in Shale Oil, suggesting this has been used as part of the blend stock for this fuel oil Styrene, Cyclohexanol, Butanol, Butyl ester of propenoic acid (Butyl acrylate), Phenylethylalcohol, methylethylphenol Filter problems and fuel pump damage. Vessel switched over to distillate Purifier stopped and the inner housing around the drum and sludge channel were full of sludge containing hard asphalt sediments Sticky hard film which stops the valve rods in open position. Hexadecanoic acid (palmitic acid) & octadecanoic acid (linoleic acid) C16-C18 carboxylic acids Various Phenol isomers (e.g. methyl, ethyl, etc.) Both main engine and auxiliary engine fuel plungers were badly affected Auxiliary engine plungers damaged Sticking of fuel pumps (lacquering)

VPS GCMS Screening Method Rapid Headspace GC-MS Method Detects Volatile Organic Compounds Chlorinated HCs Phenols & Alkyl Phenols Styrene & Alkyl Styrenes DCPD, Indene Alcohols Esters Ketones Between Oct-16:Mar-17: 5.5% of samples tested by VPS showed presence of chemical contamination by this screen method.

GC/MS Screen Headspace - Ports Port Percentage ANTWERP 1.61% CEYHAN 1.61% DUBAI 1.61% FUJAIRAH 19.35% GHENT 1.61% HAMBURG 1.61% HOUSTON 8.06% HUELVA 3.23% ISTANBUL 1.61% JEBEL ALI 8.06% KOZMINO 1.61% KRONSHTADT 1.61% KWANGYANG 1.61% LAKE CHARLES 1.61% MINA SAQR 1.61% OFF TALLINN 3.23% PRIMORSK 4.84% PUSAN 1.61% RICHARDS BAY 1.61% ROTTERDAM 3.23% SINGAPORE 1.61% ST. PETERSBURG 4.84% UNKNOWN 17.74% UST-LUGA 4.84% Jan-Apr 2017 5.5% 94.5% PASS FAIL

Summary Fuel quality knows no location boundaries & will remains widespread. Exercise control & use the latest Fuel Quality Specifications. Watch out for distillate quality & don t take this for granted. Put in place systems to monitor CP, CFPP. Fuel System Check program needs improvement. So initiate better systems monitoring. MFM accuracy & integrity needs robust checks. It is not plug & play. It does not control sampling. Use professional surveyor & conduct Profile review. Watch out for chemical contamination. Use a screening method for better quality control & ship safety.

Thank you! YOUR FUEL MANAGEMENT PARTNER www.v-p-s.com Questions?? Please drop me an e-mail Rahul.Choudhuri@v-p-s.com