Nafs March 2018

nafs Ted Petropoulos:

Is further consolidation in Greek shipping a positive development?

Bimonthly Review for the Shipping Industry FEBRUARY MARCH 2018 issue 121

ΚΩΔ. Γ.Γ 2229

www.nafs.gr www.nafsgreen.gr

Golden Destiny:

Ανασκόπιση της ναυτιλιακής αγοράς για το 2017

YES to Shipping Forum: Παρασκευή 8 Ιουνίου 2018 στο Metropolitan Expo

IMO: Implementing the 2020 sulphur limit

Index ISSUE 121

MARCH 2018

Κ. ΔΟΥΚΑΣ: Ο “πόλεμος των Ρόουζ” στη Ναυτιλιακή 06. ΝΙΚΟΣ αρένα ΔΟΥΚΑΣ: Οι απειλές του Ερντογάν και το 08. ΚΩΣΤΑΣ εκμεταλλεύσιμο των κοιτασμάτων Destiny: Ανασκόπιση της ναυτιλιακής αγοράς για το 12. Golden 2017 Vekris: Key Factors for a trouble free operation of a 14. Marcos BWTS

Petropoulos: Is further consolidation in Greek shipping a 16. Ted positive development?

18. IMO: Implementing the 2020 sulphur limit 38. Shell Marine prepares for more cylinder oil uncertainties in the 2020 era 40. Shipping selection of fuel and propulsion machinery

54. Dimitris Poulos*: Deciding your route to SOx compliance 60. Scrubber work demands exhaustive treatment GRUPP and SPLIETHOFF carrying out projects to re68. BLRT duce environmental impact to Shipping Forum: Παρασκευή 8 Ιουνίου 2018 στο Metro70. YES politan Expo

James Bond

Ignore the 2020 noise - but do prepare for the deadline

04 NAFS MARCH 2018

32.

30.

28.

John Kokarakis

Global Sulphur Cap 2020 time to take action

George Kazantzis

Global Sulphur Cap 2020 time to take action

36.

Sophia Themelarou

Global Sulphur Cap 2020 The sky is falling?

nafs

ανεμολόγιο

Ο «πόλεμος των Ρόουζ» στη ναυτιλιακή αρένα Γράφει ο Νίκος

Κ. Δούκας, Δημοσιογράφος, Μέλος ΕΣΗΕΑ.

Τα πάνω κάτω έρχονται να φέρουν ολοένα και πιο συχνά οι νέες τεχνολογίες στη Ναυτιλία. Οι Έλληνες πλοιοκτήτες έχουν κάθε λόγο να είναι ανήσυχοι, καθώς κατέχουν τον πιο πολύτιμο στόλο στον κόσμο με αξία που αγγίζει τα 100 δις δολάρια. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι κάθε φορά που εμφανίζεται μία νέα τεχνολογία, ο Ελληνικός και Ελληνόκτητος στόλος των 4800 και πλέον πλοίων είναι αυτός που πρώτος θα αναγκαστεί κυρίως από τους διεθνείς διαγωνισμούς που διέπουν ενίοτε τις νέες τεχνολογίες να εφαρμόσει κατά γράμμα τις εκάστοτε απαιτήσεις. Για παράδειγμα ύστερα από απαίτηση των διεθνών οργανισμών όπως ο IMO και το USCG τα πλοία θα πρέπει να εξοπλιστούν με τεχνολογία διαχείρισης έρματος υποχρεωτικά, είτε πρόκειται για μεταχειρισμένα είτε για νεότευκτα. Δεκάδες εταιρίες έσπευσαν να επενδύσουν εκατομμύρια στην δημιουργία τεχνολογιών που θα ανταποκρίνονται στις απαιτήσεις των διεθνών κανονισμών. Βρέθηκαν μάλιστα και κάποια εξειδικευμένα εργαστήρια που χρέωναν εκατομμύρια ευρώ μόνο και μόνο για τα αποτελέσματα ενός δείγματος – αποτέλεσμα της εκάστοτε τεχνολογίας διαχείρισης έρματος. Πολλές από τις εταιρίες αυτές απέκτησαν φήμη από το πουθενά, έλαβαν δημοσιότητα, και εδώ και μερικά χρόνια προσπαθούν να αποσπάσουν ένα μερίδιο της αγοράς. Χιλιάδες ώρες δοκιμών, δείγματα, και ατέλειωτες σελίδες κανονισμών και νομικών εγγράφων αυξάνουν διαρκώς το κόστος εγκατάστασης και συντήρησης ενός τέτοιου συστήματος, κόστος βέβαια που μετακυλίεται στον πλοιοκτήτη όπως κάθε φορά. Θα πρέπει να βάλει γερά το χέρι στην τσέπη τόσο για μία μετασκευή όσο και για ένα νεόκτιστο πλοίο. Ειδικά για τα

06 NAFS MARCH 2018

νεόκτιστα πλοία όχι μόνο θα πρέπει να πληρώσει αλλά τα περιθώρια των επιλογών του είναι περιορισμένα καθώς η δύναμη που απέκτησαν τα ναυπηγεία στην Άπω Ανατολή δημιουργούν τις συνθήκες ώστε εντέχνως να προωθούν συγκεκριμένες εταιρίες προκειμένου να χτίσουν ένα νέο πλοίο. Συνέδρια, ημερίδες, forum, βραβεία, φωτογραφίες, workshops, κανονισμοί, πρωτόκολλα, και ξαφνικά ένας από τους μεγαλύτερους νηογνώμονες παγκοσμίως ανακοινώνει το πρώτο LNG “Ballast free” πλοίο. Ένας νέος τύπος πλοίου που δεν θα χρειάζεται πλέον καμία από τις τεχνολογίες για τις οποίες τα τελευταία χρόνια έχουν ξοδευτεί εκατοντάδες εκατομμύρια και από την μεριά του κατασκευαστή και από την μεριά του πλοιοκτήτη. «Το τίμημα της τεχνολογίας» μου είπε στέλεχος κορυφαίας εταιρίας BWTS. «Το ίδιο συνέβη στη Σιγκαπούρη το 1979, αλλά δεν περπάτησε σαν τεχνολογία» μου είπε πολύ έμπειρο στέλεχος της ναυτιλιακής κοινότητας και με μεγάλη εμπειρία δεκαετιών. Τα τελευταία 10 χρόνια η ναυτιλία η οποία έχει κατηγορηθεί ότι ρυπαίνει το περιβάλλον, έχει σηκώσει στις πλάτες της τεράστια βάρη τεχνολογίας με απώτερο σκοπό την προστασία του θαλασσίου περιβάλλοντος αλλά και του πλανήτη γενικότερα. Σύμφωνα βέβαια με μελέτες, η ναυτιλία δεν ρυπαίνει περισσότερο από άλλες βιομηχανίες. Δέχεται όμως κατά ρυπάς συστήματα πανάκριβα προς εγκατάσταση με σχεδόν ασαφές νομικό πλαίσιο, και σφικτά χρονοδιαγράμματα. Ο Ελληνόκτητος στόλος - σταθερά πρώτος στον κόσμο με 20% και πλέον αλλά και πρώτος στην Ευρώπη με ποσοστό που αγγίζει το 50% είναι παράλληλα και ο στόλος με την μεγαλύτερη αξία που αγγίζει τα 100 δις δολάρια. Τα συμπεράσματα δικά σας.

nafs

ίσαλος

γραμμή

Οι απειλές του Ερντογάν και το εκμεταλλεύσιμο των κοιτασμάτων Η απόφαση Τραμπ για τον χάλυβα πλήττει την ναυλαγορά Γράφει ο Κώστας

Δούκας, Δημοσιογράφος, Μέλος ΕΣΗΕΑ, Βραβείο Δημοσιογρσαφίας ΙΔΡΥΜΑΤΟΣ ΜΠΟΤΣΗ

Τά ὃσα συμβαίνουν σήμερα στό Αἰγαῖο καταδεικνύουν ἱστορικῶς ὃτι οἱ ἲδιες διενέξεις γειτόνων χωρῶν συνέβαιναν στό παρελθόν καί οἱ ἲδιες θά συμβαίνουν στό μέλλον καί γιά πάντα. Ὃπου ὑπάρχουν πηγές ἐνέργειας, διατροφῆς καί νεροῦ, οἱ γειτονικές χῶρες, καί ἐν προκειμένω σήμερα ἡ Τουρκία καί ἡ Ἑλλάδα, συμμέτρως δέ καί ἡ Κύπρος ὡς ἀνεξάρτητο κράτος, βρίσκονται σέ διαμάχες πού κρατοῦν αἰῶνες. Σήμερα, πού ἡ κατάσταση ἒχει ὀξυνθεῖ, οἱ προκλήσεις ἒχουν ἐνταθεῖ καί ἡ κλαγγή τῶν ὃπλων εἶναι σχεδόν ἐκκωφαντική (ἐκ μέρους τῆς Τουρκίας φυσικά), ἡ ἐχθρότητα προκαλεῖ τήν ἀνησυχία καί τήν ἀβεβαιότητα, ὂχι μόνο τοῦ λαοῦ τῆς Ἑλλάδος, ἀλλά καί τῆς Τουρκίας, καί γίνονται ἐμφανέστεροι οἱ λόγοι πού ἡ Ἑλλάδα ἀπό τήν ἀρχαιότητα, μέ τούς σπουδαίους ἡγέτες πού διέθετε, ἒδιωξε κατ᾽ ἐπανάλειψη ἐπί αἰῶνες τούς Ἀσιανούς ἀπό τήν Μικρά Ἀσία καί κατέστησε τό Αἰγαῖο ἑλληνική θάλασσα, τήν “ἡμετέραν θάλασσαν” τοῦ Ἀρριανοῦ. Πρώτη φορά ἐκδιώχθηκαν οἱ Ἀσιανοί (τότε ἦσαν Μῆδοι, Πέρσες, βάρβαροι) ἀπό τόν Θεμιστοκλῆ στήν ἀποφασιστική ναυμαχία τῆς Σαλαμῖνος, δεύτερη φορά ἀποκρούσθηκαν ἀπό τόν Κίμωνα, τόν γιό τοῦ θριαμβευτοῦ τοῦ Μαραθῶνος Μιλτιάδου, τό 460 π.Χ. μέ δύο νικηφόρες ναυμαχίες καί μία πεζομαχία, τήν ἲδια ἡμέρα στήν Κύπρο (μοναδικό παγκόσμιο φαινόμενο), διαλύοντας τούς στόλους τῶν Αἰγυπτίων καί τῶν Φοινίκων, τρίτη φορά ὁ Μέγας Ἀλέξανδρος παρέδωσε στούς Ἓλληνες τίς δύο ὂχθες τοῦ Αἰγαίου, τέταρτη φορά τό Βυζάντιο, πέμπτη φορά οἱ Μιαούληδες, οἱ Κανάρηδες καί οἱ Μπουμπουλίνες μέ ὃλους

08 NAFS MARCH 2018

τούς ὁπλαρχηγούς τοῦ ᾽21 ἀποτινάσσοντας τόν τουρκικό ζυγό καί ἓκτη φορά στούς τελευταίους παγκοσμίους πολέμους ἡ Ἑλλάδα ἐπέβαλε καί πάλι τά κυριαρχικά της δικαιώματα στό Αἰγαῖο. Στούς νεωτέρους χρόνους, ἐκτός ἀπό τό “βυθίσατε τό Χόρα”, ἐπιχειρεῖται διάλογος γιά τήν ὑφαλοκρηπίδα, πού χρονολογεῖται ἀπό τό 1976, μέ τίς συνομιλίες τῆς Βέρνης, ὃπου καί ὑπεγράφη πρακτικό συμπεριφορᾶς τῶν δύο χωρῶν μέχρι νά ἀποφανθεῖ τό Διεθνές Δικαστήριο τῆς Χάγης. Ἀργότερα ὃμως ἡ Τουρκία ἀρνήθηκε νά προσφύγει στό Διεθνές Δικαστήριο καί τό Πρακτικό τῆς Βέρνης ἒπαψε νά ἰσχύει. Ἡ Τουρκία προτίμησε νά αὐτοδικεῖ, παραβιάζοντας ὃλους τούς κανόνες τοῦ διεθνοῦς δικαίου, εἰσβάλλοντας στήν Κύπρο, παραβιάζοντας διαρκῶς τόν θαλάσσιο καί ἐναέριο χῶρο τῆς Ἑλλάδος καί ἐγείροντας ἐδαφικές διεκδικήσεις, μέ δημιουργία ἀρχικῶς “γκρίζων ζωνῶν”, ἀλλά καί ἀπειλῶν πολέμου. Ἒγκυρη πηγή ἀπό τήν κυπριακή κυβέρνηση μᾶς πληροφορεῖ ὃτι τά κοιτάσματα τῆς Κυπριακῆς ΑΟΖ δέν ἒχει ἀποδειχθεῖ ἀκόμη ὃτι εἶναι ἐκμεταλλεύσιμα, ἀσχέτως τοῦ τί λέγεται στά ΜΜΕ. Καί τί σημαίνει “ἐκμεταλλεύσιμα”; Σημαίνει ὃτι αὐτός πού θά ἐξάγει τούς ὑδρογονάνθρακες ἀπό τόν βυθό τῆς θάλασσας, θά πρέπει νά ἒχει ἐξασφαλισμένη ποσότητα καί ποιότητα προϊόντος γιά νά τοῦ μείνει κέρδος. Ἡ Τουρκία, ἐνῶ δέν ἀντέδρασε γιά τό οἰκόπεδο 3 (Ἀμμόχωστος καί Καρπασία) ἐπειδή θεωρεῖ ὃτι ἀνήκει στούς Τουρκοκυπρίους καί, ἂρα, στήν Τουρκία, δημιουργεῖ ἐντάσεις στό Αἰγαῖο, διότι τήν μοιρασιά θά κάνει ἡ κυβέρνηση τῆς Κύπρου, ὣστε νά ἒχει κι αὐτή ἱκανοποιητικό μερίδιο μέ ὁποιονδήποτε τρόπο. Κατά παγία τακτική, ὃταν μία μεγάλη χώρα, ὃπως ἡ Τουρκία, ἡ ὁποία τροφοδοτεῖται μέ ὁπλισμό ἀπό ὃλες τίς μεγάλες δυνάμεις, δημιουργεῖ καταστάσεις διένεξης καί διεκδικήσεων, αὐτές δέν ἐπεμβαίνουν. Ἀφήνουν νά ἐξελιχθοῦν τά πράγματα καί θά δράσουν ἐν ψυχρῶ τήν κατάλληλη στιγμή καί κατά τά συμφέροντά τους. Ὁ ἐπανεκλεγείς μέ συντριπτική πλειοψηφία Ρῶσος πρόεδρος Πούτιν δέν πηγαίνει κόντρα στόν Ἐρντογάν, πιστεύοντας ὃτι μπορεῖ νά τόν “διαχειρισθεῖ” καλλίτερα ὃταν τόν ἒχει μέ τό μέρος του. Οἱ ΗΠΑ δέν ἀντιδροῦν κι αὐτές, ἀλλά μέσω τοῦ ΝΑΤΟ,

πού παίζει τόν ρόλο τοῦ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, διαμηνύουν “νά τά βροῦν μεταξύ τους”. Τήν ἲδια ἀνοχή ἐπιδεικνύουν ἡ Ἀγγλία, ἡ Γαλλία καί ἡ Γερμανία. Τό Ἰσραήλ ἒχει βρεῖ κάποια μεγαλύτερα ἀποθέματα στό Αἰγαῖο, ἀλλά αὐτά μόλις πού ἐπαρκοῦν γιά τήν προμήθεια τῆς Αἰγύπτου καί τῆς Ἰορδανίας. Ἡ Αἲγυπτος δέν ἒχει συμφέρον νά γίνει ὁ ἀξίας 10 δισ. εὐρώ ἀγωγός. Ἒτσι ἡ Τουρκία ἒχει ἀφεθεῖ ἐλεύθερη νά “ἀλυκτά” πρός κάθε κατεύθυνση καί κυρίως πρός τήν Ἑλλάδα. Αὐτές οἱ ἐντάσεις θά ὑπάρχουν διαρκῶς, καί τώρα καί στό μέλλον, εἲτε μέ τόν Ἐρντογάν, εἲτε μέ ὁποιονδήποτε ἂλλο Τοῦρκο ἡγέτη. Τό βέβαιο εἶναι ὃτι ἐπί τοῦ παρόντος δέν ἒχει ἐπιβεβαιωθεῖ ἡ ἐπικερδής ἐκμετάλλευση τῶν κοιτασμάτων τοῦ Αἰγαίου. Τά πάντα βρίσκονται ἀκόμη στό πειραματικό στάδιο. Οἱ μεγάλες ἑταιρίες πετρελαίου θά συνεχίσουν ἀνενόχλητες τό ἒργο τους. Ἡ Τουρκία θά ἐξακολουθεῖ νά δημιουργεῖ ἐπεισόδια, κυρίως σέ βάρος τῆς Ἑλλάδος, γιά ἐσωτερική κατανάλωση, λαμβάνοντας ὃμως πάντοτε σοβαρά ὃτι ἡ Ἑλλάδα εἶναι σέ θέση νά ἀντιμετωπίσει ἀμυντικά τήν Τουρκία, ἂν ἀποτολμήσει ἐπιθετική ἐνέργεια. Στό βάθος τοῦ ζωφεροῦ ὁρίζοντος βρίσκεται ἡ προοπτική διαλύσεως τῆς Τουρκίας, ὁπότε θά ἀλλάξει ἂρδην τό σκηνικό στήν ἐπίμαχη περιοχή τοῦ Αἰγαίου. Ἐπί τοῦ παρόντος ἡ τιμή τοῦ πετρελαίου βρίσκεται στά 60 δολάρια τό βαρέλι, πού ἐπιτρέπει στήν Ρωσία νά βγάζει τά ἒξοδά της καί στήν Σαουδική Ἀραβία νά ἒχει μικρά κέρδη. Ἒτσι, ἡ ἒνταση στό Αἰγαῖο φαίνεται ὃτι θά συνεχισθεῖ μέ κάποιες προσπάθειες ἐξισορρόπησης τῆς ἀνωμαλίας. Ἐπί τοῦ παρόντος ἡ κρατοῦσα ἀντίληψη εἶναι ὃτι οἱ “μεγάλοι” δέν θά ἀντιδράσουν, συμπεριλαμβανομένης καί τῆς μή ἐπιστροφῆς τοῦ Ἀφρίν στούς Κούρδους. Κατά τά ἂλλα, στόν τομέα τῆς ποντοπόρου ναυτιλίας οἱ ναῦλοι δέν κυμαίνονται σέ ἱκανοποιητικά ἐπίπεδα σέ ὃλους τούς τομεῖς, ἐνῶ ἡ πρόσφατη ἀπόφαση τοῦ προέδρου Τράμπ νά φορολογήσει τόν εἰσαγόμενο χάλυβα καί τό ἀλουμίνιο, ἀναμένεται νά χειροτερεύσει τούς ναύλους, λόγω μειωμένης μεταφορικῆς ζητήσεως. Ἂν μάλιστα ὑλοποιηθεῖ ἓνας νέος ἐμπορικός πόλεμος μέ τήν λήψη ἀντιμέτρων ἐκ μέρους τῆς Εὐρώπης, ἡ κατάσταση γιά τήν ναυτιλία θά χειροτερεύσει.

nafs market report Golden Destiny: Ανασκόπηση της ναυτιλιακής αγοράς για το 2017 Γράφει ο Νικόλας

Μ. Ζαννίκος, GOLDEN DESTINY – Shipping Analyst

Το 2017 ήταν ένα έτος με ανάμεικτα αποτελέσματα για τις τρείς βασικές κατηγορίες πλοίων (bulk carriers, tankers, containers). Οι αγορές στα bulk carriers και στα containers παρουσίασαν θετική εικόνα, κυρίως κατά το δεύτερο μισό του έτους, ενώ στην αγορά των tankers καταγράφηκε σημαντική πτώση στην αγορά. Με την εικόνα της παγκόσμιας οικονομικής ανάπτυξης σε θετικό πρόσημο αναμένεται με ενδιαφέρον ποιές μπορεί να είναι οι επόμενες γεωπολιτικές εξελίξεις και πώς αυτές θα επηρεάσουν τον χώρο της ναυτιλίας, καθώς επίσης και πώς σχεδιάζουν οι εταιρίες την εναρμόνηση με τα νέα δεδομένα που υπάρχουν στις οδηγίες για φιλικότερη προς το περιβάλλον τεχνική διαχείριση.

BULK CARRIERS

Το 2017 υπήρξε μια χρονία ανάσας για τα bulk carriers μιας και η αγορά παρουσίασε αισθητή βελτίωση σε σχέση με το τραυματικό για σχεδόν όλους 2016. Ο BDI κυμάνθηκε στις 1145 μονάδες μεσοσταθμικά για το 2017, σχεδόν το διπλάσιο από το μέσο όρο του 2016 που ήταν στις 643 μονάδες. Άξιο αναφοράς είναι ότι η μέγιστη τιμή του δείκτη το 2016 ήταν περίπου όσο ο μέσος όρος που εμφάνισε το 2017. Για πολλούς, η χρονιά που πέρασε έκλεισε πληγές και παράλληλα αναζωπύρωσε το ενδιαφέρον για νέες επενδύσεις.

H αυξημένη ζήτηση για σιδηρομετάλλευμα από την Κίνα, αποτέλεσε τον κύριο λόγο όπου η αγορά κινήθηκε σε υψηλά επίπεδα σε σύγκριση με την προηγούμενη χρονιά. Η περιβαλλοντική επαγρύπνηση της κινεζικής κυβέρνησης, όχι μόνο δεν περιόρισε τις εισαγωγές σε σιδηρομετάλλευμα, απεναντίας αποτέλεσε την κινητήρια δύναμη πίσω από αυτές. Το σταθερά ανατιμόμενο Yuan έναντι του δολλαρίου, έδωσε την δυνατότητα φθηνότερων εισαγωγών καλύτερης ποιότητας σιδηρομεταλλεύματος από την Βραζιλία και την Αυστραλία, κάτι το οποίο αναμένεται να αυξήσει την ζήτηση για τονομίλια και να βελτιώσει σημαντικά τα επίπεδα των ναύλων. Οι αυξημένες εισαγωγές περιόρισαν σημαντικά την εγχώρια ρύπανση λόγω της περιορισμένης εξόρυξης αλλά και λόγω της ευκολότερης επεξεργασίας του εισαγόμενου σιδηρομεταλλεύματος. Ωστόσο, υπάρχουν και αυτοί που εκφράζουν επιφυλάξεις καθώς τα αποθέματα του σιδηρομεταλλεύματος στην Κίνα βρίσκονται στα υψηλότερα επίπεδα από το 2014. Η ευμετάβλητη αυτή κατάσταση σε συνδυασμό με τον περιορισμό στην παραγωγή προϊόντων χάλυβα από την κινεζική κυβέρνηση, ενδέχεται να περιορίσει την ζήτηση για σιδηρομετάλλευμα από τις ολοένα και λιγότερες, λόγω ελλειπών περιβαλλοντικών κριτηρίων, μονάδες παραγωγής. Το παραπάνω γεγονός αναμένεται να επηρεάσει δυσμενώς και τον μεταλλουργικό άνθρακα, που χρησιμοποείται για την παραγωγή χάλυβα. Ωστόσο και σε αυτό το προϊόν οι γεωπολιτικές ανακατατάξεις δρούν σε όφελος της αγοράς χύδην ξηρών φορτίων, καθώς η απαγόρευση των εισαγωγών ανθρακίτη από την Β.Κορέα στα πλαίσια των μέτρων που έλαβε η επιτροπή ασφαλείας Ηνωμένων Εθνών μέλος της οποίας αποτελεί και η Κίνα, είχε σαν αποτέλεσμα να στρέψει το ενδιαφέρον της χώρας στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες για να καλύψει το κενό στις εισαγωγές. Τέλος αξίζει να αναφερθεί ότι η Ινδία μονοπώλησε την ζήτηση για άνθρακα ατμοπαραγωγής μέσα στο 2017 μιας και τα πολύ χαμηλά επίπεδα των ενεργειακών της αποθεμάτων την οδήγησαν σε

12 NAFS MARCH 2018

αυξημένα επίπεδα εισαγωγών από χώρες της Αφρικής και της Ινδονησίας. Η υψηλή ζήτηση σε συνδυασμό με την έλλειψη κατάλληλων υποδομών για την μεταφορά της εγχώριας παραγωγής από τον τόπο εξόρυξης στους σταθμούς παραγωγής ηλεκτρικής ενέργειας, καθώς και η απαγόρευση της καύσης pellet στην ευρύτερη περιοχή γύρω από την πρωτεύουσα,αναμένεται να διαμορφώσουν την ζήτηση σε υψηλά επίπεδα για το συγκεκριμένο αγαθό. Σε οτι αφορά στις καταγεγγραμένες πωλήσεις, συνολικά 675 πλοία άλλαξαν χέρια, με μέσο όρο ηλικίας περίπου τα 10 χρόνια. Οι κατηγορίες που παρουσίασαν τη μεγαλύτερη κινητικότητα ήταν τα Supramax (22%), τα Capesizes (14%), τα Panamax (13%) και τα Handysizes (12%). Τα αντίστοιχα νούμερα για το 2016 ήταν 646 bulk carriers με μέσο όρο ηλικίας περίπου τα 11 χρόνια. Το κλίμα που επικράτησε καθόλο το διάστημα του 2017 ήταν αισιόδοξο ως προς το μεσομακροπρόθεσμο μέλλον, με τις χαμηλές τιμές (ιστορικά) των μεταχειρισμένων πλοίων να δημιουργούν προυποθέσεις εκτεταμένων επενδύσεων αλλά και έντονου ανταγωνισμού. Για τον ίδιο λόγο (χαμηλές τιμές μεταχειρισμένων πλοίων), οι παραγγελίες νέων πλοίων κυμάνθηκαν σε πολύ χαμήλά επίπεδα αφού η δυνατότητα των ναυπηγείων για μειώσεις στις προσφερόμενες τιμές ήταν εξαιρετικά περιορισμένη. Συνεπώς οι περισσότεροι επενδυτές αναγνώρισαν στην αγορα μεταχειρισμένων πλοίων αυξημένα περιθώρια κέρδους δυνητικά. Ενδεικτικά: • ένα Capesize 180k dwt/10ετίας, τον Ιούλιο του 2017 πουλήθηκε στα $ 18 εκατ. ενώ την αντίστοιχη περίοδο το 2016 μόλις στα $ 13.75 εκατ.

• ένα Panamax 76k dwt/10ετίας, τον Απρίλιο του 2017 καταγράφηκε ότι άλλαξε χέρια στα $ 13.5 εκατ. ενώ την αντίστοιχη περίοδο το 2016 τα επίπεδα ήταν στα $ 6.5 εκατ.

• ένα Supramax 56k dwt/10ετίας, τον Οκτώβριο του 2017 πουλήθηκε στα $ 13 εκατ. ενώ ένα αντίστοιχο τον Οκτώβριο του 2016 στα $ 8.7 εκατ.

• ένα Handysize 28k dwt/10ετίας, τον Ιούλιο του 2017 πουλήθηκε στα $ 8 εκατ. και την ίδια εποχή το 2016 κοντά στα $ 5.75 εκατ.

TANKERS Η αγορά των tankers είναι άρρηκτα συνδεδεμένη με τις γεωπολιτικές ανακατατάξεις καθώς το αργό πετρέλαιο αποτελεί ένα ισχυρό μέσο οικονομικής επιρροής. Ήδη από το 2014 με την επέκταση της παραγωγής του σχιστολιθικού (shale) πετρελαίου από τις ΗΠΑ, έχει αρχίσει να διαμορφώνεται ένα νέο τοπίο στην συγκεκριμένη αγορά, με βασικότερο χαρακτηριστικό την χρήση του συγκεκριμένου εμπορεύματος από τις ΗΠΑ, προκειμένου να επηρεάσουν αμιγώς ενεργειακές οικονομίες όπως της Ρωσίας, ρίχνοντας την τιμή Brent σε πολύ χαμηλά επίπεδα. Έτσι, παρά το γεγονός ότι η τιμή του Brent διαμορφώθηκε στο τέλος του 2017, σε επίπεδα πάνω από τα $60 το βαρέλι, ύστερα και από την επέκταση των περικοπών στην παραγωγή αργού από τα μέλη του OPEC και την Ρωσία, οι ΗΠΑ θα είναι αυτές που στο τέλος θα διαμορφώσουν το τοπίο με το ποσοστό του πετρελαίου που θα ρίξουν στην αγορά. Με παραγωγή που φθάνει τα 10 mbpd, οι ΗΠΑ φαίνεται ότι θα συνεχίσουν να αποτελούν τον κυριότερο απορρυθμιστικό παράγοντα για την αγορά πετρελαίου. Μέσα στο 2017 είδαμε μια πολύ μεγάλη πτώση στα επίπεδα των ναύλων. Κυριότερος λόγος ήταν η παράταση των περικοπών από τις χώρες του OPEC και για το 2018, κάτι το οποίο διαμόρφώσε υψηλότερα επίπεδα τιμών για το brent, αναγκάζοντας τους Oil majors να σταματήσουν την αποθήκευση του αργού πετρελαίου,όπως γίνοταν την τελευταία τριετία. Έτσι πολλά VLCC’s επανήλθαν στις κυριότερες εμπορικές διαδρομές, ασκώντας σημαντική πίεση στα επίπεδα των ναύλων. Τέλος η Κίνα αναμένεται να αποτελέσει τον κυριότερο εισαγωγέα πετρελαίου μελλοντικά με εισαγωγές που φθάνουν τα

market report 8.5 mbpd, και με τις προβλέψεις να κάνουν λόγο για νέα επίπεδα ρεκόρ μέσα στο 2018 καθώς το Πεκίνο αναμένενεται να εκδόσει περισσότερες άδειες σε ανεξάρτητες μόναδες διύλησης. Συνολικά καταγράφηκαν 357 αγοραπωλησίες tankers το 2017 σε αντίθεση με 322 το 2016. Τα μεγέθη που παρουσίασαν τη μεγαλύτερη επενδυτική δραστηριότητα ήταν: τα MR (27,5%), τα Handy (19,5%) και τα VLCC (17%) με ηλικιακό προφίλ ως επί το πλείστον μεταξύ 10 και 15 έτη. Οι τιμές των μεταχειρισμένων πλοίων ακολούθησαν σταθερά πτωτική τάση σε όλες τις κατηγορίες, με πολλούς να θεωρούν την χρονική στιγμή κατάλληλη για επενδύσεις. Μια σημαντική παράμετρος που πρέπει να τονιστεί είναι η έλλειψη μοντέρνων πλοίων (5ετίας και νεότερα) προς πώληση καθόσον οι διαφορές στις ιδέες των πωλητών και των αγοραστών ως προς το θέμα τιμής ήταν αγεφύρωτες. Ενδεικτικά: • VLCC 320k dwt/5ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 60εκατ τον Φεβρουάριο του 2017, έναντι VLCC 317k dwt /5ετίας στα $75 εκατ τον Φεβρουάριο του 2016.

• Aframax 105k dwt/8ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 22.25 εκατ τον Αύγουστο του 2017, έναντι Aframax 107k dwt/8ετίας τον Ιούλιο του 2016 πουλήθηκε στα $ 26.5εκατ.

• Panamax 75k dwt/10ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 17 εκατ τον Μάιο 2017, έναντι Panamax 75k dwt/10ετίας που τον Φεβρουάριο του 2016 άλλαξε χέρια στα $ 25.5εκατ.

• MR 50k dwt/12ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 10.5 εκατ τον Ιούνιο του 2017, έναντι MR 47k dwt/ 12ετίας πουλήθηκε $ 14.25 εκατ τον Ιούλιο του 2016.

CONTAINERS

Στην αγορά των containers, κυριότερο στοιχείο ήταν οι εξαγορές και συγχωνεύσεις μεταξύ των εταιρειών με σημαντικότερες την εξαγορά της OOCL από την COSCO και της Hamburg Sud από την Maersk, καθώς επίσης και η ενεργοποίηση συνεργειών μεταξύ εταιρειών σε συγκεκριμένες εμπορικές διαδρομές. Αυτές οι κινήσεις καταδεικνύουν αφενός την προσπάθεια των εταιρειών να επωφεληθούν από τις οικονομίες κλίμακας και αφετέρου την δυσμενή κατάσταση που βρίσκεται ο κλάδος τα τελευταία χρόνια. Μπορεί από το 2016 μέχρι σήμερα, τα επίπεδα των ναύλων να βελτιώθηκαν σημαντικά, χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα αποτελεί το γεγόνος ότι σε κάποιες διαδρομές είχαμε αύξηση των ναύλων ανα ΤΕU κατά 100%, αλλά η υπερπροσφορά πλοίων σε συνδυασμό με την παράδοση των ULCV (22,000 TEU) μέσα στα επόμενα χρόνια, καθιστούν την ανάκαμψη του κλάδου εύθραυστη. Χαρακτηριστικό αποτελεί εξάλλου το γεγονός ότι πολλοί μεταφορείς ανέλαβαν ήδη από την αρχή του έτους δράση για να μεταστρέψουν την επίδραση στην αγορά από την παράδοση επιπρόσθετης χωρητικότητας, αναβάλοντας τις παραδόσεις των πλοίων τους για το 2019. Μεταξύ αυτών και η COSCO η οποία ανέβαλε την παράδοση 10 εκ των 28 ULCV. Ακόμη βέβαια και με αυτές τις αναβολές η επιπρόσθετη χωρητικότητα που θα παραδοθεί μέσα στο 2018 αναμένεται να φθάσει το 1.5 Mteu, όπου περισσότερο από το 50% αυτής θα είναι από πλοία 14,000 έως 21,000 TEU. Ο ρυθμός αύξησης της προσφερόμενης χωρητικότητας αναμένεται σύμφωνα με προβλέψεις του οίκου Fitch να είναι στο 5,5% το 2018, ξεπερνώντας μια πιθανή αύξηση της ζητούμενης χωρητικότητας η οποία αναμένεται στο 4,5%. Το 2017 άλλαξαν χέρια συνολικά 270 πλοία, σχεδόν τα διπλάσια από τη προηγούμενη χρονιά. Αυτό δικαιολογείται πλήρως από το γεγονός ότι το 2016 ήταν μία πραγματικά πολύ δύσκολη χρονιά και γι αυτόν τον κλάδο, καθώς επίσης και από το γεγονός ότι υπήρξαν μαζικές πωλήσεις πλοίων από τράπεζες ( κυρίως γερμανικές) με σκοπό την εκκαθάριση των χαρτοφυλακίων τους. Τα μεγέθη που είχαν τη μεγαλύτερη κινητικότητα ήταν τα λεγόμενα μικρά feeders (1000-1700 ΤΕU) όπου καταγράφηκαν 81 αγοραπωλησίες το 2017 έναντι 66 τo 2016. Στα πλοία μεγαλύτερης χωρητικότητας, στην κατηγορία 20003500 ΤΕU καταγράφηκαν 130 πωλήσεις το 2017, έναντι μόλις 48 το 2016. Στις κατηγορίες άνω των 4500 ΤΕU, 59 πλοία άλλαξαν χέρια το 2017, ενώ αντίστοιχα το 2016 ο αριθμός τους ανήλθε μόλις στα 29 πλοία. Τέλος αξίζει να σημειωθεί ότι κατά κύριο λόγο το επενδυτικό ενδιαφέρον επικεντρώθηκε σε πλοία περίπου 10-12ετίας.

nafs

Ενδεικτικά οι μεταβολές των τιμών, για τις τρείς παραπάνω κατηγορίες, μεταξύ των ετών 2016 και 2017 ήταν οι ακόλουθες: • Panamax 5.000 ΤΕU/7ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 11 εκατ. τον Οκτώβριο του 2017, έναντι $ 7.5 εκατ τον Mάρτιο του 2016 • Feedermax 2100 TEU/10ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 5.8 εκατ. τον Μάιο του 2017, έναντι $ 4.2 εκατ τον Οκτώβριο 2016.

• Feeder 1100 TEU/12ετίας πουλήθηκε στα $ 4.8 εκατ τον Σεπτέμβριο του 2017, έναντι $ 4 εκατ. τον Μάιο του 2016

DEMOLITION MARKET REVIEW

Ενδεικτικά το σύνολο των bulk carriers, tankers και containers που οδηγήθηκαν για διάλυση μέσα στο 2017 ανέρχεται στα 421 πλοία, αποτελώντας το 58% επι του συνολικού στόλου που αποσύρθηκε από την αγορά. Ενώ αντίστοιχα για το 2016 καταγράφηκαν προς διάλυση 616 πλοία, τα οποία αποτέλεσαν το 66% του συνολικού στόλου που οδηγήθηκε προς διάλυση. Αναλυτικότερα, η άνοδος της αγοράς στα bulk carriers είχε σαν φυσικό επακόλουθο να μείωθεί ο αριθμός των πλοίων που κατευθύνθηκαν στα διαλυτήρια. Συνολικά ο αριθμός των πλοίων που οδηγήθηκαν στα διαλυτήρια κατέγραψε μείωση της τάξης του 50% συγκριτικά με το 2016 και αποτέλεσε το 26% του συνολικού αριθμού των πλοίων που διαλύθηκαν μέσα στην χρονιά. Αντίστοιχα στα tankers τα στοιχεία δείχνουν ότι ο αριθμός πλοίων που κατευθύνθηκαν στα διαλυτήρια έφτασε σε υψηλό τετραετίας, ενώ συγκεκριμένα, σε σύγκριση με το 2016 ο αριθμός των tankers που οδηγήθηκαν στα διαλυτήρια διπλασιάστηκε, κάτι το οποίο οφείλεται στα πολύ χαμηλά επίπεδα που βρέθηκε η αγορά μέσα στο 2017 καθώς και στις βελτιωμένες τιμές του scrap, το ποσοστό των tankers που διαλύθηκαν να είναι το 14% επί του συνόλου. Τέλος,στα containers η άνοδος της ναυλαγοράς δημιούργησε προυποθέσεις μειωμένου ενδιαφέροντος στις διαλύσεις πλοίων από μεριάς πλοιοκτητών, με τον αριθμό πλοίων που οδηγήθηκαν προς διάλυση να ανέρχεται σε επίπεδα μειωμένα κατά 30% περίπου σε σύγκριση με το προηγούμενο έτος, αποτελώντας το 18% επί του συνολικού στόλου που διαλύθηκε μέσα στο 2017. Σε ότι αφορά τις επιμέρους χώρες με έντονη δραστηριότητα στις διαλύσεις πλοίων, την μερίδα του λέοντος απέσπασε η Ινδία με 28% του συνόλικού αριθμού των πλοίων που κατευθύνθηκαν στα διαλυτήρια, με το Μπανγλαντές να ακολουθεί με 20% , την Κίνα με 14% και το Πακιστάν με 10%. Έδώ πρέπει να αναφερθεί ότι η αγορά του Πακιστάν παρέμεινε κλειστή για μεγαλό χρονικό διαστημα μεσα στον χρόνο μετά από αλλεπάλληλά ατυχήματα που έλαβαν χώρα σε διαλυτήρια τις χώρας. Τέλος, ιδιαίwτερο ενδιαφέρον αναμμένεται να έχουν στον τομέα αυτό οι εντατικοποίηση των όλο και πιο αυστηρών μέτρων για την προστασία του περιβάλλοντος.

Η αγορά των ναυπηγήσεων το 2017

Το 2017 οι νέες παραγγελίες παρουσίαν 34% αύξηση σε σχέση με το 2016 με τη μερίδα του λέοντος να έχουν τα tankers και τα bulk carriers. Ο ακριβής αριθμός του επενδυμένου κεφαλαίου δεν μπορεί να προσδιοριστεί με ακρίβεια διότι σε όλες τις κατηγορίες πλοίων υπάρχουν πολλές περιπτώσεις όπου δεν γνωστοποιήθηκαν οι λεπτομέριες των συμφωνιών. Αξιοσημείωτο είναι ότι ενώ σαν συνολικός αριθμός παραγγελιών τα tankers σημείωσαν τη μεγαλύτερη κινητικότητα σε σχέση με τα υπόλοιπα πλοία, 297 νέες παραγγελίες μέσα στο 2017 έναντι 180 το 2016, τα bulk carriers ήταν αυτά που παρουσίασαν τη μεγαλύτερη αύξηση σε σχέση με το 2016 (280 έναντι 64). Η ελληνική παρουσία αντανακλά το 14% των συνολικών παραγγελιών σύμφωνα με τα διαθέσιμα στοιχεία, με 115 καινούργιες παραγγελίες πλοίων (έναντι 29 το 2016) στο σύνολο και παρουσία σε bulk carriers, tankers, LNG/LPG και containers. Η κινεζική παρουσία αντανακλά το 19% των συνολικών παραγγελιών με 154 παραγγελίες νέων πλοίων έναντι 103 το 2016. Με δεδομένη την πολύ καλύτερη εικόνα στην αγορά ξηρού φορτίου αλλά και τις ανταγωνιστικές τιμές που προσφέρονται από τα ναυπηγεία στα tankers, η πρόκληση θα είναι πάλι μεγάλη για πολλούς επενδυτές να στραφούν σε νέες παραγγελίες, εφόσον βέβαια έχει εξασφαλιστεί και η απαιτούμενη χρηματοδότηση. Λαμβάνοντας υπόψη την γενική άποψη ότι οι μαζικές παραγγελίες στα πρότυπα του παρελθόντος πρέπει να αποφευχθούν, αναμένουμε με ενδιαφέρον την κίνηση της αγοράς κατά το τρέχον έτος.

NAFS MARCH 2018 13

nafs market report Key Factors for a trouble free operation of a BWTS

By Markos

Vekris, Senior Associate, Oceanking Technical & Trading S.A

at the early stages , when the convention was not in force and many stakeholders believed (and lobbied) that it would be subject to continuous extensions .

Once the Convention became effective on 8th of September, 2017, the ship crews tried to put in operation the BWTS which were left for some years unattended and in most cases without any maintenance.

The lack of maintenance was confirmed by a recent statistic (June 2, 2017). From a population of perhaps 4,500 ships with BWTS installed, maybe 50 vessels have turned them on as of today.

The study of ABS “Best Practices for Operation of Ballast water Management Systems� dated August 10, 2017 raised serious concerns among the ship owners regarding the operability and the reliability of the installed systems. Actually the report revealed many problems with 43% of these systems to be considered either inoperable or problematic.

The main contributing factors included installation faults during shipbuilding or retrofitting, lack of proper commissioning , insufficient training, lack of thorough maintenance and frequent changing of crews who are constantly on rotation.

If we try to have a look of what really happened in the past, starting from 2011 when actually the first BWTS were installed on new vessels, we can notice the following.

It is well known that during delivery of new buildings the yards were not willing to dedicate too much time for the commissioning of the BWTS. Actually the full testing of a BWTS system needs ballasting and de-ballasting procedures which unavoidably change the trim of the vessel and affect seriously the dock and sea trials .

On the other hand the Makers of the installed BWTS had not the power to demand from the yards the extra time required from their systems for checking and testing and had to apply for assistance to the site team of the shipping company .

But unfortunately at that time the operation of the BWTS was not obligatory and therefore it was not a first priority for the owners supervisors who were confronted with other more hot issues .

On the other hand the class representatives were not interested in the correct installation of the BWTS as this was not considered as a safety issue.

In addition to all above we have to mention that many yards had not given proper attention to the correct storage and coverage of the components of the systems against dirt, humidity, rain, sand blasting etc. and this resulted to some damages of critical components which in many cases were not rectified prior to the departure of the vessels .

Proof that the above were the root causes of the malfunctions is that, most of the teething problems of the installed systems were noticed

14 NAFS MARCH 2018

As the crews were faced with serious difficulties, the ship owners got in contact with the after sales department of the Makers in order to resolve the malfunctions.

Actually it proved very difficult not only to send spares and service engineers in limited time all over the world, but also to carry out ballasting and de-ballasting operations on chartered vessels, as the charterers did not wanted any change of the trim. The fleet coordinators had also to cope with additional difficulties associated with restrictions of de-ballasting in some calling ports (e.g Australia).

The above was not an easy task but most makers did up to now their best to rectify all malfunction.

Of course we have to admit that the existing technology of the BWTS during the early days of the first installations was not enough mature at as it is now.

Oceanking Technical & Trading S.A. representing the NK-O3 BWTS which so far was selected to be installed on 155 vessels of the Greek shipping community (out of the 600 orders in total worldwide for NK) after having gained enough experience, started to point out to the Owners the importance of the proper commissioning.

Therefore finally some the Owners demanded from the yards to provide enough time to the Commissioning engineers for the thorough checking of the installation, testing and commissioning of the BWTS. The results were very satisfactory both to New Buildings and retrofitting projects, as far as the initial operation of the systems was concerned .

In order for the NK -O3 BWTS to continue being fully operational, Oceanking in cooperation with NK carried out training sessions to Greek customers.

In this respect, very big and important Greek shipping companies –clients of NK-arranged their office staff (shore based support) and vessel based crews to attend an extensive training, including the frequent operation and the thorough maintenance of the systems.

Summarizing all above , it is deduced that , the policy of ship managers must be that the BWTS is operated regularly in order for the crew to be familiarized with the operation and thus the system will be maintained fully functional for when it is required to be used.

In conclusion, we all must have in mind , that for the trouble free operation of a BWTS the cooperation between BWTS manufacturers and ship operators is very critical for the familiarization and better understanding of the system and for sharing knowledge and experience onboard.

nafs financial focus Is further consolidation in Greek shipping a positive development?

By Ted

Petropoulos, Head, Petrofin ResearchŠ

There are strong signs of consolidation both on global and Greek levels.

Globally, the growth of international trade across all shipping segments and the striving for greater efficiency has called for larger more expensive and sophisticated vessels. Ample evidence can be observed, among others, in the container sector with large container vessels, soon surpassing the 20,000 teu size, as well as in the development of jumboisation in all market segments. We see that every company seeks to grow

GRAPH 1

GRAPH 2

and enjoy economies of scale in all its constituent parts of management, technical, chartering and finance.

Seeking to analyse such economies of scale better, we can point out to a variety of benefits derived from enjoying a larger fleet. These include lower spare part procurement costs, keener service supplier prices, lower lubricant, paints and chemical costs, lower telecommunication costs, more efficient crewing procurement, training and rotation ability, keener prices by all service providers, lower insurance costs, as well as being able to command greater attention by all parties interacting with a shipping firm.

I have left finance and capital procurement last because this has become a defining influence, especially over the last decade. The disappearance or diminution of many shipping household European banks e.g. RBS, Commerzbank, HSH and many others has reduced traditional bank finance availability to all market participants. Once again, it is the larger owners that enjoy the benefit of bank finance at relatively low cost, with smaller owners failing either to be considered or being offered finance at considerably higher costs, much more stringent terms and lower loan to asset levels. It is this development that has resulted in an acceleration of the consolidation of the shipping industry, as smaller owners find it difficult to compete and are forced to leave the industry or to seek to join with other small owners.

The barriers to entry have also risen with new companies needing to either access substantial capital and commence with a large fleet or to commit more substantial capital per vessel, in order to enter shipping.

The relatively few that make it need to grow fast and achieve economies of scale, bearing in mind the increasing preference for young vessels by banks, insurers and charterers.

In industries where a) the barriers to entry rise, b) the economies of scale are continuously rising and c) the cost and availability of finance becomes critical, we find a strong consolidation process.

I have left out one other factor, which is access to capital. Raising capital in the public markets too has become very difficult for any but the biggest owners and the same applies for the rapidly rising investment funds, who favour larger owners and larger transactions.

The counter benefits of small owners e.g. agility, swift decision making, personal commitment, are still there but are losing ground in a world where regulations abound and restrict the ability to run vessels differently.

Small owners are increasingly looking to the remaining few, less regulated, local / coastal areas, where they can use their often aged vessels.

It is self evident that the factors propelling owners to grow have accelerated. A possible recovery in shipping across all sectors will prove to be but a brief respite to the consolidation trend.

The evidence for consolidation in the Greek shipping market For Greece, we have the benefit of Petrofin Research Š and its findings, since 1998. As such, we can highlight the changes to the composition of Greek shipping, as follows: 1. The number of Greek shipping companies (of all sizes) has fallen from 926 in 1998 to 597 in 2017 (please see graph 1). The consolidation trend has accelerated from 2009 onwards.

2. The fleet percentage held by fleets of 25 vessels and over, in dwt terms, has risen from 42.27% in 2010 to 67.07% in 2017. From the research, it is self evident that Greek shipping companies have been

16 NAFS MARCH 2018

financial focus actively growing and aiming towards bigger fleets.

3. The fleet percentage held by fleets of 1 – 4 vessels, in dwt terms, has fallen from 11.67% of the Greek fleet in 2010 to 5.62% in 2017.

4. Table 1 is also a useful guide, as to consolidation of the Greek fleet. In only a decade, 2007 to 2017, despite the Greek fleet growing significantly from 208m dwt to 387m dwt, the top Greek fleets have significantly increased their market share.

5. The same consolidation can be observed in the number of Greek companies with fleets of over 1,000,000 dwt, which has risen from 2011 to 2017 from 62 to 75 and which now own 79.57% of the total Greek fleet.

6. In Graph 2, you will observe the rise of the Greek fleet but also the decline in the average age of vessel, as well as the rise in the average size of vessel in dwt terms over the last 16 years.

nafs

TABLE 1

The study clearly points out to Greek shipping increasing its overall fleet substantially, as well as greatly improving its age. At the same time, the emphasis has been on larger size vessels with an emphasis on eco vessels.

Most importantly, Greek shipping clearly appreciated the benefits of the economies of scale and moved rapidly to grow and invest accordingly. This is Greek shipping’s response to the increasing challenge for more efficient and competitive vessel operation and management, in order to compete in international shipping and maintain / increase its market share. To conclude, we consider that further consolidation will be a positive development for Greek shipping and should enable it to maintain its competitive edge.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 IMO: Implementing the 2020 sulphur limit The 0.50% limit on sulphur in fuel oil on board ships (outside designated emission control areas) will come into effect on 1 January 2020. Ensuring consistent implementation of the 0.50% requirement is a key item on the agenda of IMO’s Sub-committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR) which meets this week (5-9 February) at IMO headquarters, London. The meeting will also continue to look at how to measure black carbon emissions from shipping.

Other matters on the agenda include the development of further guidance to support the implementation of the Ballast Water Management Convention, including ballast water sampling and analysis. Revised guidelines for the use of dispersants for combating oil pollution at sea, which take into account experience from the Deepwater Horizon incident, are expected to be finalised.

The ongoing revision of the product lists and index in the international code for carriage of chemicals in bulk will continue, as well as consideration of requirements to address the discharge of high-viscosity solidifying and persistent floating products (such as certain vegetable oils). The meeting will also consider including new controls on the biocide cybutryne in the convention for the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships (AFS Convention).

The meeting was opened by IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim and is being chaired by Mr Sveinung Oftedal (Norway).

IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim said: “Undoubtedly, the most important item on your agenda this week is the consistent implementation of the 0.50% m/m global limit of the sulphur content of ships’ fuel oil, which will come into effect from 1 January 2020. There is no turning back! The lower global sulphur limit will have a significant beneficial impact on the environment and on human health, particularly that of people living in port cities and coastal communities.” The full speech has as follows: Good morning, distinguished delegates, It is a pleasure for me to welcome you to the fifth session of the Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response. I particularly welcome those delegates who may be attending this Sub-Committee for the first time.

Before addressing the work of your Sub-Committee, I would like to express my sorrow upon hearing the tragic sinking of the Kiribati ferry Mv. Butiraoi, carrying more than 80 passengers and crew, which was first reported missing on 26 January 2018. On behalf of the IMO membership, the Secretariat and myself, I would like to send our deepest sympathies to the Government of Kiribati and to the families and loved ones of the victims. I would also like to commend all those involved in the international search and rescue operations.

Distinguished delegates, Last year was a very successful one and we should be proud of all the great achievements. I wish to highlight, in the context of protection of the marine environment and the atmosphere, the entry into force of the Ballast Water Management Convention in September 2017 and the development of an initial IMO GHG strategy, which we all expect its adoption at MEPC 72 in April this year.

The Organization’s contribution to the global efforts to address climate change features prominently in our Strategic Plan. The mandatory data collection system for fuel oil consumption of ships, entering into force in less than one month time, will provide robust data and information on which future decisions on additional measures, over and above those already adopted, can be made. We have committed to produce a comprehensive

18 NAFS MARCH 2018

strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from ships, beginning with an initial strategy to be adopted at MEPC 72.

The whole world will be watching IMO and looking for something of real substance, an initial strategy that will send an important signal of intent and provide a firm basis for our work towards the revised strategy in 2023. The task will not be easy at times; the stakes are high and the expectations even higher. I urge you to be bold to set ambitious goals that really will make a difference and to use this opportunity to enhance our well established system of collaboration and cooperation. I will do my utmost to open even further our communication channels which are paramount in facing together the challenges that lay ahead for the shipping industry.

This year’s World Maritime Day theme, which is “IMO 70: Our heritage – better shipping for a better future” reflects on the Organization’s celebration of its 70th Anniversary. I encourage you to take part in the events programmed to commemorate this milestone, to embrace the theme and use this occasion to reflect and showcase how the Organization has adapted over the years as a crucial player to the global supply chain, and to be passionate about the IMO family.

In this connection, I wish to pay tribute to the Sub-Committee’s remarkable and impressive achievements during the long period of its existence. Since its creation in 1976 as the Sub-Committee on Bulk Chemicals which was succeeded by the BLG Sub-Committee in 1996 , your dedicated work, through ongoing revision of MARPOL Annexes I and II, the International Bulk Chemical Code and the International Gas Carrier Code and the development of new regulatory measures, has resulted in highly restrictive limits for operational discharge of oil and chemical tanker washings, the ban of carriage and use of heavy grade oil in the Antarctic area, and a new four-category system for categorizing noxious and liquid substances, etc.

As a dedicated technical sub-committee on environment matters, the PPR Sub-Committee, which succeeded the BLG Sub-Committee in 2013, has been covering a remarkably broad canvas, embracing everything from the quality of our atmosphere to the invasive species that can be transported around the world in ships’ ballast water. The revision of MARPOL Annex VI, with a progressive reduction in SOx and NOx emissions from ships, and the development of comprehensive guidelines on the management of ballast water and biofouling, is exemplary in illustrating the commitment of the Organization to be in the frontline of achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals which are a wide-ranging response to the challenges facing the world today.

Distinguished delegates, Undoubtedly, the most important item on your agenda this week is the consistent implementation of the 0.50% m/m global limit of the sulphur content of ships’ fuel oil, which will come into effect from 1 January 2020. There is no turning back! The lower global sulphur limit will have a significant beneficial impact on the environment and on human health, particularly that of people living in port cities and coastal communities.

Consistent implementation to all ships will ensure a level playing field is maintained, with the result that the expected improvement of the environment and human health will be achieved. The large number of submissions on the matter indicates its importance and significance in the minds of all parties concerned, a point reiterated by the recent combined press release from industry and environmental observer organizations.

I am confident that the Sub-Committee, with the assistance of an intersessional meeting scheduled later this year, will, once again, rise to the

Global Sulphur Cap 2020

nafs

IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim challenge to ensure timely completion of this vital work. This will no doubt project, to the wider world community, the image of an organization that is effective in the exercise of its regulatory mandate related to environmental health and united in its determination to ensure that international shipping remains the most environmentally sound mode of transport. Moving on to the Ballast Water Management Convention, you will note with satisfaction the outcome of MEPC 71 which, inter alia, agreed a practical and pragmatic implementation schedule for ships to comply with regulation D-2 of the Convention – an agreement crucially reached before its entry into force last September. MEPC 71 also adopted a resolution on “The experience-building phase associated with the BWM Convention” with a detailed plan to be further considered at its next session in April this year. I look forward to the further work at this session on the revision or development of Guidance on topics including ballast water sampling and analysis, methodologies that may be used for enumerating viable organisms, System Design Limitations and contingency measures for ports with challenging water qualities.

In relation to the OPRC convention, one of the items under consideration is the final draft of part IV of the Guidelines for the use of dispersants for combating oil pollution at sea, which specifically focuses on the sub-sea application of dispersant during an offshore oil discharge. The revision and the update of the IMO Dispersant Guidelines, has been a significant undertaking. It was initiated in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon incident, to reflect the latest developments in this field of response and in particular, capture the learnings from its use in that particular incident. I look forward to the finalization at this session of this final part of the Guidelines, which in their entirety will provide useful and practical advice to Governments in preparing for and responding to oil spills at sea. The work of the Organization is essential in this field as it yields a stronger preparedness and response community. I would therefore encourage all interested stakeholders to continue sharing their experience and lesson learnt through submissions on technical matters on preparedness for and response to accidental marine pollution from spill of oil and HNS.

Among the other important issues before you this week, I would like to highlight: - the revision of chapters 17 and 18 of the IBC Code; - the development of a regulatory solution to the discharge of high-viscosity solidifying and persistent floating products; - the consideration of an initial proposal to amend annex 1 to the AFS Convention to include controls on cybutryne; and - further work on the Consideration of the impact on the Arctic of emissions of Black Carbon from international shipping.

Distinguished delegates, I am confident that you will tackle the tasks before you successfully, inspired by the customary IMO spirit of cooperation and under the able leadership of your Chair, Mr. Sveinung Oftedal of Norway. As always, the Secretariat will be standing by to give you all the support required. I am sure that, you will make sound, balanced and timely decisions and I extend best wishes to all of you for every success in your deliberations.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the interpreters for their dedicated contribution during last year and I look forward to continue receiving their precious assistance this year.

Before I conclude, let me remind you that the submission of nominations for the 2018 IMO Award for Exceptional Bravery at Sea is open until 16 April. For those who are not familiar with this prestigious annual Award, it was established by the Organization to provide international recognition to individuals who, at the risk of losing their own life, perform acts of outstanding bravery while attempting to rescue persons in distress at sea or to prevent catastrophic pollution of the marine environment. I hope you will agree that we should do our utmost to identify these remarkable people to give them the recognition they rightly deserve and I look forward to receiving your nominations Finally, as is customary, all of you are cordially invited to a cocktail reception hosted by me in the Delegates’ Lounge this evening after the closure of today’s session.

NAFS MARCH 2018 19

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 IMO: Sulphur 2020 – cutting sulphur oxide emissions

The main type of “bunker” oil for ships is heavy fuel oil, derived as a residue from crude oil distillation. Crude oil contains sulphur which, following combustion in the engine, ends up in ship emissions. Sulphur oxides (SOx) are known to be harmful to human health, causing respiratory symptoms and lung disease. In the atmosphere, SOx can lead to acid rain, which can harm crops, forests and aquatic species, and contributes to the acidification of the oceans.

Limiting SOx emissions from ships will improve air quality and protects the environment.

IMO regulations to reduce sulphur oxides (SOx) emissions from ships first came into force in 2005, under Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (known as the MARPOL Convention)... Since then, the limits on sulphur oxides have been progressively tightened.

From 1 January 2020, the limit for sulphur in fuel oil used on board ships operating outside designated emission control areas will be reduced to 0.50% m/m (mass by mass). This will significantly reduce the amount of sulphur oxides emanating from ships and should have major health and environmental benefits for the world, particularly for populations living close to ports and coasts.

Below you will find answers to some of the frequently asked questions about the sulphur limit.

20 NAFS MARCH 2018

Limiting SOx emissions from ships will have a very positive impact on human health: how does that work?

Simply put, limiting sulphur oxides emissions from ships reduces air pollution and results in a cleaner environment. Reducing SOx also reduces particulate matter, tiny harmful particles which form when fuel is burnt.

A study on the human health impacts of SOx emissions from ships, submitted to IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2016

by Finland, estimated that by not reducing the SOx limit for ships from 2020, the air pollution from ships would contribute to more than 570,000 additional premature deaths worldwide between 2020-2025.

So a reduction in the limit for sulphur in fuel oil used on board ships will have tangible health benefits, particularly for populations living close to ports and major shipping routes.

Why are ships already less harmful than other forms of transport?

Ships do emit pollutants and other harmful emissions. But they also transport large quantities of vital goods across the world’s oceans – and seaborne trade continues to increase. In 2016, ships carried more than 10 billion tons of trade for the first time, according to UNCTAD. So ships have always been the most sustainable way to transport commodities and goods. And ships increasingly becoming even more energy efficient. IMO regulations on energy efficiency support the demand for

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 It has sometimes been quoted that just a few ships (all using fuel oil with maximum permitted sulphur content) emit as much harmful air pollutants as all the cars in the world (if the cars were all using the cleanest fuel available). ever greener and cleaner shipping. A ship which is more energy efficient burns less fuel so emits less air pollution.

It has sometimes been quoted that just a few ships (all using fuel oil with maximum permitted sulphur content) emit as much harmful air pollutants as all the cars in the world (if the cars were all using the cleanest fuel available).

Not only is this the very worst case scenario, but this does not take into account the amount of cargo that is being carried by those ships and the relative efficiency. It is important to consider the amount of cargo carried and the emissions per tonne of cargo carried, per kilometre travelled.

Studies have shown that ships are by far the most energy-efficient form of transportation, compared with other modes such as aviation, road trucks and even railways.

It is also relevant to remember that shipping responds to the demands of world trade. As world trade increases, more ship capacity will be needed.

How can ships carry so much cargo so efficiently?

Ships are the largest machines on the planet and the world’s largest diesel engines can be found on cargo ships. These engines can be as tall as a four-storey house, and as wide as three London buses. The largest marine diesel engines have more than 100,000 horsepower (in comparison, a mid-sized car may have up to 300 horsepower). But the largest container ships can carry more than 20,000 containers and the biggest bulk carriers can carry more than 300,000 tons of commodities, like iron ore.

So powerful engines are needed to propel a ship through the sea. And it is important to consider how much energy is used to carry each ton of cargo per kilometre. When you look at the relative energy efficiency of different modes of transport, ships are by far the most energy efficient.

Ships can reduce air pollutants by being even more energy efficient, so they burn less fuel and therefore their emissions are lower.

What is the current regulation on SOx in ships emissions and by how much is that going to be improved?

We are going to see a substantial cut: to 0.50% m/m (mass by mass) from 3.50% m/m.

For ships operating outside designated emission control areas the current limit for sulphur content of ships’ fuel oil is 3.50% m/m.

The new limit will be 0.50% m/m which will apply on and after 1 January 2020.

There is an even stricter limit of 0.10% m/m already in effect in emission control areas (ECAS) which have been established by IMO. This 0.10% m/m limit applies in the four established ECAS: the Baltic Sea area; the North Sea area; the North American area (covering designated coastal areas off the United States and Canada); and the United States Caribbean Sea area (around Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands).

Fuel oil providers already supply fuel oil which meets the 0.10% m/m limit (such as marine distillate and ultra low sulphur fuel oil blends) to ships

22 NAFS MARCH 2018

The largest container ships can carry more than 20,000 containers and the biggest bulk carriers can carry more than

300,000 tons of commodities, like iron ore

which require this fuel to trade in the ECAs.

What must ships do to meet the new IMO regulations?

The IMO MARPOL regulations limit the sulphur content in fuel oil. So ships need to use fuel oil which is inherently low enough in sulphur, in order to meet IMO requirements. Some ships limit the air pollutants by installing exhaust gas cleaning systems, also known as “scrubbers”. This is accepted by flag States as an alternative means to meet the sulphur limit requirement. Ships can have engines which can use different fuels, which may contain low or zero sulphur. For example, liquefied natural gas, or biofuels.

Could the 0.50% limit be delayed?

No. There can be no change in the 1 January 2020 implementation date, as it is too late now to amend the date and for any revised date to enter into force before 1 January 2020.

Will new fuels be needed to meet the 2020 limit? Will there be enough?

It is likely that new blends of fuel oil for ships will be developed, For example, a gas oil, with a very low sulphur content can be blended with heavy fuel oil to lower its sulphur content. These new blends are likely to cost more initially than the “heavy fuel oil” bunkers (fuel) used by the majority of ships today. Ships can also choose to switch to a different fuel altogether.

Or they may continue to purchase heavy fuel oil, but install ”scrubbers” to reduce the output of SOx in order to have an equivalent means to meet the requirement.Of course, some ships are already using low sulphur fuel oil to meet the even more stringent limits of 0.10% m/m when trading in the already-established emission control areas. So those fuel oil blends suitable for ECAS, will also meet the 0.50% m/m limit in 2020. However, there is a cost differential, and these blends are more expensive than heavy fuel oil.A study commissioned by IMO into the “Assessment of fuel oil availability” concluded that the refinery sector has the capability to supply sufficient quantities of marine fuels with a sulphur content of 0.50% m/m or less and with a sulphur content of 0.10% m/m or less to meet demand for these products, while also meeting demand for non-marine fuels.

Consistent compliance with the new limit is vital. What is IMO doing about that?

Monitoring, compliance and enforcement of the new limit falls to Governments and national authorities of Member States that are Parties to MARPOL Annex VI. Flag States (the State of registry of a ship) and port States have rights and responsibilities to enforce compliance.

IMO is working with Member States as well as industry (including the shipping industry and the bunker supply and refining industry) to identify and mitigate transitional issues so that ships may meet the new requirement. For example, developing guidance, developing standardised formats for reporting fuel oil non availability if a ship cannot obtain compliant fuel oil and considering verification and control issues.

ww

amte

c o

IM

.te

.n

Visit us at Posidonia Hall 3 Stand 105

w

S GROU

P

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Implementing the 2020 sulphur limit – ban on carriage of non-compliant high sulphur fuel oil agreed IMO has agreed to move forward with a prohibition on the carriage of fuel oil for use on board ships, when that fuel oil is not compliant with a new low sulphur limit which comes into force from 2020. The aim of the new limit is to reduce sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions from ships to improve air quality and protect the environment.

The 0.50% limit on sulphur in fuel oil on board ships (outside designated emission control areas or ECAs, where the limit is 0.10%) will come into effect on 1 January 2020.

To help ensure consistent implementation of this regulation, IMO’s Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR), which met (5-9 February) at IMO headquarters, London, agreed draft amendments to the MARPOL Convention on the prevention of pollution from ships (MARPOL Annex VI) to prohibit the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil, such that the sulphur content of any fuel oil used or carried for use on board ships shall not exceed 0.50%.

The exception would be for ships fitted with an approved “equivalent arrangement” to meet the sulphur limit – such as an exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS) or so-called “scrubber” – which are already permitted under regulation 4.1 of MARPOL Annex VI. These arrangements can be used with “heavy” high sulphur fuel oil as EGCS clean the emissions and therefore can be accepted as being at least as effective at meeting the required sulphur limit. For a ship without an approved equivalent arrangement the sulphur content of any fuel oil carried for use on board shall not exceed 0.50%.

Under regulation 3.2 of MARPOL Annex VI a ship undertaking trials for ship emission reduction and control technology research can be exempted by the Administration of a Party to Annex VI. The Sub-Committee forwarded the proposed draft amendments to the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 72) meeting in April 2018, for urgent consideration. Once approved by MEPC 72, the draft amendments could be adopted at MEPC 73 (October 2018) and could enter into force on 1 March 2020 (just two months after the 0.50% limit comes into effect).

To assist with consistent implementation, the Sub-Committee agreed to develop a single set of Guidelines covering all relevant aspects and also agreed the outline of draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI (the regulation on the 0.50% limit).

The guidelines would cover: • Preparatory and transitional issues, relating to how ships can prepare for implementation, including relevant time schedules; • Impact on fuel and machinery systems resulting from new fuel blends or fuel types; • Verification issues and control mechanism and actions, including port State control and in-use fuel oil samples; • Fuel oil non-availability: guidance, information sharing and standard reporting format; • Safety implications relating to the option of blending fuels; • Other useful guidance/information that assist Member States and stakeholders, including guidance addressing quality assurance and integrity of the supply chain.

24 NAFS MARCH 2018

The Sub-Committee agreed the terms of reference for its Intersessional Meeting on consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI, to be held 9 to 13 July 2018.

A work plan for the Sub-Committee was agreed, to include: • development of the draft Guidelines for consistent implementation of regulation 14.1.3 of MARPOL Annex VI at the intersessional meeting, with a recommendation that these could be presented directly from the working group to MEPC 73 (October 2018); • development of draft amendments to MARPOL Annex VI at the intersessional meeting, for finalization at PPR 6 for approval at MEPC 74, with a view to adoption at MEPC 75 (Spring 2020) with an expected entry into force in summer 2021, relating to definition of “Sulphur content” (regulation 2); and testing and verification procedure of in-use fuel oil samples (amendments to regulation 14 and associated consequential amendments to regulation 18 and appendix VI); • development of draft amendments, as appropriate, to existing guidelines at the intersessional meeting and finalization at PPR 6 for adoption by MEPC 74, namely to the 2009 Guidelines for port State control under the revised MARPOL Annex VI (resolution MEPC.181(59)); 2010 Guidelines for monitoring the worldwide average sulphur content of fuel oils supplied for use on board ships (resolution MEPC.192(61), as amended by resolution MEPC.273(69)); and Guidelines for onboard sampling for the verification of the sulphur content of the fuel oil used on board ships (MEPC.1/Circ.864).

The urgency of the matter was recognised to the extent that MEPC 72 (April 2018) will be requested to consider whether the output on ship implementation planning for 2020 from the PPR intersessional meeting in July 2018 should be forwarded to MEPC 73 (October 2018).

Consistent implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit for all ships will ensure a level playing field is maintained, with the result that the expected improvement of the environment and human health will be achieved. Sulphur oxides (SOx) are known to be harmful to human health, causing respiratory symptoms and lung disease. In the atmosphere, SOx can lead to acid rain, which can harm crops, forests and aquatic species, and contributes to the acidification of the oceans.

Black carbon: reporting protocol and most appropriate measurement methods agreed

Black Carbon is the product of incomplete combustion of carbon-based fuels. Black Carbon emissions from ships contribute to climate change as a ‘Short-Lived Climate Pollutant’. IMO has been looking at how to measure and report on Black Carbon emissions, as part of its work to consider the impact on the Arctic of Black Carbon emissions from international shipping.

The Sub-Committee agreed the Reporting protocol for voluntary measurement studies to collect Black Carbon data as well as most appropriate Black Carbon measurement methods for data collection.

The Sub-Committee encouraged Member States and international organizations to continue to collect Black Carbon data, using the agreed reporting protocol and the agreed measurement methods, and submit relevant data to the next session of the Sub-Committee.

ΠΑΝΔΩΡΑ ART SHOP

ΠΑΝΔΩΡΑ ART SHOP

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Continuous Emission Monitoring for Marine ABB’s industry proven photometric analyzer modules are covering all the wavelengths for a precision measurement of CO2, NOx and SOx according to the International Maritime Organization’s requirements.

Advance Optima gas analyzers are the choice if it comes to emission monitoring and combustion optimization.

ratio, as specified on the MEPC 184 (59). When burning fuels with sulfur content higher than 0.1 Vol. % in ECAs, ships must abate SO2 and keep SO2/CO2 ratio under control at the ECGS (Exhaust Gas Cleaning System).

The legislation set out by International Maritime Organization (IMO) came into force starting since January 2015 for SOx control and for NOx beginning of 2016. Ship yards, ship owners and marine scrubber manufactures need to equip vessels with continuous gas analyzers for Continuous Emission Monitoring.

Oceangoing ships including: − Container ships − Tankers − Rigs − Cruise ships are major contributors to increase global air pollution and exhaust gases emitted from their diesel engines. This have been recognized by International Maritime Organization to be a serious health threat.

Marine vessel engines are under observation and recent norms set by IMO clearly calls for monitoring of exhaust emission constituents from Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO): − Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) − Sulfur oxides (SOx), along with carbon dioxide (CO2) The IMO has identified rules to ensure SOx control emissions monitoring worldwide; initially (2015-2020) these rules are planned to apply for ships seagoing in the Environmental Control Areas (ECAs); at a later stage the same rules are extended to all oceans areas. The NOx Technical Code (NTC) 2008 state the conditions and processes for NOx emission control and foresees continuous emission monitoring (“direct measurement”) as method for ensuring NOx emissions compliance.

The continuous gas analyzer AO2000 Limas11UV can be easily and successfully used for direct measurement of NO and NO2 at the catalytic reactor or directly at the stack. UV based technology doesn’t require ozone generators, nor NO/NO2 catalytic conversion units and allows for a direct and separate measurement of both nitrogen oxides with high repeatability and stability. The Non Dispersive UV technology has been specifically studied by ABB for NO and NO2 analysis and offers operators a simplified approach, is easy to be used and requires no auxiliary accessories.

Direct measurement of NOx allows ships to operate engines with the highest flexibility, without any need for time consuming engine re-certifications and with no restrictions on OEM parts.

Measurement of SOx/CO2

The continuous gas analyzer AO2000 Uras26 is based on the Non Dispersive IR (NDIR) technology. NDIR is a referenced and recognized for monitoring SO2/CO2 ratio for IMO. The NDIR technology allows for selective measurement of SO2 and CO2. ABB’s Advance Optima series grant advanced capabilities and calculation of SO2 (ppm)/CO2 (Vol. %)

26 NAFS MARCH 2018

Measurement of NOx

Measurement of O2

The continuous gas analyzer AO2000 Magnos206 is specifically designed for monitoring O2. Magnos206 can be used for example to monitor oxygen in excess at the engine outlet exhaust or before SOx scrubbing. It also helps to find and maintain engine combustion efficiency at the desired set-point. ABB’s Magnos206 is based on paramagnetic effect and is therefore an IMO referenced analytical technique for oxygen measurements.

The modular gas analyzers Advance Optima combine advanced technologies with more than 75 years of experience in process and environmental gas analysis. Advance Optima is the innovative solution for the demands of today and the challenges of tomorrow. ABB has the right gas analyzers portfolio to allow oceangoing vessels to stay compliant to upcoming legislations and optimize energy and fuel consumptions.

ABB´s Advance Optima solution can be integrated in a single cabinet, to be installed close to the measuring point. In addition all Advance Optima solutions can be interfaced with the latest ABB Marine Advisory Tools such as EMMA and OCTOPUS, for an optimized visualization and a real-time actions.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Ignore the 2020 noise - but do prepare for the deadline

By James

Bond, ABS Advisory Services

ABS has published an Advisory to help owners understand the steps they will need to take to implement exhaust gas scrubbers onboard ship as well as a regulatory debrief document “Global Sulfur Cap 2020” and a Guide On Exhaust Emission Abatement.

The big question that remains is which solution is right for their fleet, their trading patterns and their future plans.

There is so much talk in the industry about the impact on the shipping industry from the 2020 sulfur cap, it is becoming difficult to separate facts from opinion, information from interference.

What we do know is that the IMO has sent a clear signal that the deadline is not negotiable. It does not have the responsibility of ensuring the required grade of fuel is available, but it is confident member states will act to ensure that supplies are in place and that penalties are levied for non-compliance.

Some shipping organisations are going further; calling for the banning of high sulphur fuel oil with exemptions only for ships that are fitted with scrubbers, while some analysts predict that even if still

28 NAFS MARCH 2018

available, HSFO may be hard to source after 2020 because refiners will begin to stop producing it before the deadline. Others predict that as a residual product of the refining process it may become less expense if marine demand drops away.

Others worry that because the refiners have so far failed to publish a specification for the Low Sulfur Fuel Oil the industry expects to use, that there will be a risk of trade disruption if insufficient supplies are available. Because the variables are so many it is easy for owners and operators to feel that they are unable to make a decision on their strategy for 2020 compliance - or that to move too soon risks incurring a first-mover penalty. But any shipowner with an eye on business continuity and the value of their customer relationships will want to understand the options and plan for compliance.

The reasons are more than just regulatory. Because the cost of low sulfur fuel may see a short term spike, it is also a case of ensuring that shippers and charterers are aware of the change, whether they are paying for fuel, if it is rolled into freight payments or levied as a bunker adjustment factor.

Whether owners choose to switch to low sulfur fuel oil, fit a sulfur scrubber or, in the case of newbuildings investigate alternative fuels, they do not have to be distracted by the debate; but they must recognise that choices will need to made and start their planning as soon as possible.

ABS has published an Advisory to help owners understand the steps they will need to take to implement exhaust gas scrubbers onboard ship as well as a regulatory debrief document “Global Sulfur Cap - 2020” and a Guide On Exhaust Emission Abatement. The big question that remains is which solution is right for their fleet, their trading patterns and their future plans.

ABS believes that key to supporting owners during the transition to low sulfur shipping is techno-economic evaluation, a unique decision support process which identifies key inputs such as life cycle costs, net savings, payback period, saving-to-investment ratio and internal rate of return.

To provide owners with an analysis of which solution is right for them, ABS undertakes a study of fleet trading patterns, ship design and air emission control options and includes the ‘ready’ concept which provides an understanding of the impact to implementing LNG or scrubber options at a later date.

This data is used to establish the base case and alternative cases identifying the relevant life-cycle and supplementary cost impacts to enable a meaningful comparison between the cases.

For compliance-minded shipowners the 2020 sulfur cap is a fact of life, not a matter of debate. The industry’s response will be critical to defining the future of cleaner shipping and ultimately moving it towards the next environmental challenge. For individual owners, there is no need to fear the change, providing they have a trusted partner to help guide them through the process.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Global Sulphur Cap 2020 - time to take action

By John

Kokarakis PhD, Director Technical Business Development, Bureau Veritas

In 2016, IMO decided to reduce global sulfur emissions to air from shipping starting January 1st 2020, i.e. a globalization of the regionally imposed emission control areas (ECAs). Ships will continue to be allowed to burn high sulfur residual fuels, provided they employ EGCS exhaust gas cleaning systems, also known as scrubbers. Scrubbers use seawater to remove sulfur oxides from the exhaust gases. Other options are to utilize fuels with less than 0.5% Sulphur content, such as de-sulfurized HFO and distillates or alternative fuels with minimal sulphur content such as LNG, LPG or methanol.

Cause and effect

The option of alternative fuel oils is potentially associated with significant energy consumption at refineries – and with a net increase in production of CO2.

Alternative fuels are likely to be a more viable option for smaller vessels, while scrubbers are more suitable for larger vessels - due to their increased fuel consumption and benefits of economy of scale. Higher priced fuel alternatives to HFO could resurrect slow steaming and lead to a reduction of CO2 emissions.

Ships with scrubbers are likely to be operated at increased speeds - with a consequential increase in CO2 emissions. This is due to the fact that utilization of more expensive fuels shifts focus on reducing OPEX, whereas in the case of scrubbers, focus will be on securing a return on the CAPEX leading to higher fuel oil consumption.

Furthermore, utilization of diesel favors lower speeds as operational (fuel) costs are likely to be the most significant factor for the more costly distillate. Owners operating scrubbers are likely to do so at higher average speeds and so with higher average fuel consumption. Increased speeds and CO2 emissions directly work against the concept of net environmental benefit – reducing both harmful emissions and greenhouse gases (GHG).

Scrubber technology options

If the scrubber option is chosen, then there are three types to choose from, depending on the operating mode: open loop, closed loop and hybrid. Open loop scrubbers discharge the wash-water outboard and so cannot be used in ports or, of course, within ECAs. Closed loop scrubbers treat wash water with chemicals like caustic soda and can be re-used. While a hybrid scrubber can operate in either open loop or closed loop mode and so is attractive to ships trading in areas of varying alkalinity. The cost of scrubbers is proportional to the installed power of the engine and is higher for the more flexible, hybrid, systems. An additional hidden cost is the approximately 2% additional energy needed to run a scrubber. HFO consists of the fractions of crude after the extraction of lighter and more expensive fractions. Refineries sell HFO to shipping instead of investing in the process equipment required to convert more residuals into lighter distillates. Alternatively, they can de-sulphurize residual oils to less than 0.5% sulfur (LSHFO). But both de-sulphurization and conversion of residuals are expensive. The low-sulfur induced increase in fuel prices is greater at high oil prices given the higher refinery costs. The “HFO with scrubbers” option is cheaper and more financially attractive for larger vessels.

From 2020 refineries will still look to sell the residual that remains from production (and that is currently absorbed now by shipping). If overall demand declines for traditional high sulfur HFO, and the price falls, increasing the price

30 NAFS MARCH 2018

premium between MGO and HFO, this will reduce the time required to secure payback on scrubber installations.

The LNG option

LNG is a feasible and attractive option for new-building projects – so far mainly seen as attractive for ships on specific trades such as ferries, cruise and river vessels and, most recently, mega containerships - with regular and fixed routes allowing long term fuel supply contracts to be made. Retrofitting LNG is unlikely to be cost effective and there have been few such projects completed and when they have they have been supported by government incentive schemes.

Blended fuels

We believe that blended LSHFO fuels will be considered a very attractive option for deeps sea shipping - and that these fuels may be cheaper than MGO. A critical parameter for the blended fuels, is the balance between aromatic and paraffinic hydrocarbons to ensure stability and good combustion characteristics. A category of blended fuels, known as “hybrid fuels” or New ECA fuels, degrade with time, contain increased catalytic fines, need to be preheated and mixing of different blends may be problematic. Although they meet the requirements for low sulfur content, their availability remains a critical issue.

A multi-fuel future

What seems certain is that post-2020 we will face a multi-fuel future. LNG is already a viable option for new-buildings. Development of liquid injection two-stroke ME-LGI Diesel engine by MAN will open the door to its cousin LPG and the non-cryogenic methanol. If availability and price of the later improve we might see it at a premium position especially due its low emission of CO2.

Given the current trends with marginal scrubber penetration, it appears that low-sulfur blended bunker fuels will be the future kings of the marine fuel market. LNG adoption remains relatively marginal in shipping - particularly for deep sea ships - and uptake of scrubbers has also been slow. Markets are likely to see a 1-2 year period of increased volatility and shifting supply and demand volumes. The 2020 global sulfur cap pushes the initiative to refineries, placing fossil fuels in a dominant position for the immediate future. More holistic regulation, encompassing SOx, NOx, and GHG emissions could have favored fuels like LNG. But the current reality is that fuel oil remains very much the prime option -for now.

With lower-sulfur fuels looking like the easier, more practical route to compliance, owners still have some technical challenges to consider and questions of fuel quality and consistency to address. Bureau Veritas is able to help owners address these challenges.

If you can measure it – you can manage it better

Bureau Veritas is also proponent of digitalization - the new playground of innovation and performance optimization with implications for new fuel economies.

Collection of huge clouds of data from various systems onboard, sensors, meters and subsequent analysis will lead to novel paths to fuel efficiency, optimized operations and improved designs.

So, while market unpredictability and the proximity of 2020 favors the option of burning low-sulfur blended bunkers, LNG installation and scrubber systems may in time be bought for less - and cost less due to standardization, technological advances, efficiency gains and increases in production. Regulatory uncertainty remains as the global cap covers only SOx emissions and neither NOx nor GHGs. And, of course, something new will always emerge. Bureau Veritas is the ship-owner’s partner to assist you in finding the best route to compliance and optimum performance depending on the type of your ship, economics and availability of fuel, structural and stability compatibility and providing the necessary engineering studies.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Global Sulphur Cap 2020 - time to take action

By Gregory

KAZANTZIS, Technical Resource Manager , Maritime Service Centre & Advisory DNV GL – Maritime

The introduction of the new global sulphur cap in 2020 is causing nothing short of a paradigm shift in marine fuel. It is more than just another regulation — it is a complex challenge, and how you choose to comply may ultimately impact the future competitiveness of your assets.

There is a great deal of uncertainty related to enforcement, fuel availability and technological solutions.

It is challenging to make exact predictions regarding the most cost-efficient approach. DNV GL has compiled and thoroughly analyzed available information to give shipowners a comprehensive overview of the various compliance options. Every ship is different and so is its operational profile. The ultimate decision between HFO and scrubber, distillate fuel (MGO), LNG, low-sulphur fuels (0.50 % S) or other, alternative fuels should to be evaluated individually.

Depending on the underlying assumptions, the calculations lead to different conclusions. DNV GL has established scenarios that can be used as a guidance for investment decisions. Needless to say, any unexpected event, such as volatile changes of fossil fuel prices, can substantially change the outcome. It should however be noted that by 2020, a vast majority of ships will continue to run on whichever compliant fuel, that can be supplied in a port. This will be a higher-valued product compared to conventional HFO, thus inevitably will increase the operating costs.

It is in owners’ best interest to investigate all compliance options which may increase their competitive edge.

The status quo

Emission Control Areas (ECAs) in European and North American waters already impose a 0.1 per cent sulphur limit today, and new domestic control areas are being established in ports and areas in China. Most ships switch from HFO to MGO to ensure compliance. For alternative means of compliance, regional restrictions and limitations must be taken into consideration. Factors such as suitable scrubber technology, scrubber water disposal or availability of specific fuels need to be evaluated.

Looking towards 2020, it is challenging to make precise predictions of the future fuel availability and its pricing. The refinery industry will carefully evaluate its future production capacity investments by examining the market expectations and the demand. Shipowners on the other side, tend to assume that refineries will be able to provide enough of the compliant fuel to satisfy the increased demand. The researchers and industry experts do not seem to agree either. A 2016 IMO study indicates that the refining capacity will be sufficient to provide adequate quantities of low-sulphur marine fuel by 2020. There are other sources however, which are more sceptical, pointing to the fact that desulphur-

32 NAFS MARCH 2018

ization is technically difficult, costly and may discourage refineries from such investment. All of those different opinions and strategies trigger off a lot of uncertainty.

Enforcement of the sulphur cap comes with new requirements. EU member states will be obliged to check 10 per cent of all ships calling at their ports for compliance with the EU Sulphur Directive. There are also reporting duties related to fuel sample analyses and surveys. In order to raise awareness of the sulphur control issues, inspectors and crews will have to be appropriately trained. Enforcement on the high seas is still an open question.

The options

It is clear that every owner has an interest in identifying the most economical and competitive strategy for sulphur cap compliance. DNV GL has prepared special evaluation lists presenting all of the available options. These lists are sensitive to various factors such as ship age, operating regions, trade patterns, as well as cost development diagrams accounting for the CAPEX and OPEX of each solution.

It has turned out that based on our assumptions for future cost of fuels and the corresponding investment, a SOx scrubber installation may prove to be the most cost-efficient choice over a ten year period. It must be noted however, that the experience with respect to scrubber technology is mainly limited to some passenger and ro-ro vessels operating in ECAs. Retrofitting a scrubber system can be technically challenging.

Furthermore, certain local restrictions regarding the discharge of scrubber wash water or sludge disposal may apply in addition.

On the fuel side, it is expected that new 0.50% S-compliant blends will be introduced. Similar to hybrid fuels used in ECAs today, a diligent use and handling of them will be important for safe and successful operation.

Among alternative fuels, LNG will probably get more traction as availability and bunkering infrastructure improve. This however, applies mainly to the newbuild tonnage, especially for ships which will operate extensively within NOx ECA regions. Beyond being a sulphur-free fuel, LNG also offers a reduction in NOx emissions particulate matter and CO2 footprint compared with conventional fuels. Given the present regulatory outlook, these fuel characteristics will probably become more and more attractive in the future.

Another question in the feasibility equation is the proportion of time a vessel spends inside the ECAs. Furthermore, there is also an element of the fuel consumption which partly defines the attractiveness of the ship in the charter market. A free DNV GL guidance paper “Global Sulphur Cap 2020” is available for download. In addition, DNV GL offers a wide range of advisory services to help find the most cost-effective compliance strategy, including ship-specific calculation services and feasibility studies.

Emission Control Areas (ECAs) in European and North American waters already impose a 0.1 per cent sulphur limit today, and new domestic control areas are being established in ports and areas in China.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Global Sulphur Cap 2020 - The sky is falling?

By Sophia

Themelarou, FOBAS Senior Specialist, Marine Fuels & Environment, Lloyd’s Register

Within the scope of work of the International Maritime Organisation to mitigate the environmental impact of the shipping industry activities, a tighter, revised Annex VI to the MARPOL convention was adopted in 2008 aiming to regulate – among others - the sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions from sea going vessels. The Annex VI first came into force in 2010 and the last and steeper step change in the regulatory requirements was confirmed in October 2016 by the outcome of MEPC 70. Starting with a maximum allowable sulphur content of fuel in use set at 4.50% m/m until 2012, the global sulphur cap is currently at 3.50% m/m and from January 1st 2020, it will drop by a vast 85% to 0.50% m/m marking the beginning of a new era in marine fuel type and quality within the broader regulatory framework that seeks to control airborne emissions from ships.

The global sulphur cap of 0.50% m/m brings a quantum change in the overall oil market as estimates expect approx. 2 mb/d of marine fuel demand – roughly representing 50% of total estimated marine fuel demand - to shift from high sulphur (residual) to low sulphur (distillate) fuel posing a significant interconnected challenge to both the marine and the refining industries. The marine fuel industry, once a very convenient outlet for the residual fuel by-product streams of the refineries is now converted to yet another market claiming a significant portion of the middle distillates pool.

Production of middle distillates will need to increase whereas an alternative way out for the residuals needs to be explored. Oil majors lead extensive research projects to assist in setting up a viable strategic plan to cope with the expected shift of the demand. Options examined include investing in new secondary refining units such as cockers to upgrade the fuel oil residues into lighter products, investing in more extensive - and costly desulphurisation processes or simply switching to use of sweeter crudes with lower sulphur content. Each option comes with its drawbacks; and in absence of an obvious choice, the marine industry is likely to encounter an unprecedented variability in marine fuel quality across the globe.

Despite the blur over the expected fuel quality, the most prominent compliance option for the dawn of January 1st 2020 is the use of low sulphur fuel - be it distillate or rather a residual and distillate blend product - as the majority of ship operators are expected to opt for the less capital demanding option to begin with. However, the marine industry will then need to successfully cope with multi blended products that are likely to be deprived of adequate stability reserves. Possible instability of the fuels supplied and great restrain in fuel mixing on board to avoid the risk of mixing incompatible fuels (also resulting in unstable fuel mixtures) only account for few of anticipated areas of concern for the ship operator; setting aside the uprising trend of using highly paraffinic fuels which together with excellent combustion and ignition quality come with compromised cold flow properties (high pour points, cold filter plugging points and cloud points).

36 NAFS MARCH 2018

The adoption of abatement technologies - i.e. the installation of a scrubber system – is the alternative to coping with multiple low sulphur fuel grades.

Scrubber technology has a long history in land based applications and is an arrangement designed to clean the sulphur oxides off the exhaust gases on board the vessel. This will allow ships with fitted scrubbers to continue to use the good old high sulphur residual fuels while complying with the new regulatory requirements. Nevertheless, the capital investment of fitting a new building or retrofitting an existing vessel is not to be overlooked.

The return on the investment will principally depend on the trading scheme of the vessel – how much time is anticipated to be spent in Emission Control Areas (ECAs) - as well as on the price differential between the residual fuel and the distillates or the new 0.50% sulphur content fuels. Significant consideration is also given to likely restrictions in the availability of residual fuel across the globe with future refineries production remaining unconfirmed to date. Many are choosing to open channels of communications with suppliers on the matter and collaborate to secure long term residual fuel reserves before proceeding to the scrubber installation.

With the preparatory period for ship operators to evaluate and establish their fleets’ Annex VI SOx compliance strategy already opened, the most highly weighted factor in the process remains the vessel’s age and operational profile. Within the same scope any technical considerations ought to be given on modifications required on board (fuel loading, storage and handling systems,) that will grant the vessels’ maximum flexibility in dealing with the highly variant expected fuel quality. To address such concerns, the Prevention Pollution and Response (PPR) sub-committee of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and other high end industry consortiums such as CIMAC (the International Council on Combustion Engines) and the ISO (International Standardisation Organisation) have assumed work to ensure a structured transition to the new regulatory requirements and leave as little room as possible for misinterpretations and malfunctions of any kind – from the design fuel quality to means of controlling and ensuring compliance.

The high variance expected in the quality and characteristics of the fuels available worldwide will require a model of integrated fuel management from procurement to exhaust to successfully cope with the expected handling requirements. FOBAS can lead and perform a holistic approach to fuel management in this wider context offering tailored testing regimes and coaching using a wide range of tools and controls; sufficiently flexible to react to the continuously changing conditions of the marine fuel quality.

Sophia holds a degree in Chemical Engineering and is currently undergoing her Masters’ Degree in Marine Engineering from National Technical University of Athens. She is a member of the LRGMT FOBAS team as a marine fuel consultant for Europe and the Americas.

LRGMT FOBAS Fuel Oil Bunker Analysis and Advisory Service (FOBAS) is a recognised leader in the evaluation of fuel oils used in marine, offshore and land-based industries. Use of sophisticated analytical techniques, together with a wealth of accumulated experience, ensures that FOBAS provides the independent and authoritative technical information essential to the efficient management of the highly variable quality fuels available. FOBAS provides total fuel management solutions, leads technical investigations of fuel related damages and/or claims, as well as organises training seminars on holistic fuel management.

Cyber secure: Strategies to keep people, assets and businesses safe and secure.

Our cyber security advisors are here to work with you to understand and identify the specific risks to your people, assets and business. From guidance and training to vulnerability and impact assessment, we can co-create a cyber security strategy that will work for your business now and in the future.

info.lr.org/cybersecure

Working together for a safer world

Lloyd’s Register and variants of it are trading names of Lloyd’s Register Group Limited, its subsidiaries and affiliates. Copyright © Lloyd’s Register Group Limited. 2017.

A member of the Lloyd’s Register group.

MO-Cyber-secure-210x280-3mmbleed-printadvert-201710.indd 1

26/10/2017 13:23:09

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Shell Marine prepares for more cylinder oil uncertainties

By Dr Sara

Lawrence Shell Marine Global Technical Manager

The technical, commercial and regulatory variables in play when considering a ship owner’s optimum cylinder oil supply solution continue to rise. Shell Marine Global Technical Manager, Dr Sara Lawrence, offers a perspective for 2018.

for money. “There is tangible added value if the product is ‘better’ in the sense that the time between overhaul for engine components increases,” she observes. “The incremental costs between two lubricants is insignificant against the total cost of ownership of a marine engine.”

New two-stroke and four-stroke cylinder oils, a state-of-the-art blending facility in Singapore, additional delivery ports and new technical services saw Shell Marine complete a strong year in 2017.

Sustaining the mood into 2018 is MILES (Marine Integrated Lubrication and Expert Solutions), an initiative that combines purchasing options, services and an extensive range of lubricant products in a multi-faceted strategy for customers to address their most pressing operational concerns. It includes new and different delivery options and a coherent response to digital disruption in the maritime sector.

Over the last decade, cylinder oils have needed to address numerous industry ‘pain points’, due to an unusual combination of environmental and commercial pressures. In terms of lubricant selection, the industry’s move towards slow steaming to save fuel and regulatory restrictions on emissions pose different challenges for cylinder oils.

As one consequence, Dr Lawrence has been intimately involved in Shell Marine’s development of higher BN cylinder oils to address the susceptibilities of the most modern, high-efficiency engines to cold corrosion under the part-load operations required for slow steaming.

She has also worked with the R&D team in the development of lower BN oils for marine use, in response to the need to run two-stroke marine engines on 0.1% sulphur content fuels in Emissions Control Areas.

Coming into 2017, the Shell Alexia two-stroke cylinder oil portfolio covered fuel types from LNG to HSHFO, operating regimes from full load to slow steaming, and engines of all ages. It extended from Alexia S3 - a 25BN oil for ECAs, Alexia S4 (BN 60) and Alexia 50 (BN 70) to the 100BN Shell Alexia S6 which was developed to perform with HSHFO in conditions where oils are under extreme stress.

MILES not only takes full advantage of digitalisation; it is a proposition which addresses the challenges shipowners face today from regulators, new engine technology, new fuels and efficiency pressures.

As well as providing optimal volumes/port liftings recommendations, it can also be evolved to offer entire lubrication management for a vessel, combining stock levels and demand planning that includes operating profile and even “flexi pay” schemes.

Insight into MILES is given by Shell Marine Global Technical Manager Dr Sara Lawrence, whose perspective focuses on the technology behind Shell Marine’s lubricant products and the technical services developed to support them in the field. In this context, she explains MILES as “a way of better understanding what creates value for the customer that Shell Marine can address through end-to-end integrated solutions”.

Dr Lawrence sees MILES as acknowledging the significance shipping customers attach to the price of lubrication without losing sight of value

38 NAFS MARCH 2018

In 2017, Shell Marine formally introduced Shell Alexia 140, whose high 140 BN delivers even more protection1 for modern engines against cold corrosion and can be mixed with lower BN oils to adjust base number as vessels move in and out of ECAs. Shell Marine has secured a No Objection Letter (NOL) for use from MAN Diesel & Turbo, which also used the product as its first test oil for ‘ACOM’ - Automated Cylinder Oil

Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Mixing; Shell Alexia 140 has also been successfully used with Maersk Fluid Technology’s ‘blend-on-board’ technology.

The approach of the 2020 IMO global 0.5% cap on marine fuel sulphur content means that cylinder oil optimisation to deal with changing fuel composition continues. Post 2020, both LNG and HSHFO will “have a place”, Lawrence says, but owner decisions taken to date suggest low sulphur fuels as the shipping industry’s mainstay fuel. This means that, while the two-stroke product portfolio is largely in place, a new BN40 product is under field trial, for launch in early 2019.

“We anticipate significant volumes of higher BN cylinder oils being replaced by BN40 or BN70 grades,” she says.

Shell Marine also upgraded its four-stroke crankcase oils in 2017 to be “2020 ready”, says Lawrence, under the Shell Gadinia and Argina brands. The new oils have been optimised to deal with the faster viscosity increase and BN depletion experienced by oils in modern medium speed engines, which work at pressures between 10-17% higher than their predecessors and oil temperatures approaching 300 degrees at the top crown.

Lawrence says that the approaching 2020 deadline will also add impetus to the uptake of cylinder oil monitoring, testing and analysis services. She notes that, in the two-stroke segment, deliveries of Shell Alexia products can be combined with the Shell LubeMonitor service.

“Results of our own testing and from our customers show that reductions in feed rates can be achieved with an overall cost reduction to customers.” An excellent example of this is the close collaboration with Oskar Wehr, where by using the Shell LubeMonitor service, the owner cut its cylinder oil costs by reducing the oil feed rate by 0.2 g/KWh in each of 25 vessels, whilst still complying with the equipment manufac-

nafs

turer’s feed rate recommendations.

Shell estimates that up to 3 million b/d of HSFO demand will be displaced by 0.5% sulphur content fuel. This will create challenges as it is anticipated that a large percentage of these fuels will be blended or hybrid fuels which are very different in characteristics to current fuel oil. There is some experience of such fuels in ECA zones (0.1% Sulphur) but in those cases, fuel purchasers can limit their supply sources to guarantee product consistency.

Dr Lawrence points out that, once sulphur capping ‘goes global’, managing bunkered fuels from different locations will need to be carefully managed, as the same sulphur content will not guarantee the same quality.

“Shell Marine has been concentrating on developing its technical services for a world where there is much more uncertainty and the likelihood is that the quality of fuel will vary,” Dr Lawrence says. Better monitoring of lubricant performance for engines in service, for example, backed by advanced technology to communicate data from ship to shore improves decision-making when it comes to lubricants logistics.

“I fully understand that there might be hesitation over spending more on technical services, given that for some it is still all about survival, while owners have EEDI/MRV/CO2/2020 and ballast water to contend with, and falling crew competency thrown into the mix. But, increasingly, investing in cylinder oil technical services should be considered in the context of the consequences of putting it off or avoiding it altogether.” *compared to lower BN alternatives

NAFS MARCH 2018 39

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Shipping in the 2020 era selection of fuel and propulsion machinery

By Johnny

Kackur, Business Development Manager, Marine Solutions, Wartsila

Environmental concerns have led to increasingly stringent emission legislation. What started as an onshore industry regulatory development is now impacting also the shipping industry. Shipping has lately faced multiple new regulations, and will soon be facing other major regulations. The global cap of an 0.5% maximum content of sulphur in fuel from 2020, and the IMO Tier III regulations (specifying that NOx emissions must be 80% lower than at the IMO Tier I level) within Emission Control Areas will force the shipping industry to consider alternatives beyond today´s standard solutions.

GLOBAL MAXIMUM SULPHUR CAP OF 0.5%

The Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) used by marine vessels today with a maximum sulphur content of 3.5% will not meet the global sulphur cap of 0.5% coming into force from 2020. Further refining of the HFO and blending

40 NAFS MARCH 2018

with gasoil is required to meet the maximum sulphur content of 0.5%, which also increases the price of the fuel. Low sulphur HFO is still not widely available, but the low sulphur fuels used today are Marine Diesel Oil (MDO) with a maximum sulphur content of 1%, and Marine Gas Fuel (MGO) with a maximum sulphur content of 0.1%.

The price for fuel with a maximum sulphur content of 0.5% is still open.

The MDO used today can be further refined, and also the possible increased use of gasoil will enable the sulphur cap of 0.5% to be met.

Therefore, the price of MDO today might be the best indicator for foreseeing the complying diesel oil price in 2020. Some oil majors are already developing low sulphur HFO, and have indicated that the price for low sulphur HFO would be somewhere between the current HFO and MDO prices. Naturally nobody yet knows for sure what the price of low sulphur fuel will be in the future, but many ship owners anticipate that it will be close to the price of MDO. The only alternative for meeting the maximum sulphur content of 0.5% with the HFO currently available is to clean the engine exhaust gases of sulphur oxides using an SOx scrubber. Many ship owners have already opted for SOx scrubbers in their newbuildings, because the additional price for low sulphur fuel oils has, at least historically, been considerably higher than for conventional HFO. The anticipation is that the additional investment for the SOx scrubber will pay itself back within a reasonable time frame since it allows the ship to operate on conventional HFO. Figure 2 indicates the historical fuel prices on the USA’s West Coast (IFO380 is generally considered to be the most commonly used HFO). Today, there is already a sulphur cap of 0.1% within Emission Control Areas, so the industry has to some extent learned how to operate on low sulphur fuels. However, the large-scale global sulphur cap of 0.5% must anyway be considered as a major challenge for the shipping industry. Large ocean-going vessels have thus far only had to use low-sulphur fuel periodically when sailing within Emission Control Areas. At other times they have operated normally on conventional HFO. Having to permanently comply with the low sulphur legislation will lead to changes in the marine sector far more reaching than we have seen earlier.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Figure 2 | Historical Fuel Prices on the US West Coast, HFO, MDO and LNG

NOX EMISSIONS - IMO TIER III WITHIN EMISSION CONTROL AREAS

In addition to the global sulphur cap of 0.5%, additional emissions legislation is also entering into force. New ships will have to comply with IMO Tier III regulations when operating within Emission Control Areas.

IMO Tier III means that the NOx emissions will have to be 80% lower than those specified by the IMO Tier I levels introduced in the year 2000. New ships with keel laying after 1.1.2016 for North American waters, and keel laying after 1.1.2021 for the Northern European Emission Control Areas will have to comply with the IMO Tier III legislation. Diesel engines can only meet IMO Tier III with catalysts, i.e. Selective Catalytic Reduction units (SCR). An alternative means of meeting the IMO Tier III levels might also be to use Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR), although this technology has still to be further validated.

INCREASING COSTS BECAUSE OF EMISSIONS LEGISLATION

Fig.4 | Comparison of emission levels, gas engine vs. diesel engine after-treatment units will also increase operating costs. The after-treatment equipment creates an increased electrical power demand because of the additional pumps required. Additional costs for the removal of the sludge when in port will also need to be considered. Furthermore, operating with SCRs will require the use of urea, which will have to be separately bunkered. All after-treatment equipment also requires maintenance, meaning that the overall maintenance costs will also increase.

ALTERNATIVES FUELS – LNG

A high-pressure SCR unit for a Win GD 6X72 engine undergoing shop testing at Hyundai Heavy Industries.

Emissions legislation will increase the operational costs of shipping. If no after treatment units are installed, low sulphur diesel oil will have to be used, which is more expensive than conventional HFO. If after treatment units are installed, the cost of the ship will increase, while operating the

42 NAFS MARCH 2018

Because of the anticipated cost increases for operating on diesel oil, there is growing interest in alternative fuels. Electric powered vessels, meaning battery or hybrid propulsion, will play an important role in future shipping operations, but the battery technology available today still only allows for very short distances when running purely on electricity.

For example, ferries with transit times of, say, half an hour are a good fit for purely battery powered vessels.

The alternative fuel that looks most promising today is LNG. Natural gas production worldwide is increasing, and together with renewables, gas is taking an increasing share of the global energy market. Natural gas traded as LNG is growing by some 6 to 8% per year. Of all the fossil fuels natural gas is the cleanest, and because of emissions legislation is increasing being used for fuelling ships.

Operating on LNG delivers lower emission levels than when operating on diesel oil, as illustrated in figure 4. Gas or dual-fuel engines running on gas according to the Otto cycle, have a 25% lower level of CO2 emissions,

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Fig.7 Illustration of the transition to 0.5% Low Sulphur Fuel (Shell) while NOx emissions are 85% lower than for a diesel engine. This enables compliance with the IMO Tier III levels without the need of an SCR. As LNG does not include any sulphur, it also fulfils all sulphur regulations.

The bottleneck holding back greater LNG use has been the bunkering availability of LNG. Neither has the price of LNG always been competitive compared to conventional HFO. Today there are a little more than 100 LNG fuelled vessels in operation, and by 2019 this number will have increased to more than 200. The LNG bunkering infrastructure is, therefore, gradually improving. As more and more ship owners are opting for LNG as fuel for their newbuildings, LNG bunkering volumes are increasing. However, most of the LNG fuelled vessels are operating in northern Europe, but ports worldwide are also showing an increased interest in offering LNG.

ence point for the price of 0.5% sulphur fuel is the price of MDO. Comparing the historical price spread between HFO and MDO presented in figure 2 earlier further strengthens the case for anticipating that the price of low sulphur fuel will be high. The IMO has published an extensive report, its “Assessment of fuel oil availability”, in July 2016 (IMO MEPC 70/ INF.6). The price spread shown in figure 6 between 0.5% sulphur fuel and 3% sulphur fuel is 130 USD/ton, which compared to the 10 year historical prices between HFO and MDO it is a moderate price spread. However, even with this modest price spread of 130 USD/ton, the pay-back time for SOx scrubbers will be very short compared to running on 0.5% sulphur fuel. In addition, by the end of 2019 the demand for 0.5% sulphur fuel is expected to grow from zero to approximately 75% of the global marine fuel demand. It remains to be seen how this tremendous growth in demand will work in practice, i.e. how supply will meet demand. Based on this assessTHE CHOICE BETWEEN LOW SULPHUR FUEL, SOX ment, alternatives such as SOx scrubbers or LNG should be more ecoSCRUBBERS OR LNG FOR NEWBUILDINGS nomically viable for newbuildings. While it can be foreseen that the price It is not easy to guess which marine fuel will be predominant in the future. of 0.5% sulphur fuel will be high, the choice between SOx scrubbers and The most challenging part probably is to foresee future fuel prices; how LNG is challenging because it is also difficult to foresee the price spread will low sulphur fuel be priced, and how will the price spread be between conventional HFO and LNG. Both alternatives, SOx scrubbers compared to conventional HFO and LNG? There are still many open and LNG fuel will drive up newbuilding costs compared to today’s items that will need to be settled. Until this has happened we can only try standard ship specifications. LNG fuelled ships will, in most cases, be to estimate what the most logical outcome could be. the most expensive alternative, and this is mainly because of the price Taking into consideration the higher production costs and increased use for the LNG fuel tank system. The price of LNG fuel tank systems has deof gasoil to produce low sulphur fuel with a maximum sulphur content of creased, and continues to do so as the technology becomes more mature, 0.5%, it is likely that the price for low sulphur fuel will be high. One referbut nevertheless the additional price for an LNG fuel tank system is still considerable. As LNG fuelled ships are generally always more expensive than HFO fuelled ships equipped with after-treatment units, it means that the operating costs for LNG must be lower in order to make the use of LNG profitable.

It is not easy to forecast how the price of LNG will develop, but it should be supply-demand driven.

And one thing that we do know is that there will be a high increase in the supply of LNG between now and 2020, which should put pressure on LNG prices Fig.6 Projected Fuel Oil prices in 2020, source IMO MEPC 70/INF.6 worldwide. Figure 8 below shows an expected 50%

44 NAFS MARCH 2018

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 increase in the global LNG supply between now and 2020. LNG pricing is difficult to assess as LNG prices are seldom yet published. Some suppliers of LNG are pricing it compared to the price of diesel oil products, for example as a discount from the price of MDO. The price spread varies somewhat geographically, but it already gives a good basis from which to estimate it over the coming two years or so.

For a complete life-cycle analysis between different fuels, consideration should also be given to the fact that the use of LNG also gives the possibility for cost savings. When using LNG as the primary fuel, HFO boosters are not needed and, therefore, steam systems and boilers can often also be eliminated unless they are needed for other heating purposes. Operational expenses with LNG can also be lowered, since by operating on LNG the time between engine overhauls can be lengthened, which in turn reduces maintenance costs. Furthermore, LNG does not need to be separated, as is the case for HFO since approximately 1.5% of the HFO is separated in HFO separators. For a complete life-cycle analysis these “hidden benefits with LNG” also need to be considered.

CASE EXAMPLE – 82K DWT BULKERS

Fig.10 Break-even costs for a conventional HFO alternative using an SOx scrubber and SCRs compared to an LNG fuelled alternative based on an HFO price of 500 USD/ton. Considering both CapEx and OpEx costs, the break-even price for LNG is 12.3 USD/mmBTU.

Bulk carriers (or bulkers) represent one of the main shipping segments. A Kamsarmax bulker is used here as a case example for comparing the selection between SOx scrubbers and LNG fuel.

The comparison in figure 9 shows the cost structure difference between an HFO engine with a hybrid SOx scrubber and SCRs, and an LNG ma-

chinery alternative. The SOx scrubber and SCRs increase the total vessel costs when compared to standard bulker designs today. The additional costs for the after-treatment system are still moderate in comparison to the additional costs for the LNG fuel tank system. As there is not a lot of free space on a bulker it may also mean that in order to keep the same cargo capacity, the ship’s length has to be increased and this will also increase the price for the LNG alternative. The size of the LNG fuel tanks has a major impact on the price for the LNG alternative, and in this example the operating range on LNG is set at 11,000 nm at a service speed of 14.5 kn.

The additional price for having LNG fuelled machinery in this case example for a Kamsarmax bulker means that, in order to be viable, it must be cheaper to operate on LNG. Otherwise the additional investment will never pay itself back. An acceptable pay-back time for the additional investment will vary from project to project, but in this example a pay-back period of ten years has been used and only the machinery investment costs illustrated in figure 9 have been used. It has further been assumed that the interest rate is 7%. Based on the historical fuel oil prices on the USA’s West Coast shown in figure 2, and the projected HFO price in 2020 by the IMO, the price of conventional HFO could be at around 500 USD/ton. Based on this, and the difference in total vesFig.9 Comparison on investment costs for two machinery alternatives: SOx sel costs, it is possible to calculate break-even prices for LNG, meaning the price of LNG that equates to the opscrubber with SCRs vs. a LNG fuelled vessel

46 NAFS MARCH 2018

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 erating costs for a given HFO price over a time span of ten years. Figure 10 illustrates a comparison based on an HFO price of 500 USD/ton, giving a break-even price for LNG of 12.3 USD/mmBTU. This means that with the given assumptions, it will be cheaper to operate on conventional HFO using a SOx scrubber and SCRs if the price of HFO is 500 USD/ton and the price of LNG is >12.3 USD/mmBTU. Conversely, it would be cheaper to operate on LNG if the price of LNG is <12.3 USD/mmBTU (and the price of HFO is 500 USD/ton). The break-even calculation includes some assumptions as regards the operating profile, and therefore, the operating hours for the SCRs and for the SOx scrubber in closed-loop. Furthermore, the comparison is based on an existing design and includes an additional hotel load for the scrubber pumps, HFO separator losses, etc., i.e. the calculations are on a detailed level. The main purpose of the calculation is to demonstrate how a comparison can be made for different fuel oils requiring different investment costs. The input parameters will vary for different projects and this will naturally affect the end results. The break-even calculation can be used in projects where the price of the LNG is negotiated to be directly linked to the price of a diesel oil product, or even directly linked to the price of conventional HFO. As LNG is typically priced in USD/mmBTU, it is challenging to understand the actual price without further conversions. 12.3 USD/mmBTU corresponds to 42 USD/MWh. The corresponding LNG price in tonnes is approximately 575 USD/ton, but the higher energy content of LNG has also to be considered. The energy content of LNG is more than 20% greater than for conventional HFO, and approximately 15% greater than that of Marine Gas Oil. Any conclusion in the selection between HFO with after treatment units and LNG depends mainly on the price difference between HFO and LNG. As per the projected fuel oil prices today, operation on LNG looks very attractive on a long-term basis. Operating on HFO with after treatment systems looks more attractive in the short-term because of the lower investment costs.

LNG FUELLED 82K DWT BULKER – OPTIMIZATION OF THE PROPULSION MACHINERY

laden at service speed, although it is generally known that the actual operation is very seldom at the optimization point. Secondly, the redundancy level is not optimal with only one main engine, and furthermore gas fuelled 2-stroke engines have only been in operation since 2016, meaning it is still a new technology under development. The third argument is actually cost optimization. Why not do it cheaper if possible to achieve the same outcome? 2-stroke engines are today often heavily derated, meaning the service speed is typically around 60% of the R1 rating. In addition, there are three auxiliary gensets with poor efficiency covering the hotel load, and typically only one of the auxiliary gensets is in operation. It is, therefore, a very poor utilization of the total installed power. For diesel fuelled ships it has not been considered as being particularly crucial to have over-powered engines, but since gas fuelled engines are more expensive than diesel engines, it becomes more important for LNG fuelled ships.

An LNG fuelled Kamsarmax bulker with a 2-stroke main engine could comprise a WinGD 5X62DF main engine and three Wärtsilä 6L20DF gensets. The R1 rating of the 5X62DF is 11.925 kW, but here it would be derated to CMCR 9030 kW at 82 rpm. A further optimized LNG fuelled Kamsarmax bulker would consist of only two 4-stroke main engines simultaneously utilized for both propulsion and hotel load. An optimum 4-stroke machinery arrangement would consist of a Wärtsilä 8V31DF and a Wärtsilä 10V31DF main engine. The power output of these engines is 4.400 + 5.500 kW, giving a total of 9.900 kW installed power. Both main engines are connected to a reduction gear box, and the reduction gear box is connected to a Controllable Pitch Propeller. There is no need for any auxiliary genset to be installed, but instead PTOs (generators connected to the gear box) would generate all the electricity needed onboard. The PTOs would also be used in port, whereby the propulsion line is disconnected from the gear box and one of the engines could be used to generate electricity only. Each PTO is connected to a frequency converter, which makes it possible to run the main engines at variable speeds.

Operation at variable speeds gives a lower fuel oil consumption for the engines at part loads, and additionally it increases the propeller efficiency at part load. The main reasons for switching from a conventional 2-stroke main engine concept to a 4-stroke main engine concept for a LNG fuelled machinery are: • Proven gas engine technology • Increased flexibility • Cost optimization Proven gas engine technology: 4-stroke dual-fuel engines from Wärtsilä have been in operation since 1996 and have already accumulated more than 16 million running hours. The 4-stroke dual-fuel engine technology has developed enormously since the first engines were delivered in 1996.

It is, therefore, an already fully proven technology compared to 2-stroke dual-fuel engines that have very recently only entered the market.

Fig.11 Illustration of an LNG fuelled machinery consisting of WinGD 5X62DF main engines and three Wärtsilä 6L20DF auxiliary gensets.

Standard bulk carrier designs today have a single 2-stroke main engine directly connected to a Fixed Pitch Propeller and have three auxiliary gensets. This has been the industry standard since the change from steam turbine machineries. For LNG fuelled bulkers, the general idea thus far has been to change only the 2-stroke main engine and aux gensets to operate on LNG, but further optimization is possible. It is easy to pinpoint the weak points with the traditional 2-stroke machinery arrangement.

First of all it is very static, having only one optimization point, i.e. fully

48 NAFS MARCH 2018

Increased flexibility: The redundancy level is increased with two main engines. If the larger 4-stroke engine is out of operation, the vessel will still be able to keep a service speed of >11 kn. Today´s standard with one 2-S main engine means that in case of a main engine failure, the vessel is out of operation. The 4-stroke engine concept also offers increased service flexibility as one of the main engines can be overhauled during sailing.

However, the major reason why the 4-stroke engine concept offers increased flexibility is because of having a CPP installed instead of a FPP as for the 2-stroke concept. With a CPP, the manoeuvrability is better than with a FPP, but more importantly, with a CPP it is possible to optimize the efficiency of the engine and propeller according to the actual operating conditions. A variable speed CPP can have comparable Open Water

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Fig.14 Example of an engine load diagram with a 5% Light Running Margin efficiency as a FPP. The drawback with a FPP is that it is very static and, therefore, higher margins must be used which might reduce efficiency.

The design of the FPP is typically at laden condition and at service speed.

For the design of the FPP, the main engine loading limitations must be considered in order to make sure that the engine is never over-loaded.

To that margins are then added to make sure that the 2-stroke engine will never be over-loaded, regardless of a dirty hull, heavy sea conditions, etc.

In addition, 2-stroke engine makers recommend a Light Running Margin of 4 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 10%, and typically a 10% LRM is applied. The LRM is applied to give some further margins for avoid overloading the engine, and also to have a faster load acceleration (especially important to minimize the time spent in the barred rpm range). The drawback with the additional margins is that the propulsion efficiency is significantly decreased when the propeller rpm is increased. The benefit of a CPP is the flexibility provided, and with the newly developed active combinator there is no need to apply unfavorable margins.

The active combinator minimizes the fuel consumption during transit sailing modes, based on the principle that equal thrust can be achieved at more fuel optimised propeller pitch and engine speeds compared to a static combinator mode. The 4-S main engines continuously communicate with the smart propulsion control system, allowing the propeller and engine to operate in the most efficient and safe way, in accordance with the actual (environmental) conditions. This is not possible with a FPP as the design is fixed and margins for worst case scenarios have to be applied, without any possibilities to make adjustments.

Cost optimization: The 4-stroke engine concept has a lower installed power, and this is also the main reason why the 4-stroke engine concept is more cost efficient than a 2-stroke concept. Figure 15 below shows a cost comparison between a 2-stroke concept with 5X62DF main engines with an FPP and 3 x Wärtsilä 6L20DF auxiliary gensets, and a 4-stroke concept with one 10V31DF and one 8V31DF main engine connected to

50 NAFS MARCH 2018

a reduction gear box and CPP, including the costs for the PTO converter systems.

The machinery investment cost comparison in figure 16 above includes the main equipment only, without auxiliary equipment. When the auxiliary equipment is also included in the comparison, the cost difference between the 4-stroke concept and the 2-stroke concept is higher. The lower installed power and fewer engines installed with the 4-stroke engine concept requires less and smaller auxiliary equipment than the 2-stroke concept.

Costs can therefore be lower with a 4-stroke concept, but how about fuel consumption? Can a 4-stroke concept be competitive against a 2-stroke on fuel consumption?

Fuel costs contribute a major share of the total operating expenses for a Kamsarmax bulker. Therefore, the fuel efficiency is of great importance.

The Specific Fuel Oil Consumption for a 2-stroke engine is generally always better than for a 4-stroke engine. A 4-stroke concept also requires a reduction gear box, which further reduces the efficiency to the propeller as compared to the 2-stroke engine that is directly connected to the propeller.

In addition, the open water efficiency of a CPP is generally lower than that of a FPP. Figure 16 below shows a comparison in energy efficiency between the 2-stroke concept and the 4-stroke concept. The loss in efficiency over the reduction gear box is 2% (a one stage gear is applied) and the CPP is calculated to have a 1% lower open water efficiency compared to the FPP used in the 2-stroke concept. As the 4-stroke concept has a reduction gear box it offers the possibility to go lower down in propeller rpm than the rating field of the 2-stroke engine allows. Thereby the propeller efficiency for the 4-stroke concept can be higher than for the 2-stroke concept, but as this advantage does not apply for all projects it has not been included in the comparison below. The starting point is that the power on the propeller is the same. The 4-stroke concept loses in efficiency compared to the 2-stroke concept because of

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 the reduction gear and the CPP, but the efficiency gain because of the active combinator being applied is approximately 2%. The total engine power needed to achieve 14.5 kn is still higher for the 4-stroke concept.

In addition the hotel load must be included in the comparison. One major difference here is that the 4-stroke concept utilizes the main engines to produce the hotel load, while the 2-stroke concept utilizes the auxiliary gensets. The other major difference is the higher hotel load required for the 2-stroke concept, which is here +135 kW. The 4-stroke engines have built-on pumps, i.e. lube oil, HT- and LT-cooling water pumps, while the 2-stroke engine uses separate electrical pumps installed separate from the engine in the engine room. The pumps built onto the engine are more efficient, but they increase the specific fuel oil consumption. The energy consumption for the 4-stroke engines used in the comparison includes the engine built-on pumps.

The 2-stroke engine has a higher efficiency from engine to propeller, and the specific fuel oil consumption for the 2-stroke engine is better than for the 4-stroke engines. However, the higher hotel load and the poor efficiency of the auxiliary gensets in meeting the hotel load outweighs these gains for the 2-stroke concept compared to the 4-stroke concept.

THE TOTAL ENERGY efficiency of the 4-stroke concept is better when taking into consideration the energy required for propulsion and for the hotel load.

The total energy efficiency of the 4-stroke concept is better when both the energy required for propulsion and the energy required for the hotel load are considered. The use of the main engines at variable speeds to produce electricity onboard is superior compared to the use of small auxiliary gensets running at a constant speed. This makes the major difference when comparing the 2-stroke and 4-stroke concepts.

Furthermore, the 4-stroke machinery is very compact in size compared to a conventional 2-stroke concept, as can be seen from the 1-1 size comparison in figure 13. The 2-stroke main engine weighs roughly three times more than the 4-stroke machinery, but even more important are the space savings. In the case example here for a Kamsarmax bulker, replacing the 2-S engines with 4-S engines will provide a large empty space above the engines. This empty space can be utilized for increasing the cargo capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

For newbuildings today, emissions legislation is a game-changer. It can be foreseen that the price of low sulphur fuels will be high, and for this reason machinery alternatives with either after-treatment systems or LNG fuelled machinery must be seriously considered. The emissions legislation will in any case increase shipping costs, but the machinery choice for newbuildings is currently probably more challenging than ever before.

Based on the evaluations made in this paper, the use of LNG as fuel appears to be attractive, although the investment costs with LNG will be significantly higher. Future fuel prices are crucial, but the forecasted global increase in LNG supply should mean that the LNG price is kept at modest levels. The worldwide availability of LNG is still an open question, but then again, none of the LNG fuelled vessels delivered thus far have faced or are expecting problems with LNG availability. The same availability challenge also faces newbuilds with SOx scrubbers, i.e. will high-sulphur HFO still be widely available after 2020 when shipping is undergoing the transformation from using high sulphur fuel to using low sulphur fuel. The use of SOx scrubbers may look like the â&#x20AC;&#x153;easy alternativeâ&#x20AC;?, but when

52 NAFS MARCH 2018

the actual consequences of higher hotel loads, additional costs for chemicals (NaOH) when operating in closed loop mode, and sludge disposal are considered, it is not that easy. Scrubber operation in open loop is more cost effective, but today there are many areas that no longer allow, or are planning to put a ban on, open-loop use, which also means that the operating costs for the scrubber will most likely increase.

2-stroke main diesel engines have for a long time been the standard in shipping. However, 2-stroke main engines might not be the optimum solution for all LNG fuelled ships. Proven technology, increased flexibility, and cost optimization are very strong arguments for choosing 4-stroke machinery. The shipping industry has always been rather conservative because of the massive capital investments required, but early adapters to the changes now being experienced will also have the opportunity to earn unusually large profits.

Note 1: A PTO could also be applied for the 2-stroke concept, which would increase the efficiency of the 2-stroke concept as well. However, for 2-stroke engines the PTO is installed on the shaft, meaning that it is a low-speed generator with a nominal speed of around 80 rpm. For the 4-stroke concept, the PTOs are connected to the gear box and thus the nominal speed is typically 1800 rpm. A slow-speed generator is much bigger in size than a high-speed generator, and the price is therefore many times higher. This is the main reason why 4-stroke installations typically always include PTOs and why they are less frequently used on 2-stroke installations. With a 4-stroke installation, it is also possible to use the PTOs in port as the propulsion line can be disconnected, but this is not possible with a 2-stroke installation and the auxiliary gensets must, therefore, anyway be included with the 2-stroke concept. Taking these facts into consideration, the use of a PTO for a 2-stroke concept always increases the investment costs, and the pay-back time is typically quite long.

Note 2: Maintenance and lube oil costs are not included in the comparisons, because reliable data for maintenance costs for the 2-stroke concept were not available. Maintenance costs for 2-stroke engines are generally considered to be lower than for 4-stroke engines. On the other hand, lube oil costs are lower for the 4-stroke concept as no cylinder oil is required. Thus, the total cost difference for maintenance and lube oil was assumed to be negligible.

Note 3: A 2-stroke engine from MAN could also be used in the comparison instead of the WinGD engine. However, the total CapEx level will increase as the MAN ME-GI engine requires an SCR to comply with IMO Tier III. In addition, the hotel load is considerably higher with an ME-GI engine because of the High Pressure gas system.

Therefore, for this comparison, the ME-GI engine was considered to be less competitive than the WinGD engine used in the comparison.

A further optimized LNG fuelled Kamsarmax bulker would consist of only two 4-stroke main engines simultaneously utilized for both propulsion and hotel load.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Dimitris Poulos*: Deciding your route to SOx compliance Vessel emissions – including those related to sulphur – are governed by MARPOL Annex VI, which first entered into force in May 2005. MARPOL Annex VI establishes the regulation of a global sulphur cap, as well as stricter regulation in Emission Control Areas (ECAs). Any party to MARPOL Annex VI can apply to become an ECA, with the time from application to enforcement taking about 18 months. As of January 2015, the limit applicable in ECAs is 0.1%S. In October 2016, the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) agreed to lower the existing Annex VI global cap from 3.5%S to 0.5%S as of January 2020. It is also worth noting that there are ports around the world that have chosen to establish their own sulphur limits outside of those set by MARPOL Annex VI. In some cases, these limits are even stricter than what is applicable for the global cap.

Will the fuel market change?

Fuel economy is the incentive for using anything other than low-sulphur fuels to comply with MARPOL Annex VI. So long as there are cheaper fuel alternatives, those alternatives will have a strong business case.

Of course, the future price of a given fuel is difficult to predict. The price of LNG, for example, might become lower as the LNG infra- structure expands. Likewise, no one can anticipate the exact price of low-sulphur fuels and heavy fuel oil (HFO) in the coming years. However, a continued difference in price between low-sulphur fuels and HFO is likely. So long as it remains in common use worldwide, a residual fuel like HFO will always be a cheaper alternative. This price differential is what justifies the installation of a scrubber – and the sooner you can take advantage of it, the stronger the justification becomes. In other words: the earlier you choose a SOx scrubber as your route to compliance, the greater the potential for long-term savings.

The time to choose is now

A “wait-and-see” approach to SOx abatement – in the hopes of a drop in low-sulphur fuel prices or a sudden improvement in the LNG infrastructure – is no doubt an option. What is certain, however, is that choosing to invest in a SOx scrubber means immediate payback in terms of fuel-related operating costs. The longer you delay your choice, the more difficult it may be to implement when you make it. In addition to MARPOL Annex VI, other environmental regulations are necessitating new equipment on board.

Shipyard availability, as well as the number of suppliers who can deliver a scrubber on time, may thus be limited in the future. By delaying your decision, you may be committing to expensive fuel for a long time to come.

PureSOx in overview

Alfa Laval PureSOx is a scrubber platform specially designed for marine SOx abatement. At sea since 2009 and launched commercially in 2012, the platform has been continuously optimized and expand- ed over time.

54 NAFS MARCH 2018

Its technological foundation, however, has always been the same.

Confirmed performance

PureSOx has been shown to reliably remove more than 98% of the SOx content in exhaust gas, as well as up to 80% of the particulate matter (PM). This exceeds both the global cap and ECA requirements set by IMO in MARPOL Annex VI. Even during periods of rapid change in engine load, SOx levels are kept well within ECA emission limits, as has been demonstrated during thousands of hours at sea.

Comprehensive flexibility As a complete platform, PureSOx is much more than just a scrubber. With the many possibilities the platform offers, PureSOx can be fully tailored to your sailing profile and the physical constraints of your vessel. Open-loop, closed-loop and hybrid arrangements are all available, as well as scrubbers with a U- or an I- design. PureSOx also offers three different profiles designed to fit your specific compliance needs.

Extensive references PureSOx has a substantial reference list, comprising more references than any other single SOx scrubber technology. Among them are the world’s largest scrubber installations, a broad range of vessel types and repeat orders from satis ed major customers. All PureSOx systems ever supplied are still in use and operating in compliance with MARPOL Annex VI limits.

Comprehensive strengths The PureSOx platform builds on Alfa Laval core expertise, including over 40 years of marine scrubber experience and world-leading strengths in centrifugal separation. PureSOx is also backed by Alfa Laval’s global organization, which can provide service and support at any time, anywhere in the world.

PureSOx and ease of use PureSOx requires little from the crew. The system is fully automated, which means starting it up, switch- ing between open-loop and closed- loop modes, and switching between 0.1%S and 0.5%S compliance modes can all be done at the push of a button. Even crews with no experience of scrubbers will be familiar with the majority of PureSOx components.

Maintenance is limited, and the few points required can be performed while the engine is running. Sludge production in closed-loop operation is minimized by the efficient water cleaning unit, and the sludge is disposed of on shore with the vessel’s other sludge streams. In the event of an emergency stoppage, the engine can be run independently. If the scrubber has a U-design, this is ensured by a “fail-safe open” function in the bypass valve.

If the scrubber has an inline I-design, the exhaust gas will continue to pass through the scrubber in a so called “hot gas mode” with no water added.

The expertise behind PureSOx The strengths of PureSOx as a system are tied to the strengths of Alfa Laval as a supplier. Alfa Laval is a world leader with a century of marine experience, including several decades of experience with marine scrubbers. Scrubbers are an integral component of inert gas production systems, which Alfa Laval has provided to oil, chemical and LNG carriers for over 40 years. Other Alfa Laval core technologies are also a part of PureSOx. These include high-speed centrifugal separation, which Alfa Laval pioneered and continues to push forward. Used for water cleaning during closed-loop operation, centrifugal separation is currently the only alternative that performs reliably in rough waters. The PureSOx water cleaning unit is a unique application of this technology, developed over the course of several years. *Alfa Laval Regional Manager, Service and Equipment Marine & Diesel Power

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Scrubber supplier selection guide by Alfa Laval There are key issues to consider when evaluating potential equipment suppliers and their SOx scrubber systems. The questions and explanations in this selection guide highlight some of the most important.

1. Does the supplier possess core technology in all necessary areas?

While scrubbers are proven to work and simple in principle, it takes considerable knowledge to optimize their function – especially in the marine environment. Your supplier should be experienced in the supply of marine solutions and should ideally have a speci c history with scrubbers. If you intend to purchase a closed-loop system, you should also look for a supplier with a deep knowledge of separation, as this will be necessary to ensure compliant cleaning of the scrubber circulation water. In-house knowledge of auxiliary equipment such as plate heat exchangers is a bonus.

2. Has the supplier worked continuously with one SOx scrubber platform?

The development of SOx scrubbers has been intense in recent years.

Many players have entered and left the market, and many technologies have switched hands. Even some of the largest suppliers have changed their technologies along the way, or purchased technologies that were not developed in-house. The longer a supplier has owned and optimized its technology, the stronger that technology is likely to be.

3. Can the supplier ensure performance for specific sailing profiles regardless of operating conditions?

The marine environment is an unpredictable one. Rough seas, as well as rapidly changing engine loads, place extreme demands on equipment performance. Your SOx scrubber should be reliable in all conditions, even when it comes to water cleaning during closed-loop operation on stormy seas. The supplier should also be able to guarantee compliance in the areas where your vessel operates. If you have a varied sailing pro le, the ability to easily switch between global and ECA compliance modes is essential.

4. Can the supplier ensure simple and smooth operating transitions?

Your SOx scrubber should not add complexity to the operations on board.

Your scrubber should not affect engine operation if it has to stop in an emergency. If you choose a hybrid scrubber or a model that offers ex compliance, you should also expect a fast, simple switch between operating and compliance modes.

5. Does the supplier have significant experience with exhaust from two- and four-stroke main engines?

Some of the SOx scrubbers today are largely untested in real life, and those with experience have often been tested in smaller installations with auxiliary engines. No matter what size or type of engines your planned installation involves, a system that has been proven to work with the greater safety requirements, higher power and higher variable load of main engines is a more robust choice.

6. Has the supplier received repeat scrubber orders from customers?

Nothing says more about a SOx scrubber or its supplier than the trust placed in them by customers. An extensive reference list is valuable, but the most important references are those where the same customer has purchased a system multiple times. The decision to purchase again, based on successful operation at sea, is the best seal of approval available.

56 NAFS MARCH 2018

7. Are all SOx scrubbers provided by the supplier (including trial systems) still operating well?

A supplier’s reference list should be examined critically. Many suppliers have tried and abandoned technologies or configurations, or have found certain installations difficult to optimise. If all of a supplier’s SOx scrubber installations – including trial installations – are still operating to the customer’s satisfaction, it is an indication of a sound technological platform and ongoing optimisation.

8. Does the supplier have a track record of meeting delivery times?

A spotless delivery track record is vital. If a supplier is unable to get equipment to your shipyard during the scheduled time slot, you incur a great deal of additional expense. As various environmental regulations demand new equipment on board in coming years, supplier resources and shipyard slots will likely be increasingly hard to come by.

9. Can the supplier minimize time out of service for installation and commissioning?

While the installation of a SOx scrubber is a major undertaking, your supplier should be able to minimize the time during which your vessel is out of service. With smart supply solutions, good planning and commissioning en route, it should be possible to limit your downtime at a capable shipyard to 2–4 weeks.

10. Does the supplier have global service and support capabilities?

Your SOx scrubber is a solution that will be with your vessel for many years. This makes it important to choose a stable supplier with a strong global network, who can provide long-term service and support wherever your vessel sails. In the unlikely event of a system failure, you want 24/7 access to your supplier’s services, no matter where you are.

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020

Alfa Laval PureSOx the choice for SOx abatement on over 100 vessels To date, a total of 109 vessels representing a diverse array of marine industry customers have put their trust in the Alfa Laval PureSOx platform for compliance with IMO SOx emissions regulations. Coincidentally, the 100th vessel to choose PureSOx was an newbuild project owned

by Danish company DFDS, who also purchased the very first PureSOx scrubber back in 2009 for use aboard the RoRo vessel Ficaria Seaways.

With over 75 PureSOx systems in operation today, Alfa Laval has the marine industry’s most extensive list of reference installations for any single SOx scrubber technology. This represents every PureSOx commissioned since the first installation, including those on board a number of other ships in the DFDS fleet. The shipping company currently has a total of 16 PureSOx scrubbers in operation on 13 of their vessels.

“The close, ongoing partnership we’ve been fortunate to build with DFDS and many other customers have been a great benefit for Alfa Laval,” says Erik Haveman, Sales Director, Exhaust Gas Cleaning at Alfa Laval.

“They have been instrumental in helping us to better understand the needs facing marine customers when it comes to installing and commis-

58 NAFS MARCH 2018

sioning SOx scrubber systems.”

A broad scope of experience

In the eight years since the first PureSOx system was installed aboard the Ficaria Seaways, Alfa Laval has been involved in a wide range of installation projects. Of the more than 100 vessels where PureSOx has been selected to meet emissions rules, 41 have been newbuild projects while over 60 have been for retrofits. “With this experience, our technicians have developed extensive expertise for finding solutions to match different customers’ unique needs,” explains Erik Haveman.

Additionally, the customers purchasing PureSOx systems represent the full spectrum of the marine industry. Today, the PureSOx platform can be found in operation on vessels ranging from RoRo and container ships to tankers and cruise liners.

“We are proud that customers from across the marine industry put their trust in Alfa Laval,” says Erik Haveman. “It’s been a testament to PureSOx as the market’s most complete SOx scrubber platform, as well as to the level of support we can offer as a true partner to our customers.”

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Scrubber work demands exhaustive treatment Owners committed to retrofit exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS) to deal with the IMO’s 2020 global cap on fuel sulphur content need to keep in mind that no ‘one size fits all’ solution exists, even across sister ships, according to leading design and naval architecture company Foreship.

“Fitting large equipment to existing vessels is always challenging,” says Foreship Head of Machinery Department, Olli Somerkallio. “Scrubber installations seem straightforward, but they actually call on our full-service capabilities as a design house, involving our machinery, hull, electric, stability and safety departments.”

Driven by entry into force of Emissions Control Areas, ships have had to achieve emissions equivalent to 0.1% sulphur content fuel from January 1, 2015. Scrubbers ‘wash’ exhaust gasses and allow ships to continue burning HFO with sulphur content of 3.5%, or even higher, while achieving the ECA limit. From 2020, an IMO emissions limit equivalent to burning 0.5% sulphur fuel content ‘goes global’, affecting an estimated 60,000 ships.

Somerkallio recently drew attention to oil company expectations that, while most of shipping will turn to lower sulphur fuel to meet the 2020 emissions restrictions, a subsequent drop in HSHFO prices could mean up to 30% of ships could gravitate back to the fuel type by 2030. The number of scrubbers in position by 2020 may not exceed 4,000, he said, but future oil pricing would have a positive influence of ROI. Foreship has so far participated in 34 EGCS projects, including 29 full retrofits, covering cruise ships, passenger ro-ro vessels, freight ferries and a containership. “Scrubber installation is one more example of having to give up revenue-earning space to meet a regulatory requirement, so our target must be to minimise the pain for the owner,” says Somerkallio.

As well as the design and installation work itself, scrubber projects demand material selection for harsh environments, ship stability analysis, exhaust gas back pressure calculations and equipment room ventilation calculations.

Foreship has advised customers to select multi-stream or in-line scrubbers, open loop, closed loop or hybrid systems. Open loop systems are simpler, using seawater for scrubbing but discharge waste water containing sulphur, which is not allowed in some locations. Closed loop systems recirculate treated fresh water, avoiding the waste water issue, but are more complex and costlier to run, and create waste storage and handling issues on board. Hybrid systems can operate as an open loop system while outside special areas.

A typical retrofit on board a 1990s-vintage cruise ship on which Foreship consulted saw an EGCS installed to accommodate four 12.6 MW four-stroke engines with the hybrid units scrubbing exhaust from all four main engines. Also typical was a retrofit on board a ro-ro ship built in the early 2000s, powered by twin 8.1 MW four-stroke engines. In this case, a ‘hybrid ready’ scrubber was selected.

In all cases, the design process begins with a feasibility study that draws on systems and structural inspections made onboard ship by Foreship designers, and a comparison of available EGCS equipment. The subsequent basic design work generates drawings to cover the EGCS arrangement, tank plan, piping and scrubber water diagrams, electrical and automation integration design, the stability & loading manual, damage stability calculations, the structures for the scrubber room and/or foundations and the sea chest, and the process tanks. This is supplemented by detail design which is handled by the systems integrator under Foreship’s supervision, and support given by Foreship on site, which could result in modifying existing drawings for the installation team.

“The system work is also usually more complex than it first appears,” Somerkallio observes. “New pumping, water treatment and tank storage equipment will be required, but consideration is also needed at the individual ship level of the need to integrate the EGCS with existing equipment, the routing of large diameter piping and its communication with the ship’s automation systems. In the cruise market, owners also expect installation to be carried out when the ship is under way.”

Photo: Foreship Head of Machinery Department, Olli Somerkallio

60 NAFS MARCH 2018

nafs Global Sulphur Cap 2020 Seizing the real opportunities at the edge of the 2020 chaos

By Per

Funch Nielsen, Senior Associate, 20|20 Marine Energy

There are a few notable similarities between Brexit and the impending global 0.5% sulphur cap in marine fuels, which will be enforced from 1st January 2020.

Firstly, the majority of people don’t want either to happen; a recent BMG poll showed that a significant number of Brexiteers were suffering from Brexit hangover guilt and cold feet, with a 10-point lead for the Remoaners. And ship owners are hardly chomping at the bit to increase their operating costs overnight.

Secondly, no-one really knows what on earth is going to happen when either 2020 does come around, or when the UK finally hauls up its political drawbridge. Chaos? At least the IMO did actually conduct an impact assessment, which is more than can be said for the UK government.

The only problem is that BIMCO also conducted a study, which completely contradicted the IMO’s more positive spin.

What to do? Panic? Put our heads in the proverbial sand and hope that it all goes away? Absolutely not! Wasn’t it historian Niall Ferguson that said complex western civilizations are at constant risk ‘because they operate, most of the time, on the edge of chaos’ anyway? And isn’t the edge of chaos where the ‘truly creative changes and big shifts occur’? What is required is pragmatic, and bold thinking; planning based on using the best information and technology available; and collaborating with those that have the knowledge and experience to peer into the future; to mitigate risk, and reap the opportunities of change.

Within the shipping and bunkering sectors, we are continually hearing about what the options for compliance are. Distillates and distillate-based fuels (0.5% LSFO) are the clear choice with some ship owners and operators definitively pinning their colours to the MGO mast due to the quality concerns over the formulation of the hybrid products, and the potential impact on engine performance. The majors are certainly positioning for 2020 with a lot of distillate supply and some LNG, despite legitimate concerns over the bunkering infrastructure, standards and pricing for the latter.

Exhaust gas cleaning systems, or scrubbers, continue to realize some small pick-up, but again the upfront capital costs to retrofit are prohibitive in an industry still struggling with liquidity. The major scrubber manufacturers have also failed to invest in winning the PR battle to overcome market concerns in relation to operational performance and the lack of necessary yard space should there be a sudden rush to retrofit, as well as the continual headlines that impact reputation and credibility in relation to washwater.

So, bar the more future-gazing solutions such as biofuels, methanol and so forth, for ship owners and operators this is their lot for compliance. It’s hardly a vast smorgasbord of choice that sets the pulse racing. Indeed, part of the problem that explains why the majority of ship owners are not doing anything to develop a compliance strategy, is that they don’t really know what to do with this information. Worse still, the many physical fuel suppliers and traders that really should know, don’t have the internal setup, knowledge, vision, or predictive intelligence capabilities to help, and provide proper consultation. If they do, they are holding their cards very

62 NAFS MARCH 2018

close to their chest.

What is required is real consultancy that delves into the bowels of a ship owner’s operations to develop a compliance strategy that first optimises current fuel procurement, and then simulates business as usual post 2020, from which a compliance solution can be developed on a vessel-by-vessel basis within their fleet.

The reality is that even right now, ship owners and operators are not adopting an effective fuel procurement strategy; one that drills down into buying the right product grades, at the right port, at the optimal time, and at the right quantity and price; or from the right supplier where efficiencies (time = money) can be generated, for example through the use of mass flow meters. The main reason for this is that the price of fuel continues to be relatively cheap. It’s certainly far from the highs of the 2014 prices where MGO was anything up to $1,000 per ton, and fuel accounted for over 70% of a vessel’s operating costs. There’s not the urgency. But there should be.

Particularly when you can save 1% to 2% in fuel costs per vessel just by implementing the right procurement strategy.

This becomes even more important in a post 2020 world. There is myriad of opinion in terms of what fuel prices will look like in less than two years time. Crude prices continue to rise – at the time of writing it was $65 per barrel – and there are questions in relation to the supply of compliant product, particularly in Europe, which could push distillate prices further north.

A number of opinion formers that claim to be ‘in the know’ are predicting premiums of up to anything from 200% to 400% for distillates over Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO). Whatever it works out to be, one thing we can be sure of: it will be a lot more. It will certainly impact the bottom line, and in some severe cases, business continuity. And all of a sudden, those 1% to 2% savings look rather good.

Of course, in an ideal world, there would be total clarity over what the future looks like – the presence of an oracle or crystal ball to show us the future. But in their absence, we have technology and its advancements beginning to provide this kind of foresight. The whole world is obsessed with Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. It’s hard to find an article in a maritime publication that doesn’t reference digitalization. For a reason! It’s really important, and can help owners and operators mitigate the risks of compliance and create the right and most viable, cost effective fuel procurement strategy.

As part of 20|20 Marine Energy’s growth strategy, we are in discussion with technology partners to bring to market a predictive analysis model that enables owners and operators to simulate what their post 2020 fuel costs look like, based on current trading routes and optimizing their existing strategy. Once this is done, the best compliance solution on a vessel-by-vessel basis can be developed; ‘this vessel needs to buy MGO from this port, in this quantity, at this price and from this supplier’; ‘this vessel should retrofit a scrubber, and based on predicted HFO costs, this is the return-on-investment timescale’, and so forth. Real analysis, and real consultancy, based on in-depth knowledge and experience.

But the planning needs to happen now. There is no room, or excuse for apathy. This leads to disaster. There is no question that change is genuinely scary; the 2020 regulation will undoubtedly have the greatest impact on the marine fuel supply chain since we moved from wind power, (which could come back again, but that’s for another article). There are also huge complexities to overcome, but by creating clarity and transparency amongst the chaos, real opportunities can be seized.

nafs Class DNV GL in Greece: Showcasing new tools and services at the cutting edge of digitalization

Mr Ioannis Chiotopoulos, Regional Manager South East Europe, Middle East & Africa, DNV GL In a Press Conference that took place recently at DNV GL’s Piraeus offices, Regional Manager, Mr Ioannis Chiotopoulos, and his management team presented DNV GL’s new and updated digital tools and demonstrated how the classification society was using these to achieve the best outcomes for its customers.

“We are proud that our organization has become a pioneer in the delivery of digital classification and certification services,” said Mr Ioannis Chiotopoulos, Regional Manager South East Europe, Middle East & Africa. “We have already implemented a number of pilot and full-scale programs that have proven that with effective tactics and targeted efforts we are able to achieve significant, tangible benefits not only for our customer but also for the shipping industry.” Drones, electronic certificates, and smart survey booking are only some of the advanced technologies DNV GL is deploying for the benefit of our customers, he noted, enabling them to face the shipping challenges of this new digitalized era.

With these new digital tools, DNV GL is working to ensure the efficiency and quality of its services, utilizing data-based analytics, and is addressing new risks related to complex systems and cyber security. Even with the new digital tools on offer, personnel remains the key to success highlighted Jason Stefanatos, Senior Research Engineer at DNV GL - Maritime, in his presentation: “Highly skilled surveyors and auditors will enhance their abilities by taking advantage of the new opportunities this digital world provides,” In addition, the new VERACITY platform was launched in 2017 to improve data quality and manage the ownership, security, sharing and use

64 NAFS MARCH 2018

of data. By creating frictionless connections between data owners and users, Veracity will open up new opportunities for improving ship performance and safety, while at the same time reducing operational costs.

Greece as third home market: An update

Two years after the launch of DNV GL’s “Greece as third home market” initiative, DNV GL is continuing to strengthen responsibilities and capabilities in the Region, with the Piraeus office now responsible for the African region: “The confidence of our headquarters in the Piraeus office and the realization of Piraeus as the third home for the organization is demonstrated by the extension of responsibilities,” said Chiotopoulos.

The Business Development team in the regional had also been strengthened by the addition of three new colleagues, he noted. Nikolaos Michas, who joins the team after spending 11 years in China, will be the single point of contact for Chinese yards. Ioannis Sergis, as the new Regional Segment Manager for Bulk Carriers, and Leonidas Karystios, the Regional Segment Manager for Gas and Tankers.

“We are more than pleased to be able to add these outstanding executives to the team, who have proven their value in key positions and during many years of service abroad,” said Chiotopoulos. “Deepening the local skill and competence pool available to our Greek customers, most notably by the location of Greek segment directors for Bulk and Gas carriers in Piraeus, fulfills the promise we made to our local maritime community with the third home market initiative. And we look forward to expanding on this promise in the years ahead.”

nafs Market report Powering zero-emission marine transportation Highlights of the first conference of shipping electrification

On Tuesday 27 February 2018, 24 experts in five conference sessions discussed how Eastern Mediterranean region could become emissions-free through the application of electrification technologies in ports and vessels.

The Conference entitled “Powering zero-emission marine transportation” organised by the European co-funded elemed project attracted more than 200 delegates from marine & energy sectors, public bodies, port authorities and professional associations, at the amazing Lighthouse of SNFCC in Athens.

During his welcome speech Minister of Maritime Affairs & Insular Policy P. Kouroumplis, announced the intention to convene a Committee to prepare the greek regulatory framework for electrification in ports and ships. The conference was also inaugurated by the Mayor of Piraeus I. Moralis and the Dean of School of Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering Professor G. Grigoropoulos.

The key outcomes of elemed project, the project policy recommendations for effective regulatory framework and the “Killini case”, the first on-shore power installation in Eastern Mediterranean, were featured at the first conference session.

The first panel discussion focused on zero-emission technologies for ports and vessels, where the design of an all-electric RoPax vessel developed within elemed project, the experience of port of Antwerp in implementing cold-ironing applications, available battery & power solutions as well as the capacity of greek companies to support the switch to greener marine transportation, were presented.

How ports could be transformed to emissions free energy hubs was the focus of the next panel discussion, where representatives from Ministry of Shipping, Port Authorities, Regulatory Authority of Energy & Cruise sector underlined the challenges and opportunities for ports to accommodate electrification

66 NAFS MARCH 2018

technologies.

Notably interesting was the last panel discussion on greek islands potential to develop a sustainable insular ecosystem with the exploitation of electrification technologies. The Orkney islands’ experience of bridging renewable energy with marine transportation as well as strategies for supporting insular communities’ mobility and interconnections were at the forefront of the discussion.

Conference photos available here Speakers’ quotes available at twitter @elemedproject Conference presentations will be uploaded shortly at www.elemedconference.eu The Conference was held under the auspices of: Ministry of Maritime Affairs & Insular Policy; Ministry of Environment & Energy; Piraeus Municipality; Hellenic Marine Environment Protection Association; Hellenic Institute of Marine Technology; Hellenic Ports Association; Union of Cruise Ship Owners & Associated Members; Hellenic Chamber of Shipping; Association of Passenger Shipping Companies.

About elemed Elemed (Electrification in the Eastern Mediterranean) prepares the ground for the introduction of cold ironing, electric bunkering and hybrid ships across the Eastern Mediterranean Sea corridor, aiming at eliminating emissions & noise in ports and surrounding urban area. It is a co-funded by European Union project, studying all technical, regulatory and financial issues related to the establishment of cold-ironing infrastructure, in four ports (Piraeus, Killini, Lemesos, Koper), involving three countries. Within elemed framework, the first pilot cold-ironing infrastructure in Eastern Mediterranean will be established in Killini Port.

nafs Corporate BLRT GRUPP and SPLIETHOFF carrying out projects to reduce environmental impact

BLRT Grupp and the Dutch shipping company Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor B.V. signed a contract on modernization of F-type ships with a deadweight up to 12,500 tons. This agreement includes installation of scrubbers (systems for cleaning exhaust gases) and ballast water treatment systems on six ships of the company.

Earlier, an agreement was signed to equip company’s 14 ships of S –type with deadweight up to 21,500 tons with ballast water treatment systems.

“Work on modernization of ships has already begun and will continue until the beginning of 2020. During this time, most of the ships of the Spliethoff company will be re-equipped at the BLRT Grupp shipyards in Tallinn and Klaipeda, “explains Andrejus Babachinas, Chairman of the Council of Directors of BLRT Repair Yards.

The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004, entered into force on 8 September 2017. According to the convention, all ships involved in international navigation are required to replace ballast water or to purify these waters to prevent or minimize the possibility of intrusion of non-indigenous organisms.

Within the framework of modernization projects a technology solution of GloEn-Patrol from Panasia, the world’s leading and the biggest manufacturer of ballast water treatment systems, is applied. These systems are one of the most environmentally friendly technology solutions to be

68 NAFS MARCH 2018

applied on any type of vessel.

The South Korean company Panasia is a long-term partner of BLRT Grupp. Within the framework of cooperation a test center has been set up at the Group’s shipyard in Tallinn to demonstrate the possibilities of technological solution of GloEn-Patrol to the customers and for the personnel’s training.

Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor B.V. is a Dutch shipping company, founded in 1921. The fleet of the company includes about 50 modern multifunctional vessels with a deadweight of 12,000 to 23,000 tons.

Euploia Drydocks and Services Ltd is representing Exclusively in Greece the BLRT Grupp

The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, 2004, entered into force on 8 September 2017. According to the convention, all ships involved in international navigation are required to replace ballast water or to purify these waters to prevent or minimize the possibility of intrusion of non-indigenous organisms.

nafs Forums YES to Shipping Forum: Παρασκευή 8 Ιουνίου 2018 στο Metropolitan Expo

To YES Forum επαναλαμβάνει και πάλι το μέγαλο του NAI στη Ναυτιλία με τη διοργάνωση του YES to Shipping Forum το οποίο θα πραγματοποιηθεί κατά τη διάρκεια των Posidonia 2018 την Παρασκευή 8 Ιουνίου 2018 στο Metropolitan Expo - Posidonia Conference Hall με την πρωτοβουλία μιας ομάδας 40 νέων φοιτητών και στελεχών υπό το συντονισμό της Δανάης Μπεζαντάκου, Διευθύνουσας Συμβούλου της NAVIGATOR SHIPPING CONSULTANTS. Το YES Forum είναι η πλατφόρμα ανοιχτού διαλόγου μεταξύ Decision Makers της Ναυτιλιακής Βιομηχανίας, του θαλάσσιου Τουρισμού και της επιχειρηματικότητας εν γένει, των νέων υποψηφίων στελεχών της, καθώς και νέων ανθρώπων που θέλουν να ανοίξουν δίαυλο με τους κλάδους αυτούς. Επιδίωξή μας είναι η νέα γενιά να γνωρίσει την ιστορία της ναυτιλίας και του τουρισμού μας, γεγονός που πιστεύουμε ότι θα υλοποιηθεί και μέσα από τη νέα συνεργασία μας με το Greek Shipping Miracle. Τελικός σκοπός μας είναι η εξοικίωση της νέας γενιάς με τις διοργανώσεις των ΠΟΣΕΙΔΩΝΙΩΝ και τον τρόπο δικτύωσης σε αυτές. Η ανάγκη δημιουργίας αυτής της ανοιχτής πλατφόρμας διαλόγου βασίζεται στη διαπίστωση που προκύπτει από τα αποτελέσματα της πρόσφατης έρευνας της ΔιαΝΕΟσις τα οποία καταδεικνύουν τη γήρανση του Ελληνικού Πληθυσμού. Το 2015 οι Έλληνες ήταν 10,8 εκατ. και το 2050 προβλέπεται ότι θα φτάσουν 8,3 – 10 εκατ. με το 30-33% του πληθυσμού να ξεπερνάει τα 65 έτη. Αν λοιπόν δεν θέλουμε η Ελλάδα να διοικείται από ένα γερασμένο πληθυσμό και το ενεργό εργατικό δυναμικό της χώρας να φεύγει στο εξωτερικό (450.000 νέοι μετανάστευσαν κατά την κρίση), θα πρέπει να ενθαρρύνουμε τον διάλογο με τους νέους

70 NAFS MARCH 2018

σε όλες τις βαθμίδες τις εκπαίδευσης, ώστε να τους παρακινήσουμε να γνωρίσουν την επιχειρηματικότητα, τις προοπτικές και τις ευκαιρίες που αυτή προσφέρει και να τους μεταλαμπαδεύσουμε τις γνώσεις, την εμπειρία και την ιστορία μας ώστε η χώρα μας να συνεχίσει να εξελίσσεται και να προοδεύει. Για το λόγο αυτό, φέτος οι συμμετέχοντες την ημέρα του συνεδρίου εκτός από το να θέσουν τα ερωτήματά τους, θα μπορούν να λάβουν μέρος σε οργανωμένες επισκέψεις σε περίπτερα της Έκθεσης των Ποσειδωνίων με στόχο να μάθουν περισσότερα για τον κλάδο της παροχής ναυτιλιακών υπηρεσιών. Πιστεύουμε ακράδαντα ότι ο ανοιχτός διάλογος που ξεκίνησε στα πλαίσια των Ποσειδωνίων 2016 και στον οποίο έλαβαν μέρος περισσότεροι από 1300 συμμετέχοντες πρέπει να συνεχιστεί και ελπίζουμε ότι ολοένα και περισσότεροι θα αφουγκράζονται και θα υποστηρίζουν το όραμα και την προσπάθεια μας. Αναμένουμε να σας καλωσορίσουμε την Παρασκευή 8 Ιουνίου 2018 για να σας παρουσιάσουμε το αποτέλεσμα ενός έργου που πραγματοποιείται καθ΄ όλη τη διάρκεια της χρονιάς μέσα από ποικίλες δράσεις όπως open days, εκδηλώσεις με στόχο τη δικτύωση των νέων με άλλα νέα στελέχη της ναυτιλίας, workshops, μηνιαίες συναντήσεις με την ομάδα των εθελοντών, παρουσιάσεις σε πανεπιστήμια και σχολεία. Τη συμμετοχή σας μπορείτε να πραγματοποιήσετε δωρεάν στον ακόλουθο σύνδεσμο http://yes-forum.com/auspices-yes-to-seatourism-2017-2-2/

nafs Corporate BMT and Black & Veatch to Deliver £1.8m Marine Vessel Technology Assessment System Project for ETI We work closely with ship owners and operators to provide all the smart data support and expertise they need to identify and implement efficiencies and improve overall business performance.

We have an unrivalled track record in Fleet and Vessel Performance Monitoring expertise and industry leading tools and solutions that give you the edge.

As your trusted partner, BMT SMART can help you identify the optimal balance of all factors affecting your operations.

BMT has announced that it will take the lead in a £1.8 million Vessel Technology Assessment System (VTAS) project. The work has been commissioned and funded by the Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) and will be delivered in partnership with Black & Veatch. The primary objective is to assist financiers to understand and confidently quantify the benefits of investing in fuel efficient technologies for existing and future vessels, thus accelerating the deployment of viable fuel-efficient technologies.

David Butler, Project Manager for HDV marine efficiency at the ETI says: “Maritime transport emits around 1000 million tonnes of CO2 annually and is responsible for about 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, the International Maritime Organisation states that emissions could rise by 50 - 250% by 2050 compared to 2011 levels. Therefore, the efficient use of fuel through the implementation of energy saving devices (ESDs) will be critical to the future affordability, security and sustainability of maritime transport.”

BMT, in partnership with Black & Veatch, will look to create independent, transparent and insightful information to engage and support stakeholders and decision makers who can positively influence commercial shipping to reduce fuel consumption. This will support and promote the drive to change the way in which the world’s shipping power and propulsion is designed and operated. The project will focus on characterising and addressing perceived barriers to the adoption of ESDs, providing data driven technical models of individual ships and dovetailing this with the necessary financial modelling to help capture the CAPEX and operational issues accurately.

BMT and Black & Veatch will, during the course of the project, establish a presence in the commercial shipping market that will provide enduring support and continue to promote adoption of ESDs beyond the completion of the VTAS project.

John Buckingham at BMT explains: “There is a choice of ESDs within the commercial shipping market such as Flettner rotors, high efficiency propellers and wingsail technologies and yet, the uptake to date has been somewhat slow, due to the perceived technical and financial risks of implementing these technologies. Through improved ship-based modelling, assessments and data validation, this project will allow us to explore the options and provide independent evidence that stakeholders can trust to make an informed decision.”

ETI’s David Butler adds: “We hope that this project will help to tackle the market barriers that currently exist which limit the uptake of cost-effective fuel efficiency technologies. Combining this project with our current £10m portfolio of demonstrations in the areas of Flettner rotor sails, high efficiency propulsion systems and new waste heat recovery technology, will help us reach our target of a 30% improvement in fuel efficiency for marine vessels.”

Interest in this project can be registered at: www.fuelefficientshipping.com and regular updates on the development of this ground-breaking project will be made available.

72 NAFS MARCH 2018

events

nafs

2nd Annual Capital Link Cyprus Shipping Forum a Huge Success For a second year in a row, Capital Link organized its Annual Cyprus Shipping Forum in Limassol with tremendous success attracting well over 400+ delegates, continuing the great success of last year’s inaugural conference

FORUM DISCUSSION TOPICS & OBJECTIVE

The Forum took place in Limassol at the Columbia Plaza, under the Auspices of the Republic of Cyprus with Bank of Cyprus as the Lead Sponsor and with the sponsorship and cooperation of the Cyprus Union of Shipowners. The event was also supported by the Department of Merchant Shipping and by the following Organizations: Cyprus Union of Shipowners • CIFA • CYMEPA • Cyprus Marine Club • Cyprus Master Mariners Association • Cyprus Naval Architects & Marine Engineers Association • Cyprus Shipping Chamber • Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers • Young Ship Cyprus • Wista Cyprus • Wista Hellas.

The Forum discussed the recent developments and trends in the shipping, financial and capital markets; issues pertaining to geopolitical developments; as well as technical and commercial fleet management.

The Forum highlighted the challenges the industry is facing with compliance to the new regulatory framework as well as the use and impact of innovative technologies.

The event aimed to highlight: • the Cyprus maritime industry; • the Cyprus flag which has been recognized internationally as a quality and safe flag; • the significant role of Cyprus as a maritime, energy and logistics hub and as an investment and business destination.

CONNECTING GLOBAL & LOCAL MARITIME LEADERS

The Capital Link Cyprus Shipping Forum is an International Maritime Forum which takes place in Cyprus. This Forum attracts the Cyprus top foreign executives from the global shipping, financial and capital markets as well as from the investment community who have the unique opportunity to meet and network with their Cypriot counterparts. Furthermore, post-Forum, Capital Link promotes the Forum proceedings globally through its marketing platform.

All major stakeholders of the Cyprus Maritime Cluster supported the Forum with their participation and attendance, including major International and Cypriot Shipowners, Government Officials, Ship Managers, Bankers, Financiers, Insurers, Charterers, Technology Providers and other major Industry Participants.

9th Annual Capital Link Greek Shipping Forum “Opportunities & Challenges” Capital Link is hosted its 9th Annual Greek Shipping Forum “Opportunities & Challenges”, on Thursday, February 8th, 2018 at the Divani Caravel Hotel in Athens, Greece, in cooperation with NASDAQ and the New York Stock Exchange with huge success attracting 1.200+ participants.

Greek shipping is the global leader with more than twenty percent of the global fleet. Greek Shipowners have established a reputation as astute and highly efficient operators always adapting to the ever changing conditions of the shipping trade and making the best out of volatile markets. Shipping is the artery of global trade carrying over 90 percent of the world’s trade and Greek shipping plays a pivotal role in the global economy.

FORUM OVERVIEW & STRUCTURE

This event provided a comprehensive review of current trends and outlook of the global economy and the main commodity, energy and shipping markets. It also discussed critical issues and challenges the industry faces, including geopolitical and regulatory developments, technical and commercial fleet management and access to capital. It examined bank financing, capital markets and alternative funding mechanisms and strategies.

Our Athens Forum, in its 9th year, draws consistently over 1,200 delegates and is known for its large attendance by public and private shipping companies’ executives and market participants.

2018 CAPITAL LINK GREEK SHIPPING LEADERSHIP

AWARD

During the Official Luncheon of the Forum, the “2018 Capital Link Greek Shipping Leadership Award” was presented to Messrs. Panos Laskaridis, President, European Community Shipowners Associations; CEO, Lavinia Corporation/Laskaridis Shipping Company Ltd. and Athanasios Laskaridis, Chairman and CEO Lavinia Corporation, Lavinia Enterprises Limited and Laskaridis Shipping Company Ltd. The award was given in recognition of their unique and extensive contribution to Shipping and Greece and for their overall outstanding service to the shipping industry made by each of them individually, by their family and by their companies.

Capital Link’s President, Mr. Nicolas Bornozis in his introductory Remarks mentioned: “It is an honor that today we presented the “Capital Link Greek Shipping Leadership Award” to Messrs. Panos Laskaridis & Athanasios Laskaridis in recognition of their unique contribution to the shipping industry”.

Capital Link’s Forum target shipowners, shipmanagers and all shipping industry participants, as well as institutional investors, analysts, bankers, financial advisors, financial media, and other qualified investors who seek up-to-date information on recent trends, developments and outlook of the shipping, financial and capital markets. With an average of roughly 1200+ participants each year, attendees can expect an informative networking forum connecting them to the shipping industry’s key players, including influential members in the shipping, financial and investment communities.

NAFS MARCH 2018 73

nafs Training Τάσος Κακλαμάνης: Η PPG επενδύει διαρκώς στην εκπαίδευση Με ιδιαίτερη επιτυχία ολοκληρώθηκε για ακόμα μία χρονιά στα γραφεία της PPG στις Αχαρνές το επιμορφωτικό σεμινάριο με άξονες την επιστήμη γύρω από την διάβρωση, αλλά και τις νέες τεχνολογίες για τα χρώματα. Η δημοσιογραφική ομάδα του ΝΑΥΣ είχε την ευκαιρία να παρακολουθήσει από κοντά το επιμορφωτικό αυτό σεμινάριο. Είχαμε επίσης την τύχη να συναντήσουμε τον κ. Τάσο Κακλαμάνη, Market Manager Marine Greece PPG o οποίος μεταξύ άλλων δήλωσε τα εξής: «Η προσπάθεια αυτή ξεκίνησε πριν από 5 χρόνια με την ευκαιρία των εγκαινίων των νέων γραφείων αλλά και του Training Spray Application Center. To 2013, και μετά την εξαγορά της εταιρίας Sigma, η PPG - πρώτη εταιρία στον κόσμο αν αθροίσουμε τα χρώματα όλων των κατηγοριών - έθεσε στόχο να βρεθεί στην πρώτη θέση στον τομέα των ναυτιλιακών χρωμάτων. Στην προσπάθεια αυτή επενδύθηκαν πολλά χρήματα, η εταιρία επανδρώθηκε με νέο προσωπικό, αγοράστηκαν νέα γραφεία, δημιουργήθηκαν καινούργια προϊόντα, και όλα αυτά για την Ελληνική αγορά όπου η Ελληνική Ναυτιλία κατέχει την πρώτη θέση παγκοσμίως. Σε όλη αυτή την προσπάθεια θεωρήσαμε πολύ σημαντικό και το κομμάτι του training. Έτσι λαμβάνουν χώρα εκπαιδευτικά προγράμματα στο Άμστερνταμ, κάνουμε δύο φορές τον χρόνο inhouse training, και το ετήσιο training που γίνεται εδώ στην Ελλάδα. Σε αυτό συμμετέχουν άνθρωποι από 30 και πλέον εταιρίες για το corrosion science, ενώ να επισημάνουμε ότι δεν έχει καθόλου χαρακτήρα marketing. Το feedback που παίρνουμε είναι πολύ ενθαρρυντικό και μας κάνει να δίνουμε ακόμα μεγαλύτερη έμφαση στην εκπαίδευση. Υπάρχει η σκέψη στο μέλλον καθώς έχουμε συνεργασία και με πανεπιστήμια, να φτιάξουμε ένα course για πειράματα, που σήμερα λαμβάνουν χώρα στην Κορέα και στο Άμστερνταμ. Δίνουμε λοιπόν ιδιαίτερη έμφαση στην εκπαίδευση. Ο εκπαιδευτής έχει τεράστια εμπειρία επάνω στο θέμα καθώς έχει εμπειρία πάνω από 10 στο R&D και άλλα 10 χρόνια ως inspector σε ναυπηγεία. Γνωρίζει λοιπόν το χρώμα από την γέννηση έως την εφαρμογή».

74 NAFS MARCH 2018