Shipping's digital explosion by Fathom Maritime Intelligence

Formerly Ship Efficiency Review

FINDING THE GOLDEN LINK P.33

MEET THE ALPHAS: THE PRECURSORS P.44 TO SHIP AUTOMATION?

www.fathom-news.com www.fathommaritimeintelligence.com

ABS CYBERSAFETY: BEST PRACTICES FOR CYBERSECURITY Concerns of cyber threats and attacks are all around the world. No one is immune, yet most cyber issues are preventable. ABS can help you identify and protect against your biggest vulnerabilities. The ABS CyberSafety® program introduces industry’s first framework for providing actionable steps for improving cyber intelligence and security implementation based on best practices. ABS has a team of cyber specialists in a dedicated cyber lab working to develop additional industry-leading guidance. Contact us today to learn how the ABS CyberSafety program can help you mitigate risks to cybersecurity, software quality and data integrity.

Visit the ABS Stand, D02-22

SAFETY | SERVICE | SOLUTIONS www.eagle.org

DISRUPTIVE TALKS P.22

Finding the golden link P.02

See ohh too much P.07

What lies beneath P.12

20/20 Vision: the big fuel choice gamble P.37

CONTENTS Welcome to Fathom

Finding the golden link

Shipping should be scared: this man’s funding your disruptors

Wrong data turned right

See ohh too much

Drawing new battle lines in the fog

What lies beneath

The growth of patchwork ECAs

The 10 unmanned water craft that talk of the future

Shiptech 101

Disruptive talks

Cold sailing

The ecofeeder vessel you can’t quite have just yet

A new stern twist

10 vessels that didn’t exist 10 years ago

20/20 vision: the big fuel choice gamble

Financing the future of shipping

Meet the alphas: the precursors to ship automation?

The states at play: no level playing field?

WELCOME TO FATHOM When I ask people what they think shipping needs, I get 10 different answers, just as I if I similarly ask how they define the industry. There is a belief that the maritime industry has been conservative, and is now ripe for disruption. And ask those same people what they think disruption is, I get 10 different answers. What there is in this industry, or whichever sector of it you are passionate about, is a profound sense of change thanks in part to the acceptance and trust of digital solutions and the growing societal acceptance of responsible sustainability. At Fathom we work hard to be at the cusp of this change and bring you the stories, passions and changes that are happening all around. Fathom is about reporting from the crest of that wave. Ship design, operations and even function are changing, and as our report: 10 Vessels That Didn’t Exist 10 Years Ago, p.33 shows, this change has been building up over several years. But key to this is the support now being given to outside companies to come into the maritime and shipping sectors with new ideas. Two years ago companies that talked with passion about unmanned ships were being looked at as if they were desperate, now we see high level working groups and thoughts on how to change regulations to make it happen. And after 10 years we now see blockchain, the source of Bitcoin, rolling into shipping. Two years ago there was also a belief that attempts to bring further CO2 rules into shipping were struggling. Not now, and the pressure is on to get it done, as you will read in See Ohh Too Much, p.07, though political confusion seems destined to once more have its say. Whether your interest is in technology, regulation, fleet and vessel operations or just trying to dig out the next big thing, you will find something here, and online at our website www.fathom-news.com So, regardless of how you define shipping, or disruption, enjoy the change.

Craig Eason Editorial Director, Fathom

Managing Editor Craig Eason craig@fathom-mi.com Managing Director Alison Jarabo alison@fathom-mi.com Magazine Editor Fiona Macdonald Fathom Maritime Intelligence fiona@fathom-mi.com Design & Layout Ben Watkins Rightside Creative Design ben@rightsidecreative.co.uk Writers Craig Eason, Fiona Macdonald Sales sales@fathom-mi.com Enquiries editor@fahtom-mi.com Publisher Fathom Maritime Intelligence, 59-60 Gainsborough House, Windsor, SL41TX, United Kingdom T: +44 1753 626 881

FINDING THE

GOLDEN LINK

Digital

After nearly a decade, blockchain is being taken seriously. But what is it and will it solve any of shipping’s problems? The shipping industry seems to be on a constant hunt for the next best thing, its silver bullet. Five years ago shipowners and the maritime media were getting hot under the collar with the ecoships that yards and designers were trying to sell as the saviour of shipping. And then, just as fuel prices dropped and the ecoship fad dwindled, a new business tool emerged: Big data. Big data rapidly evolved into talk about digital services, and talk about algorithms, automation and thanks to some blue sky thinkers in the leading tech firms, autonomous ships. On top of that another potential magical solution has emerged, Blockchain. The idea of blockchain is not new. It emerged in the public consciousness in 2008 when the co-called crypto-currency Bitcoin hit the news. Nearly ten years later blockchain remains an emerging technology. It can be built according to the specifications of users needing digital databases. There is no single blockchain platform or software, rather, a plethora of solutions being created based on the basic principles inherent to blockchain. It has begun to emerge as a potential solution for not only the financial industry, but also other sectors including shipping. In its simplest form blockchain is a digital ledger that its proponents say cannot be hacked. That claim itself may make it a prime target for hackers, but the key here is that blockchain is a series self-created blocks of data that allows two counter-parties to do business without an intermediary such as a broker. It is in short, one of the technologies that some say underpins the idea of industrial disruption, not only in the financial markets, but the energy sector and the maritime and shipping markets. Maurice Meehan is one of the co-founders of Blockchain Labs for Open Collaboration in Copenhagen, Denmark, an organisation targeting the use of blockchain in the shipping and maritime sectors.

“Therefore, to think of blockchain as a one stop solution that will evolve and continually be updated similar to software would be over simplifying,”

Denmark is toying with creating a crypto-Krone. Will this make Blue Denmark the capital of the blue blockchain?

The Blue Block

Establishing BLOC in Copenhagen is not perhaps so strange. Like other parts of the developed world, Scandinavians are becoming ever less dependent on printed or minted money and using online or digital banking for almost every transaction. Bloomberg reported late last year that the Danish Central Bank is considering using blockchain to create a virtual Krone to increase oversight, reduce crime and of course, save the expense of having to actually mint notes and coins. If Denmark gets a crypto-Krone, it is not difficult to see blockchain spreading to the BlueDenmark, the name for the country’s maritime cluster. Denmark is toying with creating a crypto-Krone. Will this make Blue Denmark the capital of the blue blockchain? Meehan believes the time has come to look at the real tangible uses for blockchain in the highly commercial, contract based world of shipping, and stop talking about it as a future silver bullet. There are, he says, many possible tangible uses for blockchain in the industry. That’s why he launched Blockchain labs with a couple of ex-colleagues from AP Moller Maersk, the shipping giant that recently came out with timely news about a quiet two year blockchain experiment with IBM. While companies like Microsoft and IBM have developed blockchain services, a version of software as a service for developers, Meehan believes the true value for the commercial use of blockchain is in creating transparent trusted open source solutions. He and his team got a grant for 18 months research by the Danish Maritime Forum to look at real world business applications within the maritime sector. It might be, he says, that blockchain provides a solution to enable better charter party contracts, and organisations like Bimco could find a new secure solution that could cut administrative burden. Maersk says it has demonstrated a potential in the contract chain in the container industry. But while there are emerging uses that could reveal radical new opportunities for forward thinking organisations, blockchain itself is still evolving. It is after all a software programme, or rather a type of programme. So, will these systems need upgrading in a way that one finds with smartphone apps, computer programmes and other firmware found on today’s onboard or office based systems?

Digital

Changing the chain

“When we use the term ‘blockchain’ we are actually referring to several different configurations and protocols that comprise the ecosystem of blockchains,” says Deanna MacDonald, another BLOC co-Founder, and also its Chief Executive. She highlights for example that one open-source, public blockchainbased distributed system known as Ethereum is run on an entirely different set of protocols and validation mechanisms than does the blockchain system behind Bitcoin. “Therefore, to think of blockchain as a one stop solution that will evolve and continually be updated similar to software would be over simplifying,” she says. “That isn’t to say that this ecosystem and the suite of blockchain based solutions will not have to adapt and evolve over time, but rather there is no one solution, no one blockchain and no one update to run.” She adds that there will be different blockchains for different uses, depending on application and sector. Interoperability and standardisation of the common elements of these blockchains will be crucial to the development and widespread application of the technology as new blockchains emerge to solve specific problems inherent to the use case or customer. While the maritime and logistics sectors look at blockchain with hopeful expectancy, and its advocates talk about its disruptive potential, the reality will likely be that this potential will emerge rapidly, pushed by entrepreneurs in the industry that are willing to take the risk and reap the reward. It’s not so much one single magic bullet, but a barrel full of smaller ones.

Read more on the transformation of shipping and sign up to the weekly newsletter at www.fathom-news.com

Digital

SHIPPING SHOULD BE SCARED. THIS MAN’S FUNDING YOUR DISRUPTORS A DUTCH FUND established to push start-ups in front of willing businesses is looking to expand outside of Rotterdam where it was launched a year and a half ago. Port XL is a stand alone accelerator dedicated on incubating young start-ups that have potential solutions meeting the client base found amongst the Port of Rotterdam’s customers. Running Port XL is the job of Mare Straetmans, its managing director. It is his job to find and fund shipping and maritime industries’ disruptive success stories. Accelerators have become quite common in the start-up scene, helping budding technology and digital solutions find their voice, direction and importantly first customers. They are found around the world, but none have been dedicated to helping start-ups with solutions dedicated to the port, maritime and logistics sectors. Port XL has just brought in the second batch of start-ups that they will help. This second batch of 11 potential disruptors was chosen in February and work began with them last week. The latest batch of 11 start-ups have been chosen out of hundreds says Straetmans, talking to fathom-news. These are not all companies based in Rotterdam, they are global but have solutions that may well be based in the needs of the port of Rotterdam’s clients. Straetmans comes from the Port of Rotterdam Authority but left to run PortXL. He insists it is run at an arm’s length from the Port Authority, and that the advisory board demonstrates input from entrepreneurs and business as well as the port authority. The money it has to invest comes from a large grant fund that is backed not only by the port but also by entrepreneurs and a bank to ensure its independence. The deal for the start-ups is that PortXL will make an investment in the company in return for eventual equity whilst the start-up gets focused help in growth. The reason this investment idea is doing so well in Rotterdam is because the companies with business operations in the port are already willing to talk to startups and embrace change, says Mr Straetmans. Pointing particularly to his former employer, the Port of Rotterdam. The Port authority has made significant strides in pushing innovation and championing start-ups he said. The start-ups Amongst the start-ups Port XL is supporting are new waterborne drone makers. One is Ranmarine, an automated water cleaner, picking up floating litter in the port, the other, Aquasmart, offers a floating inspection drone and then there is Deep 6, an autonomous buoy. There is also a company that has developed an automated mechanical twistlock,

which has huge safety potential on container ship operations. The solution reduces the risks associated with shore or vessel crews having to try and undo jammed twistlocks. Another solution, Pingle, is an online platform whereby companies can check the credentials of offshore unit workers. AlterAct is a Dutch start-up that has designed a virtual reality solution enhancing fire and safety training. VesselBot, Portcall.com, Lotebox, 4shipping are all potentially disruptive solutions of chartering, freight forwarding or port agency activities. The future Given the international nature of the port and maritime industries, and the growing interest in start-ups and new ideas in many industrial sectors, Straetmans says there is interest in expanding the Port XL concept around the world. The issues he says are finding locations where businesses are open to start-ups ideas that may be disruptive, but may also be able to provide solutions where they are most needed. He has a few locations in mind already. He also acknowledges that PortXL is perhaps a misnomer, because as a start-up accelerator it is not looking for start-up solutions focusing on port or harbour related issues, but the issues that are found amongst a port customer base. This means solutions for shipping, maritime, logistics, oil and gas companies, refineries and energy companies. These are industries that have some inherent historical ways of doing business and will likely see a growing number of business-tobusiness disrupters emerge.

Digital

Even when data is wrong, it is still right. Data today can be, and needs to be, manipulated according to Finnish data company Eniram, which provides solutions for monitoring and analysing fleet performance. Jan Wilhelmsson, Eniram’s Vice President of Commercial Shipping believes that accepting data is wrong is ok. While there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of shipborne sensors on a vessel, there remains uncertainty over their reliability. In his opinion, this sensor data will never be completely correct. Wilhelmsson believes that if it is accepted that data is wrong by default then a system must be built up that handles the data in a way that allows the analysis of ever more information. He says that once you have enough data and once the values change you can see what you can do and fix it. Wilhelmsson points out that data

analysis is not necessarily about reading absolute values from the sensors, but understanding any indications of change over time. Director of Digital Solutions and Innovation at DNV GL, Albrecht Grel, agrees to some extent and says that industry needs to be careful when it comes to sensor technology. Sensors are critical, he says, but we cannot blindly trust them. The issue is making sure companies understand that a new way of thinking about information is needed, says Grel. He believes that real value will be provided from discovering data anomalies and inconsistencies in the data rather than thinking the data is always spot on.

"The mind set of those using data is just as important as the data itself" Jan Wilhelmsson, Eniram’s Vice President of Commercial Shipping

Digital

Not so big after all Creating value from vast amounts of data, often called big data, requires the right tools and the right competencies. The shipping industry has largely been focussed on generating ‘big data’ but the focus is now more on what can ultimately be done with this data to add value to operations. Wilhelmsson argues that it is more about the way data is used and the mind set of those using it. He is confident that the future of data lies in using less to make smarter decisions. This requires real understanding of what the data shows so that it can be translated into meaningful value and turned into a successful management plan. Generating this data is not so much of a problem as is understanding what to do with it. Too much data and too little analysis can lead to an overload of data without

much meaning. Unlocking data’s potential is needed to improve efficiencies, but it is not always straightforward. Grel believes that digitalising operations will only add value to data if company employees have the right technical capabilities to run the software. He is confident in the potential of data but says that it first needs to be unlocked by ensuring that a company has a core team of digital-ready and data-ready people. After all, there is little point in having data without having the know-how or tools to use the data intelligently. It’s not always about generating huge amounts of data but more about having good quality data that can be analysed by people with the understanding to do so. Without good handling of data, the improvements made to operational efficiencies and its contribution to improved asset value will be limited.

“Sensors are critical, but we cannot blindly trust them”

Director of Digital Solutions and Innovation at DNV GL, Albrecht Grel

Zen and the art of data

To obtain and understand uniqueness in the data the right mind set is required. Acceptance of change, of the power that data has and the different tools, skills and practices that are needed to assess large quantities of data is needed reports Allianz in its Smart Ships overview. Bringing 50 years of experience in the aviation industry and current advisor to product safety of Airbus to the maritime industry, Harry Nelson agrees that an agile mind is crucial to take control of the phenomenal power that data generates. While he believes that data cannot be wrong or right, it puts a huge responsibility on those that are involved in it to drive management for better efficiency and safety in operations. He is of the strong opinion that data must be blended with the human mind, weaknesses in the human system must be recognised and embraced in a data driven and digitalised world.

“Real value will be provided from discovering data anomalies and inconsistencies in the data rather than thinking the data is always spot on” Read more on this topic at www.fathom-news.com

SEE MUCH

OHH TOO

In an odd twist of international policy, China seems to be beating the green drum while the US turns its back. Is this good news? China, the country whose belligerence at the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009 led to the failure of a deal being struck has changed its tune, just as the US, whose policies were strong under Barack Obama, seems to be about to change its. This changing tide of climate opinion coupled with European pressure on the IMO to strike a strong climate roadmap could spell additional uncertainty for shipowners. China’s Ministry for Environment Protection recently published a story from state owned news site China Daily promoting President Xi Jinping’s support for the subsequent Paris Agreement struck in 2015. The argument that China was investing in renewable energy both domestically and internationally came with a belief that the country could meet its greenhouse cap by 2025 instead of 2030 and highlights its drive to cap coal use and plans for a carbon cap and trade programme. “That China has taken the initiative on acquiring clean technologies is quite timely. Its new industries are manufacturing electric cars, batteries, nuclear power and wind, solar and geo-thermal technologies. As an illustration, nearly 200 million electric vehicles have been sold in China already and this trend may be catching up in other countries soon,” claimed China Daily. China’s interest in cleantech, and a cap and trade system comes as Europe considers whether shipping should be pulled into the region’s revised emissions trading scheme and a common societal push globally for cleantech as a result of the UNFCCC deal. Related to this, and showing China’s developing view on clean air, are attempts to ensure cleaner gasoline is used by cars and the development of a sulphur emission control area for shipping in Chinese waters around a number of the country’s ports. The US has said it plans to effectively abrogate its responsibilities under the Paris Agreement thanks to President Trump’s

denial of climate science. The result of this could be the US withdrawal from the UNFCCC or it pulling out of the Paris Agreement. Either way it has a potential impact on how climate policies the world, influence shipping companies. The US president has questioned climate science, and called for a hard look at a wide range of environmental rules. He has, as has been well reported, made favourable nods towards the US coal industry. The signals from Trump have alarmed many and increased the belief that the UNFCCC deal may be under jeapordy, as well as making a deal at the IMO more difficult. The lobby groups think that the Panama and Marshall Island flags may follow the US lead, although there remains some friction between the Marshall Island’s government, which as a low island pacific state is a strong supporter of climate action, and the US-based administrators of the Marshall Island’s Flag, which has been more diplomatically neutral on the matter. The fear of failure at the IMO, especially with the Trump uncertainty, is one of the reasons the green lobby groups support the proposal for bringing shipping into an EU scheme. They see it as an insurance policy. Kathy Metcalf, president and chief executive at the Chamber of Shipping of America thinks

“China's industries are manufacturing electric cars, batteries, nuclear power and wind, solar and geo-thermal technologies.”

that the green lobby fears are unfounded. “Personally I don’t see any impact on shipping if the US withdraws from the Paris Agreement/UNFCCC,” she tells Fathom pointing to amongst other things, the minimal size of the US flagged fleet. “While President Obama was the most “active” US President in recent history on this issue, the withdrawal of the US will not alter the beliefs by other countries that progress in some form needs to be made in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.” Other shipowner groups are not so sure. “We are concerned with the signals coming from Washington DC and the administration,” the Danish Shipowners’ Association says, adding that they will be looking at how the US engages with discussions relating to the IMO road map to curb shipping’s emissions. (There is

Environmental

Organization’s plans for a CO2 roadmap). “The US has played a pivotal role in developing the concept of the IMO three step approach to climate action and it would be very detrimental should the US change its position completely. That would undoubtedly have a spill-over effect in terms of other countries losing their appetite on moving forward with the road map and strategy for the industry’s CO2 reduction.” The fear is that this could undermine IMO as the global regulator of shipping and pave the way for regional legislation

“Nearly 200 million electric vehicles have been sold in China already” a summer meeting of the IMO’s marine environment protection committee as well as a special meeting to discuss the

such as the EU ETS. The hope is that the IMO will be able to push ahead, and eliminate the need for the European Union political body to create a regional CO2 measure for shipping.

For regular environmental updates and to sign up to the weekly newsletter visit www.fathom-news.com

Environmental

DRAWING NEW BATTLE LINES IN THE FOG IMO and EU may want the same thing, but they are not the only ones with differing opinions on the road to carbon reduction in shipping There is a political fog around shipping when it comes to shipping and the issue of its CO2 emission. It may be because the road forward has a number of possible routes, and some influential shipowners, lobby groups, and political advocates see some of these roads as being more beneficial to themselves than others. Fathom-News has heard from various sources that ship-owner lobby groups remain unable to find a unified voice on the way forward while green lobby groups are still trying to create additional pressure on the IMO, mostly by claiming its member states are not doing anything. And the European Union, namely the commission, has some internal politics, and some of its member states are even at odds with each other over how they can be at odds with the IMO.

Whether this will provide any meaningful data to allow specific measures to be implemented in Europe is debatable. Data experts have said that two years worth of data, at the very least, should be collected before any decisions on additional CO2 reduction measures are made. Commission sources have confirmed with FathomNews that once the IMO global data collection system is finalised by the adoption of the guidance documents setting out details of the system, the Commission is obliged to review the EU MRV system with a view of possible alignment of it with the international one. However they add that the robustness of the global IMO scheme, and crucially this includes any verification guidelines, will be a key parameter in such an assessment. Sources also say that the alignment process will take "around two years" due to it involving first a proposal from the Commission and then the required involvement of the Council and the European Parliament. The IMO plans will become the third part of current plans to create global CO2 rules. Shipping already has regulations on the design of vessels and energy efficiency management (EEDI and SEEMP). TIME TO ALIGN Timeline box: Data collection for the EU CO2 data The IMO member states have agreed to have a collection scheme starts on January 1 2018, and the roadmap, or rather, a plan for a roadmap by 2023, IMO global scheme, January 1 2019. the earliest date with an initial strategy in 2018. The final 2023 strategy for alignment of the two would be 2020. Green lobby will include the level by which the IMO intends to cut groups and MEPs want the IMO to have a roadmap by shipping's carbon footprint. 2021, including emission targets, otherwise shipping The green lobby groups doubt this. may be pushed into the fourth phase of the European Meanwhile Green MEPs have managed to get the European Parliament to agree to proposals for shipping ETS, while the IMO has set a date of 2023, with a first to be included in the next phase of the emission trading draft in 2019. scheme which will begin in 2021. Each phase is eight years and negotiations have now gone into the threeway talks between Parliament, Council and Commission where they may yet come to nothing. The key problem between the MEP proposal and the IMO roadmap is timing. The eight years for the ETS starts in 2021, while the IMO has pinned its roadmap to start in 2023. His may make alignment difficult. The European Union has the agreed MRV regulation about to kick off in January 2018 but has yet to lay out all the details of how. Data collection will start on January 1 2018, with all relevant ships needing approved plans. The first data will be coming in by May 2019.

A BIG ASK For both organisations the question is what will they do with the CO2 data once they have it. In short it will be used to determine the level with which individual ships and therefore ship operators, will have to pay to emit CO2. The thorny issues here include what form this will take, who gets any revenues from any scheme and how severe it will be. And this is where even the shipowners themselves are struggling to find agreement. Will the industry be more in a favour of a bunker levy, an independent fund, or the proposed inclusion in an emission trading scheme? And what will policy makers prefer. The creation of a standalone emission trading scheme just for the shipping sector will be costly and a huge administrative burden, whether it is for global shipping or only those vessels caught in the European scheme. A fund is by comparison much more straightforward to create and administer. And moreover both the IMO and the EU have experience of this. If shipowner lobby groups appear too reluctant to engage in a CO2 reduction scheme, especially when the Paris Agreement has shown a societal desire for greenhouse gas reductions, it will likely be seen in a poor light, yet if they let policy makers have a free reign then they will likely get the ire of some shipowners who feel that the CO2 transport burden is too heavily placed on them. So what of the green lobby groups? It is easy to dismiss the environmental lobby group as wanting the impossible, even Transport and Environment, one of the environmental lobby groups in Europe believes the mainstream press gives it little coverage because it is often seen as a group of left wing environmentalists seeking to disrupt the industry. What is perhaps slightly ironic is that T&E gets annual funds from the EU, the very institution it spends a lot of its time lobbying. T&E acknowledged with Fathom-News it would rather see a global CO2 reduction solution rather than a regional European one. But they have little faith in the IMO members coming up with a robust solution, so will continue to lobby Europe to get shipping into the ETS. Yes, this is a political lobbying game, and T&E acknowledges this, but also says it is an environmental insurance policy should IMO fail to agree anything, pointing out that its track record has been far from encouraging. A FUND? What the green lobby groups want to see is either owners pay for the emissions of individual ships through an ETS system, or they are permitted to forgo that and pay directly into a relevant maritime related CO2 mitigation fund. T&E cites the existing NER300 Fund which performs a similar role to the fund proposed by the Shipping in ETS revision proposal agreed by the Parliament. Applying the criteria for this fund to a shipping specific one would appease some shipowner groups say the lobby groups, who point out that it was the owners that came up with the idea in the first place. The other option being considered for shipping is a bunker levy, applicable on fuel purchases, in short

Environmental The European New Entrant Reserve Fund NEF has, in total, awarded €2.1bn to 39 projects in 20 EU member states. The programme funds projects in various technology categories (bioenergy, concentrated solar power, geothermal, ocean, smart grids, photovoltaics, wind, and carbon capture and storage). Lobby groups suggest this funding model could be used in the shipping industry.

an additional cost per tonne of fuel used, but again revenues generated hopefully channeled back into the shipping industry through a dedicated fund. And as a final word, while critics say Brussels has been unfairly putting pressure on the IMO to bring forward its roadmap plan or it will make its own measures, it needs to be considered that Europe gave the IMO €10m recently to establish a network of maritime technology coordination centres in developing countries that can enhance the deployment of CO2 reducing technologies and policies.

WHAT LIES BENEATH? Environmental

Ship-sourced underwater noise is more than a nuisance, and there are strong calls for something to be done about it. The gleaming blue of the Salish Sea can be mesmerising in the sun. Its waters, famous for its whale watching tours, are surrounded by the distant tops of snow topped mountains. The air is clear and fresh, well at least when it is not raining. The Salish Sea is the expanse of water west of Vancouver, between the city and Vancouver Island, spreading south of the island and including the waters north west of the US state of Washington, including Puget Sound. It covers an area of about 18,000 sq km, and on the surface can be beautifully tranquil. The waters are crisscrossed regularly by ferries, bulk carriers and large container vessels. And therein lies its problem, because beneath the surface the latest environmental issue is being heard. The hundreds of ships going to Vancouver and Seattle make a lot of noise, underwater noise, and scientists want them to be quieter because they are, they say, seriously disturbing a pod of killer whales in the region. A group of scientists wrote a letter recently to the Canadian prime minister last month asking him “to produce a concrete, funded, science-based plan and a schedule for reducing the already excessive levels of underwater noise pollution in the Salish Sea from all sources, to help enable the population’s recovery and substantially improve its acoustic habitat”. This particular pod is already listed as endangered. It never fully recovered from the period in the 70’s when individuals were farmed for the aquaria according to the letter, and the high levels of underwater noise are seen as a continued threat. Underwater noise can travel long distances, and the noise of vessels in enclosed waters such as the Salish Sea can and do disorientate whales, blanket out their communication calls and even disturb their food sources. The problem of underwater noise is not limited to just shipping, other sources are prevalent including, dredging, military activities and seismic research by the oil and gas industry. The issue is not just related to the volume of the noise, but also the frequencies that the noise of ships’ span, and therefore the distance the noise can be a problem. The issue is considered important enough for several places around the world to start using listening stations to track the ambient noise levels for both scientific reasons, but also to track pollution and marine environment health issues. Scientists even gather for an annual Oceanoise Conference to discuss various issues, not least the problem of anthropogenic, or man-made, noise. Noise pollution from ships does come from several sources, propeller, engine vibrations and even the sea chests. Bigger engines, naturally, have more noise. The IMO has already done some work on the issue, agreeing guidelines in 2008, (MEPC.1/Circ.833) but as guidelines they are not enforceable.

HOW LOUD IS LOUD?

The problem is not just the volume of noise pollution, but frequency. However do you know your decibels? Normal human conversation: 60 dB Safe human noise levels: < 90 dB The loudest rock concert: 129.5 dB Grey whale/Humpback whale: 140 dB A blue whale: 188 dB A ship’s engine (when overhead): 195 dB Scientists are recommending stronger action; an initial global target for the reduction of shipping noise of 3 dB (decibels) within 10 years and 10 dB within 30 years, relative to current levels. The goal is to reverse the upward trend in deep-water ambient noise pollution during the second half of the 20th century, largely attributable to commercial shipping. There are other rules from the IMO in place that call for action for shipborne noise from a crew health perspective, so it is likely that further proposals will be made at the IMO to make the current underwater noise guidelines more robust. Sailing slower is one known way that the noise of a ship is lessened, and in the future, the method of propulsion selected in a ship design may well be another. Whatever the outcome, the pristine waters of places such as Vancouver, Seattle and elsewhere hide an unmeasured environmental risk beneath their surfaces, but is this a risk that can be easily silenced?

For regular environmental updates and to sign up to the weekly newsletter visit www.fathom-news.com

THE GROWTH OF

PATCHWORK ECAS

Earlier this year a group of five non-government organisations, aka green lobby groups, came together to form an alliance to push for an emission control area in the Mediterranean Sea. It is not the first time the idea of an ECA in the Mediterranean has been muted, but mostly it has been to push for sulphur in fuel limits. This alliance wants to have the ECA restricted for SOx and NOx just as the North American ECA is, and the Baltic Sea ECA is set to become.

THE NORT SEA

NORTH AMERICAN ECA

US CARIBBEAN SEA

The argument is that if it can be done for Northern European, it can be done elsewhere in Europe. This green alliance also argues that the likely increase in global trade, when trade does start increasing again, will see more vessels sailing through the Mediterranean and therefore creating increased pollution. The lobby groups also believe that increased cruise ship activity is a contributing factor to increased pollution from sulphur in fuel. This fact has recently been echoed by residents in an area of New South Wales, in Australia. With pending increased cruise traffic during the tourist season, and proposed sulphur in fuel limitations in Sydney, they are pushing the government to extend the rules to all Australian ports. Couple this with Chinese efforts to build a series of sulphur ECA regions and a pattern can be seen. It is worth remembering that the current rules state that vessels in a designated emission control area need to use a marine fuel that has a sulphur content below 0.1% volume, while other waters have other limits that will soon drop to 0.5% The issue for shipowners is that the cleaner fuel is more expensive. Exhaust gas scrubbers are an option to allow the cheaper fuel to be used, with the sulphur in the exhaust being cleaned out before the gases are emitted into the air. LNG fuel is also an option, but the retrofit capital costs are still prohibitive, although there are a growing number of newbuildings being ordered with dual-fuel options.

Environmental SO WILL A GROUP OF GREEN LOBBY GROUPS GET THEIR WAY? The push by this alliance of green European lobby groups is, they claim, following a push by France at recent European Council working group meetings to push for a Mediterranean ECA. NABU, a Germany/based member of the alliance, told Fathom in an email that a French environment ministry representative confirmed to the alliance at a recent conference last month that it was of interest politically in France. Italy, according to the lobby group, is also considering similar proposals. While the lobby groups are pushing for a restriction of sulphur in fuel to 0.1% the

ECA can be applied. “In principle we would like to see North African states joining and there are already respective talks underway,” NABU confirmed, but taking a more regional approach to the Mediterranean Sea is also an option for the lobby group alliance. But does the European Union have the appetite to push for increased emission constraints on shipping at this moment? There are already the EU talks about including shipping in the region’s emission control area as a way to push for quicker

THE BALTIC SEA

IS THE MEDITERRANEAN NEXT?

Sulphur %

problem is that any ECA proposition at the IMO action against shipping’s CO2 emissions, which has must be from all countries whose territorial created friction between the IMO and EU and the waters are in that body of water. ire of ship-owners associations who fear a two When the proposal for the Baltic Sea to be a tier CO2 reporting and abatement systems being sulphur ECA, which the Med lobby groups are created at the expense of ship operators. citing as an example, was put forward at the A costly emission control area in southern IMO, it had the backing of all seven member Europe would likely be equally disliked, states surrounding the Baltic. especially as there are still issues related Hence the push by the lobby groups to “get to monitoring of compliance with current more member states to step up to the plate”. sulphur rules. But shipping would be The Mediterranean has many countries to writecontent this proposal off as Schedule for the reduction offoolish fuel sulphur surrounding it, including a dozen nonregional extravagance. 5,0 European ones. Any bid to push for a ECA regions in Northern Europe 4,5 Europe only Mediterranean ECA may and North America will hardly be Subject to rescinded, so2018 thereview locations will simply push vessels to sail closer 4,0 to 3,5 only grow. It is likely that in time the North African cost and out of EU waters. more ECAs (for sulphur and NOx 3,0 NABU’s answer to this is that the emissions) will emerge to create 2,5 alliance sees different possibilities an increased patchwork of 2,0 to which geographical extent a Med regulations. 1,5 1,0 0,5

Future proof shipping WE FOLLOW THE LATEST TRENDS TO KEEP OUR OFFERING AND CUSTOMERS COMPETITIVE

THE WÄRTSILÄ OFFERING IS UNRIVALLED IN SCOPE AND QUALITY.

Wärtsilä connects the dots – noW and tomorroW We continuously optimise our portfolio to meet the changing needs of our customers. As a leader in LNG technology and fuel flexibility, we allow our customers to keep their options open while guaranteeing environmental compliance in all IMO areas for years to come. We can help you achieve optimal efficiency throughout the entire lifecycle. Experience our visions of the future and ensure your future success. Read more at www.wartsila.com Join us during NOR-SHIPPING 2017, in the Wärtsilä Digital Lounge, May 30 - June 2, Oslo, Norway, Hall D, Stand D03-36

THE 10 UNMANNED WATER CRAFT

THAT TALK OF THE FUTURE

There are a number of uniquely interesting projects underway that highlight how automation in shipping is advancing. Not only is there work on making commercial shipping more integrated, but other work, on somewhat smaller vessels, are also giving a hint of the future. The umbilical-connected ROV has been unleashed, the remote controlled boat in the duck pond has just been given a mind of its own, and a military grade reboot. Automated shipping will not start with the big ships, it may never get that far, but it will start small - a small ferry or offshore vessel perhaps, sailing only in national or local waters. Here’s 10 developments that we at Fathom have found, that are proving there are unmanned vessels today. These are the high powered real life examples of autonomous vessels in action, though the challenge of course will be in scaling them up to meet the demands of any commercial shipping needs and then deciding how to best deploy the technology in an international arena. This list is far from comprehensive, and maybe focused heavily on developments of ROVs in the offshore sector, but it’s aimed at showing how advanced research into autonomous unmanned water borne systems has become, thus giving an indication of what could be achieved.

1.MARITIME ROBOTICS

This is a Norwegian company with a range of airborne and waterborne autonomous craft. It has teamed up with Norwegian tech firm Kongsberg to further examine autonomous craft. It is part of a consortium that has now received permission from the Norwegian government for an official test region in the waters off Trondheim where the company is based.

2. LIQUID ROBOTICS One of the products Maritime Robotics lists on its website is Wave Glider, which is under development from US-based Liquid Robotics, a Boeing subsidiary. Liquid Robotics describes Wave Glider as the world’s first ocean robot powered by wave and sunlight.

4. YUNZHOU TECH The Emergency Sampling & Monitoring Vessel (ESM30) is an unmanned surface vehicle (USV) designed by YunzhouTech, based in Guandong, China.

5. ASV GLOBAL 3. AUTONAUT This is an unmanned service vessel concept designed to use wave power for propulsion let loose off Plymouth in South England recently. The company, whose directors can be linked to the Royal Navy and BMT, see the wavepropelled Autonaut as being able to replace weather buoys and even offer services to the military.

While UK-based ASV builds and rents autonomous vessels with a distinctly military focus, it does have a series of products (C-Workers) that have much more commercial workboat applications.

Digital

6. SEA MACHINES Boston, USA-based Sea Machines Robotics is three years old. It sees itself as a forwardlooking autonomous technology company, developing advanced control systems for vessels and specialised unmanned surface vessels. It sees its products as having a use across the whole maritime industry.

8.SEA DRONE PRO Sea Drone is what the name suggests. It also looks remarkably like a remote controlled jellyfish, albeit one with precise movement control and high resolution cameras.

7. MODUS Modus is a company in North East England that has completed system integration and trialling of one of the subsea industries first commercially available hybrid unmanned underwater vehicles. The company has worked with Saab Dynamics for three years, developing advanced sensor payload packages and operating methodologies. Like many of these examples demonstrating automation, the Modus AUV will be used in survey and inspection projects in the oil & gas, interconnector and offshore renewables sectors, as well as offer a number of applications in the oceanographic and defence sectors. The company sees its AUV as a game changing development for the subsea industry.

9. EELUME Then there is The Eel. Like many of the examples of automated, near automated or remotely operated vessels, Eelumeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s products are focused on underwater intervention in the oil and gas sector. This Norwegian tech firm is a spin off from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). The Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s research into snake robots was in collaboration with the Norwegian research outfit SINTEF. The company now has a strategic partnership with Kongsberg and Statoil as it looks to revolutionise underwater operations.

10. AUTOMATED SHIPS LTD Automated Ships is behind Hronn. Unlike the rest of the examples shown here, Hronn does not exist, but it likely will soon. Hronn will become the largest unmanned offshore vessel when built. Last year Automated Ships signed a memorandum of understanding with Kongsberg in Norway, to build the vessels. Once built, the companies expect sea trials to take place off Trondheim at the newly designated automated vessel test bed there. Class society DNV GL is likely to class the vessel.

1 0 1 H C

E T P I SH

, less cient fi f e more back o t e l too hanc ed al an c b i r e c h rs t des wing owne being eas follo d y n r t a s s rs the indu erato hile e the re sailing t p op i i p ns w r h s o s i e e s e d w s v i , i em lphu at g hips tant cons wered s ucing reduce su cts th r d e j e e r v o o r e f sel p ds o directly tegy. een and p etho has b e first die gies m o not new y l stra r e o t r n s th ch plo du re do n overall e is not a hing o x e n t i e g e h a g e o t n i of a ssed met tanc years tors aritim excit pera ies discu y as part n for ins is not so he m over 100 o ome t s d n i n e o c g i r e. tle ogy ea ers a ssels ficien hnolo opuls Ther g tonnag f technol only a lit es’ – pown uture tec nergy ef Wind pr rchant ve i h n ologi s s i o . t a n e e u e f n . h m l w v l t c i o e a i e m r o t o e t s I e p n a e th lu ld st e. ure t incre d of 0 wil often ower larg ough e evo vativ f ‘fut o Th s conser ort perio % in 202 nt. Alth ption and hem are p t n o e a sh .5 pm cie m ind t dt often ail and a r cap of 0 and effi el consu ts behin ng the w evelo d e s h p i u w t u f f s e o d to era o bal sulph al costs l to lower the conc 0s, but u as le rations. h , 2 lo n d 9 g o s e w i 1 t s e e A a pe nc oper can be u s seem n ted in the adva el ship o g n e i v y p i e n i t e u kee ons, th ova ces to f olog was inve ago. d inn r si echn emis e these t ner rotor 00 years esses an able sou l c t 1 w i t o e h r e e l n W t; the F een don terials, p r and re b a e ep conc uld have ding of m tural pow o a n n a w t that ders ness w un that har e N es ologi techn

MARINE BATTERIES

The development of the first electric battery came in 1800 by Italian physicist, Alessandro Volta and shortly after the fuel cell by William Grove, a chemist, physicist and lawyer, in 1839. Electric boats were also pioneered in the 1800s, but the application of this technology to larger marine vessels is much more recent. By switching from conventional fuel to lithium-ion batteries and using renewable energy sources such as shore power when docked, ships can significantly limit environmental and health impacts to port residents. Batteries are often designed to recharge themselves once the ship has left the port and is sailing on bunker fuel. At the current time, tugs are the most likely users of batteries as they operate largely within ports and at very low loads. And when not in operation, the tug can connect itself to shore power to recharge.

SOLAR POWER

Energy from the sun can be harnessed to assist with the production of energy on a ship. The ability for solar power to impact energy consumption on a ship is very minimal. However, it does show that solar power can and is being utilised at the small scale, and indicates potential for it to be scaled up and used at the commercial level in the next few decades. Ports are also exploring solar power to reduce carbon emissions and increase environmental health. India has invested $104m into solar and wind power projects at twelve of its ports. Significant investment such as this indicates the prospects the maritime industry sees in harnessing renewable energy sources.

Environmental

FUEL CELLS

Fuel cells offer greater endurance over batteries. They use hydrogen, LNG, methanol, or diesel to produce electrical power. Anodes and cathodes convert chemical energy to electrical power for continuous use in ships. Batteries and fuel cells solutions are available but at the current time they are not robust enough for wide scale application to the maritime industry. However, they are advancing all the time and there are a number of projects that aim to understand and development their applications. ABB offers an onboard grid solution to provide electrical power using a DC between the thrusters and propulsors and other onboard consumers. The first onboard DC grid system was delivered to the Dina Star, owned by Myklebusthaug Management in Norway in 2013.

This article is the third part in Fathom’s Shiptech 101 series. For Part 1 on emissions and Part 2 on effluents visit www.fathom-news.com

HYDROGEN

A growing interest in building ships to transport hydrogen indicates a strengthening chain in the alternative fuels sector. Increasing transport of hydrogen opens the door to its use within the maritime sector as letters of intent for building hydrogen carriers are signed. Hydrogen can be generated from different sources such as wind, biomass or natural gas and is used in some fuel cells. Kawasaki Heavy Industries has been involved in the development of a demonstration vessel to establish a supply chain for the transportation of hydrogen. It would see the transportation of hydrogen from its production in Australia be transported by sea to Japan. Last year Iwatani, Electric Power Development (J-Power) and Shell Japan teamed up with Kawasaki to develop the CO2-free Hydrogen Energy Supply-Chain Technology Research Association (HySTRA). Although there are not as many projects to date based around hydrogen powered or hydrogen carriers, there is evidence that interest is growing. Letters of Intent to pursue hydrogen as a fuel are being signed – PowerCell signed one with Nel ASA to pursue hydrogen opportunities in February this year. A small hydrogen-powered ferry in the UK city of Bristol has operated successfully at the small scale, indicating that there is potential,

Environmental

AIR LUBRICATION

Air lubrication technology reduces resistance between the ship’s hull and seawater by implementing a layer of air bubbles between the two to lubricate the hullwater contact area. According to DNV GL, by 2025 more ships will operate with air lubrication technology to significantly improve efficiency. Savings of 10-15% can be achieved according to Mitsubishi. UK-based Silverstream has been the most visible system maker. The company has been able to install and demonstrate commercial installations after a number of years of development.

l a i t n e r e f re dif u s s e r p w

WIND ASSISTED PROPULSION

si l a t n e m a the fund

Harnessing wind power to propel maritime vessels has been done since 1300 BC when the first sailboat was invented. It was not until 1924 that German engineer and inventor of the Flettner rotor, Anton Flettner, used the magnus effect to build a ship that could propel itself. While the magnus effect was abandoned for use in ships due to its inefficiency at the time, recently it has been trialled by shipping companies to reduce fuel consumption, and emissions. Wind assisted propulsion includes the use of wingsails, soft sails, kites or flettner rotors. These technologies harness the power of the wind and generate a forward thrust to propel the ship. Combining this power with the ship’s engine reduces the power required to achieve a given speed, which reduces fuel consumption, emissions, and overall costs. A given ship speed can be achieved with the same engine power. There are a variety of wind assisted propulsion technologies that are in development or have been trialled, however, Norsepower’s rotor sail solution is the only technology to demonstrate commercial orders. It is also supported by European funds. Other wind assisted propulsion concepts have been developed by companies such as US-based TankerProa and Japan-based Eco Marine Power, but at the current time their concepts are just that. However, the increasing number of companies developing concepts for wind propulsion indicates a strong level of interest in using renewable energy to lower fuel consumption. As more companies invest in developing methods for wind driven propulsion, concepts are more likely to become realities. It is possible that increased use of wind power could reduce the quantity of diesel fuel required and help both lower fuel consumption and reduce overall emissions. TankerProa’s wind assisted propulsion concept was trialled in 2013 on a Massachusetts Maritime Academy model tanker vessel. The technology propelled the vessel at 4 knots in 5 knot winds with the engines turned off.

er:

5 20/03/201

1 0 1 CH

E T P I SH

DISRUPTIVE TALKS GET DISRUPTIVE This yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Nor-Shipping sees the introduction of a

new hall, brimming with new ideas. The disruptive sustainability hall represents the very cusp of the changing face of the maritime sector. For some this is a huge opportunity to bring about industrial change at a level never seen before. For others, this may be too much of a risk, they may even decide to ignore what this hall represents, much like the dinosaurs would have ignored that huge meteor.

Disruption and innovation are not owned by the young and inventive, there are many existing industry players that see the signs and are early movers. In the maritime and shipping sectors they are emerging, restructuring to become new agile businesses ready to meet the challenges they think the future will bring. We may call them the disruptive dinosaurs, the ones that have the tenacity and drive to evolve and change These are the companies, new and old,

that form the disruptive sustainability hall, and key to that the disruptive talks at the centre of the buzz. â&#x20AC;&#x192; The disruptive talks are hosted by Fathom Maritime and supported by leading companies willing to be seen as self-disruptive. They are 10 focused one hour debates throughout the first three days of Nor-Shipping tackling key issues and questions that many companies, their executives and staff should be asking themselves.

COME TO THE DISRUPTION

Disruptive Innovation

TUESDAY

30TH MAY 13.30

WHAT PROBLEMS NEED DISRUPTING? What issues that are ripe for innovative solutions? Three key factors are at play. New technologies, new attitudes and the same old tired market cycles. Are the factors drawing together to create upheaval that will bring the old-world shipping model to a close and what sort of a model will replace it?

Disruptive supporter:

14.30

WHY SHOULD SHIP-OWNERS OPEN THE DOOR FOR NEW PLAYERS TO DISRUPT IT?

Disruptive supporter:

Shipping is facing new and potentially disruptive challenges as new companies, and new solutions emerge. How do companies ensure they doÂ not suffer negative disruption, but instead are prepared to embrace the innovation that will enable positive disruption? What are new companies likely to be offering the ship-owners and what changes, technological and commercial, are enabling these solutions?

15.30

HOW WILL LARGE CORPORATES EVOLVE IN AN AGE OF START-UPS? Disruptive supporter: Will large companies create their own disruption or find better solutions through collaboration with start-ups? How important is corporate agility? Do large corporates need a new mindset and how can this be achieved?

WEDNESDAY

Disruptive Innovation

31ST MAY 10.30

DOES INDUSTRY NEED TO COLLABORATE OR BE DISRUPTED OUT OF BUSINESS?

11.30

FAST AND CHEAP: WILL NEW SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SERVICES ALLOW THE DISRUPTERS TO WIN?

Disruptive supporter:

Can new business applications be successfully developed and can established suppliers adapt to meet the opportunities? Are fast and cheap the only two factors needed to enable new ideas and solutions to emerge, if not what other elements are needed for a new way of communicating?

Where are the difficulties and blocks in today’s shipping model that are ripe for upheaval? What uncertainties in ship design, construction and operation need to be addressed and will better collaboration lead to more sustainable business models? Is digitization just a panacea for technology firms’ problems more than the whole industry? Will owner and designer begin to collaborate more?

Disruptive supporter:

14.00

HOW CAN NOVEL SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES CREATE OPPORTUNITY IN SHIPPING?

15.00

CAN AN INDUSTRY DEPENDENT ON FUEL OIL EVER EMBRACE UNMANNED SHIPPING?

The hull coating example. By thinking Disruptive supporter: outside the box, experts have discovered solutions that revolutionise the prevention of marine biological fouling on ship hulls. Advances in the science behind coating technology development are providing new avenues to create change. The disrupters are not only those that come from within the industry, prospering new ideas and approaches, but also those that introduce and adapt solutions from other industries to incite positive impact in the field of traditional technologies. Why is it essential that owners and operators are aware of novel scientific breakthroughs in hull coating technology?

Are conventional maritime fuels and engine not only an environmental risk, but a limiter on creating the goal of autonomous safe commercial shipping? What needs to happen to achieve the efficiencies of automation? Can diesel/ HFO fueled vessels ever be unmanned? Is electric propulsion a prerequisite for automation in the maritime industry? What levels of data are needed to create autonomous, and what are the benefits of even going partway down this journey? Are the diagnostic tools sufficient to create trust in shore based assessment?

Disruptive supporter:

Disruptive Innovation

THURSDAY

1ST JUNE 10.30

CAN DATA CREATE A KNOWLEDGE LOOP TO ENABLE SHIPBUILDERS TO REPLICATE AVIATION’S SAFETY LEVELS?

13.00

CAN SHIPPING LIVE WITH BLOCKCHAIN AND DISRUPTIVE FINANCE?

Disruptive supporter:

fathom maritime intelligence

As much as shipping and the maritime sector is facing business upheaval and environmental challenges, its financial and trad mechanism are also being called into question? Nearly a decade of overcapacity in one sector or another has thrown a necessary spotlight on potential tools that will be the bedrock of industrial revolution. Can today’s shipping model continue as it is? Will blockchain raise the financial trust of new ways of doing business, or will ship-owners and their banks fall back to the relative comfort of “Business as Usual”

Can we trust your data? While there Disruptive supporter: is as much talk about who owns the data, the question could be turned around to whether the data is good enough to be shared and then used to improve the industry as a whole. With owners and operators able to colect increased amounts of data, are they able, and indeed wiling, to share the results and alow increased value in the industry? If shipyards and naval arhcitects could, like the aeroplane makers, gain operational data for an asset‘s life would they be able to make ever better increases in their designs?

14.00

WHERE CAN TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATIVE THINKING DISRUPT PORT OPERATIONS? In the commercial operations of vessels, port operations remain one of the more critical parts of a voyage. Where can new innovative and disruptive tools emerge to create efficiencies in time and cost? What models are needed and what structures need to be considered for radically improving one of the shipping industry’s bottlenecks?

Disruptive supporter:

Find out more about Fathom’s events at www.fathom-news.com

Rethinking Fouling Prevention Selektope® – No.1 barnacle fighter Average global water temperatures are rising. Ships are increasingly idle in biofouling hotspots. Pressure on antifouling technology performance is intensifying. Selektope® takes a unique pharmacological approach to hard fouling prevention. This bio-repellent ingredient enables superior antifouling performance, particularly under static conditions, when added across the full range of antifouling products. A revolution in antifouling innovation.

SELEKTOPE.COM SELEKTOPE.SE Selektope is a registered trademark sold by I-Tech AB Selektope is a registered trademark sold by I-Tech AB

Use biocides safety. Always read the label and product information before use.

COLD SAILING

“Thin ice and beset by warm weather—not a good way to begin the melt season,” NSIDC lead scientist Ted Scambos

For regular environmental updates and to sign up to the weekly newsletter visit www.fathom-news.com

Environmental

“While the Arctic maximum is not as important as the seasonal minimum, the long-term decline is a clear indicator of climate change,” Walt Meier, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory

Tourism tours through the thinning Arctic ice are growing in popularity. This summer Crystal Serenity will sail once again, with about 1700 passengers and crew, along the northern coast of Alaska and Canada, West to East. It will spend about 15 days in an area known as the North West Passage.

As with its inaugural trip last year, the UK research vessel Ernest Shackleton has been chartered as a support vessel with the tourists able to make stop offs at some of Canada’s remotest settlements. Crystal Serenity passengers will pay more than $20,000 for a 32-day Arctic cruise. Crystal Serenity is not the only vessel likely to take passengers in and out of the island waterways that form the North West passage. A tall sailing ship, is also set to venture into the waters, though will not be making a full transit. The three masted school sailing vessel Oliver Hazard Perry will make a journey taking school children through the Arctic waterways in a month long trek from Pond Inlet westbound to Cambridge Bay. The premise of the voyage is to research and reveal the world of an ice free Arctic. The sailing vessel is however steel hulled and has two engines on board so will not be relying on the weather to make her way. She will have 18 students on board along with the ship’s crew and other staff. There is less summer ice in the northern sea route than at any other time, making these kinds of journeys now possible, whereas only decades ago they would have been treacherous and almost certain to fail. And with summer sea ice levels continuing to fall, the likelihood is that Arctic tourism will only pick up. Recently the US-based National Snow and Ice Data Center reported that Arctic sea ice maximum is at record low for the third straight year. NSIDC is part of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder. Its scientists provide Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis content, with partial support from NASA. On March 7th this year the Arctic Sea ice covered 14.42m sq km of the polar region. March is the end of the winter period and when the ice extent is at its furthest. This, said NIDC, represents the smallest area that the winter ice levels have reached in the 38-year history of satellite records. The previous

low was 14.517m sq km in 2015 and 14.52m sq km last year. NSIDC scientists said a very warm autumn and winter contributed to the record low maximum, with air temperatures 2.5 degrees Celsius above average over the Arctic Ocean. The overall warmth was punctuated by a series of extreme winter heat waves over the Arctic Ocean, continuing the pattern also seen in the winter of 2015. From mid March the ice levels will recede as the summer months draw in, reaching a minimum sometime in September before the cold winter air draws in and the waters begin to freeze again. Data from the European Space Agency’s CryoSat-2 satellite has also shown that this winter’s ice cover was slightly thinner compared to the past four years. “Thin ice and beset by warm weather—not a good way to begin the melt season,” said NSIDC lead scientist Ted Scambos. Such thin ice going into the melt season sets us up for the possibility of record low sea ice conditions this September according to the centre, and this will bode well for the tourists hoping for a risk free journey through the Arctic.

Not so hidden message

Those tourists and students heading into the Arctic this year should also heed the not so hidden message that scientists say thinning Arctic ice means. The Arctic has long been the poster child for climate change, along with the adage emerging that what happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic. “While the Arctic maximum is not as important as the seasonal minimum, the long-term decline is a clear indicator of climate change,” said Walt Meier, a scientist at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Cryospheric Sciences Laboratory and an affiliate scientist at NSIDC. Melting ice will also impact sea levels, water salinity and a host of other environmental issues. And this is why there are continual, often extravagant ideas, to help save the polar ice cap from disappearing all together. The latest one is to build floating, wind powered, pumps that can pump sea water along pipelines and then onto the ice cap, building up ice levels. Steve Desch, professor of astrophysics at the School of Earth & Space Exploration at Arizona State University, wants to have 10 million of these pumps built to help save the Arctic ice.

Ship Design

THE ECOFEEDER VESSEL YOU CAN’T QUITE HAVE JUST YET

If you want it you can have it, but you may want to wait A consortium of leading European designers, suppliers and engineering companies has come together to demonstrate how a new type of feeder container ship could be built today using existing technology and give huge fuel and CO 2 savings. There is however just one part that would make it unfeasible today. The consortium is through the Danish led Greenship of the Future and the argument is that the existing fleet of 1,861 feeder vessels between 1,000 teu and 3,000 teu in size is ageing. Over 50% of them are over ten years old and 18% are over 20 years old. Therefore they have designed the RegionalECOfeeder. The project was driven by Odense Maritime Technology, a company that grew out of the former Odense Shipyard in Denmark, best known in recent years for delivering container vessels for its then parent, Maersk. The claim is the vessel the companies have drawn up could save 30% of the fuel and CO2 emissions per transported container compared to the world fleet average. The consortium says that significant savings can be achieved not only by bolting on existing technologies, but by looking at optimal interactions, so the design suggests an open top concept for the vessel with cell guides rather than traditional lashings, to make port turnaround much quicker. Vacuum mooring systems would be deployed, as this would remove the need for larger crews to perform time consuming, and often dangerous, rope-based mooring operations. The vessel would have a wider beam than a similar feeder vessel of its size, but a beam maximised for the

Kiel Canal at 32.5 m. The design would reduce ballast water requirements, and ballast tank requirements would be met with much slimmer tanks than generally seen today. A teasing wait? The one part of the design which makes the vessel unfeasible currently is the proposal to combine navigation, control room and offices in a smaller lower accommodation block, which contravenes existing rules on navigation and look outs. The team behind this wants to use a virtual bridge complete with CCTV camera and sensors, with a forward auxiliary wheelhouse for use in congested calm waters. The project clearly takes a leaf out of the proposals that have been put forward by some technology companies like Rolls Royce, one of the project partners, that want to see autonomous ships on the water. Included in the design are two stroke dual-fuel engines and four LNG tanks with a 1,300 m3 capacity, an inline shaft generator and two diesel generators to create power, along with a battery pack to reduce generator load peak. Other considerations to make the vessel fuel efficient include waste heat recovery system, air lubrication to reduce water drag, twisted leading edge rudder with bulb, and a large curve-bladed Kappel propeller. While the navigation part of the proposal remains unfeasible, the other parts of the project are all available, and can be deployed into a feeder design today which means that as the current feeder fleet needs replacing, it can demonstrate a move towards meeting shipping’s CO2 commitments.

EXCELLENCE IN MARITIME EFFICIENCY WITH DATA-DRIVEN ANALYTICS Marorka Performance Service supports stakeholders in

Emission reduction

establishing a complete overview of operational expenses.

and fuel savings

Real-time fleet performance monitoring brings transparency,

Compliance

comprehensibility, timely feedback and control.

and reporting

Get expert support and discover your fleetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s true performance

Performance optimization

levels through a holistic overview and realistic KPIs.

and asset security

A NEW STERN TWIST A concept that initially emerged in the 1960s to improve propulsion and fuel efficiency is finally gaining ground in ship design.

Ship Design

The asymmetrical stern, which consists of a slightly twisted aft shape, was conceived by German shipbuilding engineer Ernst A. Nönnecke in 1962. It was thought to provide better propulsion by taking into account different flow conditions either side of the propeller. Compared with traditional sterns like the elliptical stern, the cruiser stern, or the transom stern, model testing has shown the asymmetrical stern is capable of producing fuel savings of between 3-6%. The asymmetrical part means that the stern frame is turned in the opposite direction of the propeller action. This generates a swirl to the flow ahead of the propeller, which counteracts the rotation of the flow from the propeller, reducing energy loss. However, this invention in the 1960s proved tricky due to the challenges of finding the optimum stern shape. The calculations were long and implementing the vision too difficult and costly. In July1984 the asymmetrical stern form was tried on two Hapag Lloyd vessels, with promising results, and expectations it would become as common as the bulbous bow. It never happened, perhaps because shipyards were reluctant. Interest has risen again and Karsten Hochkirch, Head of Department of Fluid Engineering at DNV GL, says it is all down to computational fluid dynamics software. CFD technology makes it possible to understand and test the complex geometric shapes that these sterns require before they are built, and to rapidly make the required adjustments to find the best shape. Hochkirch believes that this will help to reduce the resistance from shipyards of building twisted, asymmetrical sterns. In May 2017, the classification society said asymmetrical

stern designs would be incorporated into its CFD software called Eco Lines. Shipowners and operators using DNV GL’ s ECO Lines hull optimisation service will be able to see what impact an asymmetric stern would have upon the dynamics of a design, and therefore potential fuel consumption. While the asymmetrical stern concept may not be new the lack of interest for three decades is an indication of human error and uncertainty associated with complex design modifications before CFD and fast computing. In a recent assessment, DNV GL used CFD to discover that modifying a 3,000 TEU containership from a symmetric baseline design to an asymmetric design resulted in a propulsion power reduction of more than 3%. Using computational software is a way to unlock potential for efficiency increases in ship design and drive design from concept to reality.

WHAT IS CFD?

Computational fluid dynamics is the computation of viscous flows. CFD software is able to create a 3D description of pressure distribution and flow conditions. It can be used in the early stages of ship design consultancy to show how different designs will affect ship performance and flow physics, or to understand how ship modifications during retrofits will change the operational performance. Although CFD was not quick to migrate to the shipping industry following successful applications in the aviation and automotive industries, it has been present now for nearly a decade particularly in some of the leading naval architect firms. It is now being deployed more and more by classification societies to design vessels with low resistance and maximum efficiency.

Images courtesy of DNV GL

Disruptive Innovation 1. DEDICATED LNG-POWERED SHIPS 10 years ago ships were used to carry LNG fuel, but they were not powered by it. To reduce SOx, NOx and CO2 from shipping, ship engines have been developed to process LNG for propulsion. In July 2013, Fjord Line’s MS Stavangerfjord became the first vessel to operate with a dedicated LNG engine by Rolls Royce. An identical ship began sailing in March 2014. These ferries, the first in the world to operate purely on LNG, operate today between Norway and Denmark.

2. SHIPS WITH DUAL-FUEL ENGINES While LNG has been used as a marine fuel in gas carriers for decades, and in the first ferry as a fuel 17 years ago (the Norwegian ferry Glutra) it is only in the last decade that it has started to be used in a rage of different vessel types. The first dual or multi fuel containerships, tankers, bulk vessels, large ferries, cruise ships as well as specialised vessels like cranes, dredgers and heavy lift vessels are all in service now or on order. Added to this is the development of dual-fuel engines to use a growing range of fuel types. Methane is now being used and plans have already been made to test ethanol as a marine fuel. LPG has also been considered.

10 VESSELS THAT DIDN’T EXIST 10 YEARS AGO

With talk around disruption and change in the shipping industry, here are 10 vessels that prove shipping has not stayed still over the past decade.

Technologies that increase data output, analyse this data for us and facilitate better decision making maximises efficiency. While the concepts behind the vessels of today are not always new, they have advanced in a way that has allowed them to be deployed in commercial operations for the first time. Fathom-news takes a look at the past decade and some of the advances that have resulted in the development of vessels that did not exist 10 years ago.

3. SHIPS POWERED BY BIOFUEL Finnish shipping company, Meriaura Group was reportedly the first to own a cargo ship that can operate 100% on bio-oil. Built in 2012 by STX Finland, the multifunctional deck cargo carrier, Meri, uses raw bio-oil that has come from industry side streams and therefore does not compete against the food chain. The vessel operates using Wärtsilä engines. As part of Meriaura’s sustainability strategy, the vessel has also been designed to recover up to 2,700m3 of oil spilled. Meriaura also reported in March 2017 that a new VG EcoCoaster capable of operating on both biofuel and MGO will enter operation in the next couple of years. IMAGE COURTESY OF MERIAURA GROUP

4. VESSELS POWERED BY HYDROGEN Bristol hosts the first passenger vessel, Hydrogenesis, capable of using hydrogen to propel itself. It is powered by a 12kW fuel cell and carries just 12 passengers and two crew members. The purpose of Hydrogenesis is to demonstrate the use of hydrogen fuel cells as a future method of ship propulsion. In 2010, Bristol City Council supplied £225,000 towards the construction of the vessel, which was designed and built by Bristol Hydrogen Boats. Today the ferry operates six hours a day between Temple Quay and the SS Great Britain, allowing visitors to tour the quay and explore Bristol without contributing to the production of harmful emissions. Hydrogenesis’ only source of waste is pure water. The fuel cells used on this vessel only require ten minutes of charging to full recharge, compared with the traditional time of around five hours for conventional batteries.

Disruptive Innovation 5. VESSELS POWERED BY ELECTRICITY

6. WORLD’S FIRST CNG CARRIER VESSEL

Just two years ago the first vessel to be powered totally by electricity was launched. The car and passenger ferry, Ampere, uses lithiumion energy storage systems by Corvus Energy and was developed in collaboration with Norled AS, Fjellstrand Shipyard, Siemens AS, and Corvus Energy.

In January 2016, the compressed natural gas carrier, the Jayanti Baruna, was launched. Powered by gas using a Wärtsilä dual-fuel main engine, it carries natural gas of a very high pressure (200 bar) from East Java to the island of Lombok, Indonesia, where it is not possible for remote communities to obtain gas via pipeline.

Ampere operates in Western Norway between Lavik and Oppedal and carries 120 cars or 360 passengers. According to Corvus, by operating on energy storage systems, the ferry is able to save over 1m litres of diesel a year, 2,680 tonnes of CO2 and 37 tonnes of NOx.

The vessel was built by China’s Jiangsu Hantong shipyard and owned by Pelayaran Bahtera Adhiguna.

7. AUTONOMOUS VESSEL SYSTEMS Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) have been used since 1957 to study diffusion, acoustic transmissions, and map deep-sea manganese nodule fields. However, at this time the use of AUVs were unproven in the field and it was not until recently that the use of UAVs for hull cleaning, maintenance and even fire fighting onboard has been commercialised. Today there are a number of underwater marine robots used for a range of purposes including vessel cleaning, such as SeaRobotics’ HullBUG launched in 2013. Today there are a range of marine robotics by Kongsberg, Nautico and SeaRobotics that provide underwater assessment of vessel operations by retaining the ability to access difficult parts of a ship and operate in challenging environments.

8. OFFSHORE DECOMMISSIONING VESSELS In February 2015, plans for the first purpose built decommissioning vessel for removing and disposing, or recycling, of the facilities from oil and gas fields. Pioneering Spirit, a heavy-lift vessel officially began operations in April 2017, removing topsides from the Brent platforms in the oilfield north-east of Shetland. In just a single lift Pioneering Spirit can remove topsides of up to 48,000 tonnes and leftover platforms jackets up to 25,000 tonnes. IMAGE COURTESY OF FJORD LINE

9. WIND TURBINE INSTALLATION VESSELS Built in 2013, the jack-up vessel Vole au Vent specifically installs offshore windparks, tidal current turbines, wave energy generators, net masts and oil & gas infrastructure. With a capacity of 1,500 tonnes, the Vole au Vent can lay down the heaviest foundations of offshore windparks. The vessel has four legs, which enables it to stand stable above the sea level without being impacted by the waves. It can install all kinds of foundations in water depths up to 50 m.

10. POWERSHIPS A barge or ship mounted fully integrated floating power plants is known as a Powership, the name is trademarked by Karadeniz Holding A.S since 2010. These ships are built to deliver power plants, providing power directly into the transmission network from their onboard high voltage substation. There are now nine ships in existence with over 1,500 MW of total installed power. According to Karadeniz, there is another 6,000 MW of Powerships under construction or in the pipeline.

IMAGE COURTESY OF TOTE MARITIME

The ships use HFO, natural gas or LNG with dual-fuel engines to generate 30-470 MW power.

Read more on the transformation of shipping and sign up to the weekly newsletter at www.fathom-news.com

speed redefined

A new leader is born to create a new dimension of speed for remote and critical communications.

ď&#x192;¨ Visit us at Nor-Shipping stand B03-14

Communications

IT Solutions

Consulting

ADVERT

20/20 VISION: THE BIG FUEL CHOICE GAMBLE SHIPOWNERS and operators could be making decisions ahead of the 2020 global sulphur cap that will cost them more than their competitors.

In its simplest description they have, in reality, three options for compliance regardless of whether considering newbuildings or existing tonnage: use scrubbers to then burn residual fuels, use low sulphur gasoil blends (or distillates in the areas where emission rules are more stringent) or use liquid natural gas (which has no sulphur in it). Things are never simple though. It all comes down to total costs, both initial investment capital and the ensuing operating costs, and for that the relative fuel costs and fuel availability are the important, but unknown, key factor according to Iain Mowat, Senior Analyst at Wood Mackenzie.

Specifically, the issue of the future availability of traditional residual fuels will be key, he warns. Fluctuating fuel prices and tightening environmental laws indicate that decisions made now may not be the most cost efficient post 2020. The International Energy Outlook 2016 by the U.S. Energy. Information Administration reports that between 1986 and 2012 world consumption of residual fuel oil decreased from 13m barrels per day to less than 9 million. OPEC estimates that global demand will decline by a further 1.7m barrels per day between 2014 and 2040 as a result of policies and regulation.

Ship Operations & Management

Both Mowat and Robin Meech, Managing Director of Marine and Energy Consulting, agree that this global decline of residual fuel will impact the shipping sector, probably after 2030. However, operators need to be fully aware of how their decisions made now will affect their operational costs in the future. Meech predicts that residual fuel oil will be about $350/tonne by 2020, while marine diesel oil, with a 0.1% sulphur content, will soar to $630/tonne and 0.5% fuel to $580/tonne. The EIA assumes the cost of 0.5% fuel to be high as refineries will need substantial investment to upgrade their processes. Furthermore, they will only do this where there are good returns and therefore availability of certain fuels could be limited in some areas. Although residual fuels seem an attractive option in terms of cost, as oil refineries become more efficient in their refining processes, the formation of residues decline and therefore availability could be limited. An opposing argument is that as long as there is demand for residual fuel, refineries will ensure they are still part of the process. In developing countries where refineries are not as well placed this may be more difficult. Clean Marine, a scrubber maker, is reportedly working with BP to give shipowners as much information on the price and availability of HFO post-2020. An alternative to traditional marine fuels is LNG. While Mowat suggests that the industry is experiencing a hiatus in the uptake of pure LNG-powered ships because of the uncertainty in oil prices and availability, Meech’s fuel price prediction of LNG in 2020 at $350/tonne shows it to be an attractive option. By 2030 he thinks it could be $480/tonne Mowat believes the industry will see more dual-fuel powered ships as a result of maintaining competitiveness where oil prices are uncertain and

environmental regulations are tightening. A ship with a dual-fuel engine and the ability to operate on either 0.5% fuel and LNG also gives it a potentially stronger resale value beyond 2030. If Meech’s fuel price predictions are correct, then a ship being resold with the ability to operate on either indicates its potential for a stronger resale value. Furthermore, if the availability of residual fuel is limited then a ship using this with scrubbers is less likely to gain a good resale value. Contrary to Meech’s estimates, Frode Helland Evebo, Chief Sales and Marketing of marine scrubbers manufacturer Clean Marine believes the availability of residual fuel will decline only temporarily. He predicts that there will initially be increasing demand for LNG and less demand for residuals, which will lead to a drop in price. This will then increase its attractiveness and generate a significant return to it in a few years. James Ashworth, Lead Consultant at TRI-ZEN International, thinks scrubbers or alternative fuels are not a viable long-term option as they will not meet tightening CO2 targets. He believes LNG will have a much bigger role in shipping in the future. The demand for LNG will move forward and the infrastructure the fuel needs, will follow, he says.

Read more on fuels and ship operations at www.fathom-news.com

Ship Operations & Management

FINANCING THE FUTURE OF SHIPPING

In an industry heavily dependent on banks and loans, shipping is facing some difficulties when it comes to financing.

Traditionally shipowners have been able to borrow money from banks to finance a new ship. That has changed thanks to capital adequacy rules and a serious lack of appetite for risk. Accountancy firm Deloitte reports that European shipping banks are under pressure to reduce shipping exposures due to funding constraints giving owners less access to capital. Most banks are unlikely to lend more than half of any asset investment, says Urs Dur, Managing Director of Clarkson Capital Markets. Private equity become a new potential source of capital, but that is also waning according to some reports. An extended run of overfunding and overcapacity is part of the problem. For shipowners this exacerbates the financial challenges they face in a very volatile market. The result is a lack of finance available for all but the top owners, resulting in an opportunity for the supply/ demand balance to balance. But will traditional shipping banks step back in, particularly when industry faces environmental challenges that may push owners to order more efficient newbuildings or seek capital for fleetwide retrofits? The signs are not good. Singapore lender DBS announced in April this year that it planned to take a step back when it comes to financing shipping, while late last year the Bank of Ireland said it was to cut back its loans to shipping. Both HSH Nordbank and NordLB cut funding for shipping in 2016 by a fifth according to Bloomberg figures. Iain Mowat, Senior Analyst at Wood Mackenzie believes that banks are more likely to give funding to a technology or a fuel they feel confident in, while Finnishbased law firm, Neptun Juridica, reports that banks are far more likely to invest in bigger stronger shipowners as

they see less risk. Shipowners could benefit from easier access to loans if they are looking towards a technology or ship modification that is viewed favourably by the bank. The most important factors that affect a bank’s decision to modify its funding for shipping is linked to interest income on loans and operating profit. According to Marina Maniati and Evangelos Sambracos at the University of Piraeus, a bank’s internal environment is significant in its decision to grant loans. If a bank’s higher management has little confidence in in its own risk calculations will be more likely to follow its competitors. Freight rates and asset prices will also influence the stability and decisions made by banks and therefore shipowners’ likelihood of obtaining loans during different times of financial stability. The University Maritime Advisory Services (UMAS), a partnership between the University College London Energy Institute and MATRANS, warns both shipowners and financiers that they need to understand and anticipate the risks associated with their assets in different future scenarios as ships become increasingly technically and operationally more competitive. In April this year the European Investment Bank and Dutch bank ABN AMRO announced the launch of a €150m investment plan to finance newbuild and retrofit green shipping projects. Sustainable maritime transport projects will benefit from favourable financial terms, whether it is a newbuild or a retrofit project. The decision for a large capital sum to be injected into such projects and technologies indicates a clear market signal from shipowners and operators that they are struggling to acquire the finance needed even for green shipping investments.

On e open and c o llab o rati ve ecosy stem

kogn i fa i .c o m

0LQG6SKHUH OHWV \RX VSHDN ZLWK WKH ,QWHUQHW RI 7KLQJV ')3/ $

VLHPHQV FRP PLQGVSKHUH

MEET THE ALPHAS:

F-Word

THE PRECURSORS TO SHIP AUTOMATION? GENERATION Alpha consists of your children and those around the world born after 2010. This is the generation that was born into a world of computer tablets and smart phones. They are learning about the world through a screen.

Some, like my six year old daughter, are already being taught basic computer code, and accept willingly this digital life. They will handle augmented reality through goggles and other wearables. They are the digital natives. If you have never heard of Generation Alpha, the video below outlines how they will be immersed in a new world. In a little over a decade this Generation Alpha will be seeking jobs and careers, but will do so in the scope of what their societal expectations are. In a little over a decade the vessels that have been built over the last five years will likely still be in service. Will the Alpha generation want to work on them? And in a similar light, if she decides to follow in her father’s footsteps, how will my daughter be taught the skills needed to become a deck officer? I make the assumption that such roles will still exist of course, but given the time taken for the Manilla Amendments of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (the STCW Convention), it is likely a safe bet. I am sure the folk from the IMO member states and other associate members that agreed the Manilla Amendments were not thinking of my daughter and those of her age when they debated the changes, despite the belief they were writing what they perceived as necessary global standards “to train and certify seafarers to operate technologically-advanced ships for some time to come.” These amendments did include many welcome and much needed changes, including rest and work hours, the training of electro-technical staff and further fire and safety training. It also included reference to webbased and

e-learning courses. My question though is whether training institutes have the capability to offer learning and training methods which will compete with the ways youngsters will be taught in schools and for other careers? I have a suspicion that many shipowners may want to pay lip-service to requirements, and be reluctant to offer anything but the necessary cash for bringing in youngsters and training them, let alone keeping them. Ship managers will bear the brunt of this, especially if, as I suspect, the role of the ship manager in the future will grow and evolve. I am British and went to sea as the sun set on an era of British merchant navy officers. Today seafarers are trained from an array of countries, not just the developed ones, but as these countries see increased economic opportunity and affluence, so their own Generation Alpha will have increased expectations. And no, to end this piece, the unmanned ship is not the answer here. I am talking about a decade when vessels that have only recently been built, and those likely built in the next few years, are in the water. The regulatory framework is not in place for international unmanned ships, so crews will still be needed for some time to come. I am talking about the transition.

THOUGHT NEEDS TO START ON HOW TO GET THE ALPHAS AFLOAT.

F-Word

THE STATES AT PLAY:

NO LEVEL PLAYING FIELD?

THE level playing field: A term that sounds as innocent as a Sunday game of football in the park, but has become as mired in political tension as an innuendo is in double-entendres. I often hear the term level-playing field when shipowner representatives talk about their demands in places like the International Maritime Organization and other places where regulations are often discussed and agreed. It may be strange to hear about demands for a level playing field in an industry known to be harshly commercial and competitive. Surely any home advantage would be beneficial. While the shipowner lobby groups will call for level playing fields, the environmental green lobbyists are more sceptical. For them it is a smoke screen. So what is the much maligned level playing field that shipowners and environmental groups battle over. It is unfortunately down to semantics. In

short it means “a situation in which everyone has a fair and equal chance of succeeding” What the green lobby groups want however is that the worst polluters don’t succeed, and that those that take affirmative action do. I asked the Danish Shipowners’ Association what its definition is: “The level-playing-field is imperative to the industry. In the commercial sense: may the best company win! But when it comes to regulation, level-playing-field is only ensured by global regulation which applies to all – regardless of flag. And last, but not least: global, effective enforcement by the authorities”. That sounds straightforward until one considers some of the nuances, such as regulation often being seen as a minimum common standard, and that there are international rules that are regional: The emission control areas for example. While Kathy Metcalf at the US Chamber of Shipping, which represents shipowners in the US, agrees that a level playing field should be globally applicable to maritime, she told me she recognises the argument that agreements at the IMO by member states may be a minimum consensus. This is generally one of the accepted outcomes of diplomatic horsetrading. No one is perfectly happy, but also no one really upset. This minimum “floor” perspective is, according to Metcalf, a justification for a number of national requirements that go above and beyond the IMO

requirements (hence the US ballast water type approval program and the potential EU ETS). So there is a level, minimum regulation, with countries able, if they choose, to do more stringent things. Ship owners and operators clearly do not want this. Let’s not forget, it is the IMO member states and the EU triumvirate of Council, Commission and Parliament that make the rules, not the lobby groups. What they, the shipowner groups, want, argues T&E, a vocal European lobby group supporting stronger rules on shipping’s greenhouse gases, is the minimum level playing field and often use the term, without reference to ‘minimum’ to deflect from this. T&E and other lobby groups believe there is a very good chance that the IMO roadmap will lead to weak CO2 regulations, in short, a minimum lowest level playing field, and they want stronger more affirmative action. Hence their support for the developing EU plans to implement something regional. Faig Abbasov, Shipping and aviation officer at Transport and Environment argues that the idea of a European shipping ETS or fund, is no different from the application of the regional emission control areas that target sulphur and nitrous oxide emissions from shipping. “Both shipping ETS and ECA affect all ships sailing to/from Europe. In this sense, ECAs are regional measure too; it was initiated and agreed by the coastal countries in the EU/ USA and taken to the IMO for the blessing of the Pope and his cardinals. Why are ECAs permissible and the EU GHG measure not?” The main accusation from T& E is that is that the “level playing field/global” statement distracts from the benefits of “first mover/ regional” action. “Because CO2 regulation of ships forces them to account for their environmental costs, which in return leads to operational efficiency, and less CO2 equals less fuel consumption and thus less transport costs. So a well-designed EU measure would benefit shipping companies sailing to Europe,” he argues. That may be true, especially in a competitive industry like shipping where every marginal percentage makes a difference. Fuel costs will likely drive the industry to change as much as any global rules reliant on finding tricky diplomatic consensus.

DISCOVER THE POWER OF FLEET XPRESS EXPECT MORE Inmarsatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new maritime satellite service guarantees you a previously unachievable package of benefits. Experience exceptional performance, simplicity and reliability - wherever you operate in the world.

CONTINUOUS CONNECTIVITY

GUARANTEED PERFORMANCE

CONTROLLED COSTS

FULLY MANAGED BUSINESS SERVICE APPLICATIONS

Powering global connectivity inmarsat.com/gxfx