TANKEROperator JUNE/JULY 2014 www.tankeroperator.com BALPURE ® BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT Severn Trent De Nora has over 35 years of leadership and expertise in providing electrolytic disinfection treatment solutions. Setting new standards with the Type-Approved BALPURE ® ballast water treatment system, we have created a simple, reliable and cost-effective solution for both retrofits and newbuilds. – Easy to install – Easy to operate – Non-corrosive – Operator safe – Suitable for hazardous cargo area installations – Surpasses IMO D-2 standards by ten-fold To learn why BALPURE is the right ballast water treatment solution for you, contact [email protected]or visit www.balpure.com Visit us at SMM 2014, Hamburg, Germany, 08–12 September, stand A1.306
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Severn Trent De Nora has over 35 years of leadership and expertise in providing electrolytic disinfection treatment solutions. Setting new standards with the Type-Approved BALPURE® ballast water treatment system, we have created a simple, reliable and cost-effective solution for both retrofits and newbuilds.
– Easy to install– Easy to operate – Non-corrosive – Operator safe– Suitable for hazardous cargo area installations– Surpasses IMO D-2 standards by ten-fold
To learn why BALPURE is the right ballast water treatment solution for you, contact [email protected] or visit www.balpure.com
Visit us at SMM 2014, Hamburg, Germany, 08–12 September, stand A1.306
Denmark Report� Weathering the storm� Owners opt for chemical/products� Leading designer’s tanker portfolio
Anti-Piracy� West Africa on the agenda
Front cover - For more than eight years, Severn Trent De Nora’s patented BALPURE electrolytic disinfection ballast water treatment system hasundergone extensive testing and received third-party verification for meeting rigorous standards for performance, corrosion and safety. The system is type-approved to meet IMO regulations for ballast water, which was achieved in July 2011 (BSH Germany). In addition, BV Type Approvalwas received in May 2012, ABS Certificate of Design Assessment was received in June 2012, while the US Coast Guard Alternate Management System(AMS) certification was received in April 2013.Type approval applications are also ongoing with other class societies.
BALPURE®
BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT
Severn Trent De Nora has over 35 years of leadership and expertise in providing electrolytic disinfection treatment solutions. Setting new standards with the Type-Approved BALPURE® ballast water treatment system, we have created a simple, reliable and cost-effective solution for both retrofits and newbuilds.
– Easy to install– Easy to operate – Non-corrosive – Operator safe– Suitable for hazardous cargo area installations– Surpasses IMO D-2 standards by ten-fold
To learn why BALPURE is the right ballast water treatment solution for you, contact [email protected] or visit www.balpure.com
Visit us at SMM 2014, Hamburg, Germany, 08–12 September, stand A1.306
04
06
24
23
11
Technology 24 Ballast Water Treatment � Awaiting ratification
� Ballast tank coatings effect
Emissions� Fuel quality addressed� MDT’s new engines
Printed by PRINTIMUSUl.Bernardynska 141-902 Bytom, Poland
Just as shipping analystspredicted a possible turnaroundthe in the large tanker marketlater this year, along comesanother world event that couldcompletely undermine theiroptimism.
We are talking of course of the rapid
deterioration in the situation in Iraq. Although
Iraqi oil is primarily produced and exported to
the south of the country, at the top of the
Arabian Gulf, there is a production area in the
North (Kirkuk), which is connected to the
South via a pipeline - and we all know how
vulnerable that is.
To gauge what could happen to the tanker
market, you only have to go back to the
Iraq/Iran war in the 1980s to see what
devastation any conflict in the Arabian Gulf
might cause.
That well known US commentator T Boone
Pickens said on Friday 13th June (note date)
that the crude oil price could hit $150-200 per
barrel, if Iraqi oil exports are hit. He said that
in the long term there was plenty of oil around
the world and one solution for US consumers
would be to form an energy alliance with
Canada and Mexico.
OPEC opted to maintain its crude oil output
ceiling at its Vienna meeting in June, despite
world tensions over Iran, Iraq and Libya, plus
to a lesser extent, the Ukraine. One analyst
reportedly said that the cartel was ‘happy’ with
Brent trading at around $110 per barrel, which
benefited its member oil producers. However,
global supply was still outstripping demand.
Apart from Iraq, Libya remained in a state
of unrest with output slashed to less than
200,000 barrels per day from a possible 1.5
mill barrels per day by the middle of June.
Iran’s oil output could reach 4 mill barrels
per day in “less than three months” if Western
sanctions are lifted over its nuclear energy
programme, Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh said
at the OPEC meeting. That compares with
Iran’s current production of about 2.7 mill
barrels per day, according to OPEC’s data.
At the same time as the Iraq crisis was
escalating, BP released its ‘Statistical Review
of World Energy 2013’ in which the oil major
said that global energy demand accelerated
last year but, reflecting the weakness of the
global economy, growth of 2.3% remained
slightly below the historical average.
Within this global picture, however, shifts in
energy consumption mirrored those in the
world’s economic patterns, BP said.
Strong US growthEnergy consumption in the emerging
economies grew below their long-term average
rate, rising by 3.1%, driven by slower growth
in China. However, consumption in the mature
OECD economies grew by a higher-than-
average rate of 1.2% - entirely as a result of
strong US growth. As a result, the gap
between growth in the OECD and non-OECD
narrowed to levels not seen since 2000, BP
said.
Nonetheless, the emerging economies
continued to dominate the growth in global
energy demand, accounting for 80% of growth
last year and nearly 100% of growth over the
past decade.
The review pointed out how geopolitical
events in a number of countries continued to
impact oil production in 2013, with Libya
suffering the largest single decline in the face
of renewed civil unrest.
However, the disruptions were offset by a
big increase in US oil production – driven by
the massive investment in shale and other
‘tight’ formations production. As a net result,
average oil prices remained unusually stable –
albeit at levels exceeding $100 per barrel for a
third consecutive year.
In other words, the disruptions seen last
year were by and large balanced by new
sources of oil and according to BP Group
CEO Bob Dudley: “This underlines the
importance of continuing to secure these new
supplies through continued access to new
resources, policies to encourage markets and
investment and the application of new
technologies worldwide.”
The developments also highlighted the
critical importance of both policy and market
forces in delivering new supplies. As BP Chief
Economist Christof Rühl noted: “The huge
investments seen in the US have been
encouraged and enabled by a favourable
policy regime. And this has resulted in the US
delivering the world’s largest increase in oil
production last year. Indeed, the US increase
in 2013 – up by 1.1 mill barrels per day - was
one of the biggest annual oil production
increases the world has ever seen.”
If Iran is allowed to ramp up exports, if the
US is allowed to become an exporter of crude
oil, if Russian oil eventually flows from the
Arctic and to a lesser extent, if Kurdistan
ramps up oil exports via a pipeline to Turkey’s
Ceyhan Terminal, then the world’s energy
demands could easily be met - but at what
price?TO
INDUSTRY - MARKETS
TANKEROperator � June/July 201404
BIMCO introducesPOOLCON B
agreement formPOOLCON B, the second of two standard pooling agreements for use by tramp pools
operating in dry and liquid bulk trades, was recently published by BIMCO.
This form was developed to provide
a clearly worded basis for
establishing pool arrangements
with resulting economic benefits
and efficiencies for participants and their
customers, the organisation said.
In contrast to POOLCON A, where
participants timecharter vessels into the pool,
which operates as a self-standing entity,
POOLCON B is modelled on widely-used
agency agreements where pool managers act
as vessel operators and undertake commercial
management, BIMCO explained.
However, all contracts for the use, or
employment of a vessel, including charters
under a contract of affreightment (coa), are
fixed by the managers acting as agents on
behalf of pool participants who are, therefore,
principals in contracts with pool
counterparties.
Full account has been taken of competition
legislation, which is largely based on the same
underlying concepts in many jurisdictions.
Nevertheless, provisions, especially
prohibitions, vary between states and regional
economic groupings. Users should therefore
investigate applicable local requirements and
issues, such as market share, market
concentration, structure and turnover before
committing to a pooling agreement, the
organisation warned.
BackgroundAs for the background, in October 2012,
BIMCO published POOLCON (since renamed
POOLCON A) as the first of two specialist
documents setting out the basis for contractual
arrangements between owners participating in
a pool and the pool managers.
Under POOLCON A, the pool is constituted
as a self-standing entity where owners
timecharter their vessel(s) to the pool and the
pool contracts in its own name with third
parties.
However, this is not the only model. Owners’
commercial needs, together with
administrative and practical considerations,
have resulted in the widespread use of agency-
based arrangements where pool managers act
on behalf of participants with participants as
principal in any contract for the use of a
vessel, or carriage of goods.
In response to this need, work was
undertaken to develop a second document to
address the special requirements of agency-
based arrangements. The outcome, POOLCON
B, was adopted at BIMCO’s documentary
committee’s meeting in Copenhagen in
November 2013.
BIMCO said that it was grateful to the
following members for their work in the
development process:
� Francis Sarre (chairman), CMB
INDUSTRY - MARKETS
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator
(shipowner)
� Stathes Kulukundis, R&K (shipowner)
� Georg Scheel, Nordisk (club member)
� Ms Marjorie Holmes (lawyer -Reed Smith) (adviser)
Competition law is often modelled on the European regime. As with
POOLCON A, the importance of avoiding creating restrictions on
trade has been at the forefront of the working group’s consideration of
the issues. Full account has therefore been taken of EC guidelines on
horizontal co-operation agreements (2011/C11/01), together with
similar regulatory implications in jurisdictions around the world.
BIMCO has also published guidelines as to the provisions set out in
POOLCON B. Basically, it governs the relationship between owners
(participants) entering a vessel(s) into the pool and the pool managers
and regulates administrative and procedural matters covering pool
operations together with the allocation of respective party liabilities
and obligations.
As an agency agreement, there is no timecharter relationship
between participants and pool managers. Nevertheless, in order to
calculate the participants’ entitlement to any share of pool profits, the
Reference Charter listed must set out the basis for determining when
the vessel is deemed to be on hire and periods, such as breakdown,
maintenance, or repairs, when no notional hire accrues.
Pool managers undertake marketing and fixing arrangements, but all
contracts (including individual charters under coas) for employment
are concluded by the managers ‘on behalf of and acting as agents for’
participants. However, additional tonnage chartered in, or chartered
out to meet or supplement pool commitments, is fixed in the
managers’ own name.
As agents, managers should not be exposed to charterers’ claims.
However, to guard against the possible risk of a ‘misdirected arrow’,
participants are required to name the managers as co-assured on their
insurance policies, if possible without liability for calls in the event of
owners’ failure to make payments due.
POOLCON B follows BIMCO’s traditional style, ie Part I contains a
box layout for variable information to be inserted by the parties, while
Part II sets out terms and conditions. Four supporting annexes are
included for pool specific arrangements and a fifth annex, an
Accession Agreement, is designed to facilitate procedures for bringing
new participants into the pool.
GUARDCON GuidelinesFollowing a period of close consultation with the International Group
of P&I Clubs concerning the practical application of the BIMCO
Guidelines on GUARDCON adopted in November 2013, a special
circular was published.
The Guidelines serve as a ‘health warning’ to those owners
contemplating using the GUARDCON contract for the provision of
guard services in the Gulf of Guinea. National law in the affected
countries prohibit foreign security guards from carrying firearms on
board merchant vessels within their territorial waters.
Effectively, it means the owner is required to employ local security
personnel (commonly marine police, or naval personnel) under strict
agreements, BIMCO said.
The Guidelines set out the main issues concerned with the
recruitment of security guards in the Gulf of Guinea and highlights a
number of caveats of which owners should be aware.
Clubs in the International Group of P&I Clubs have issued circulars
to all their members giving further advice regarding approved
amendments to GUARDCON for West African trades.
international expertise
Honeywell is a global partner providing complete solutions for any type of vessel.
Only Honeywell combines the high standards and global perspective of a world-class company with a presence close to you — speaking your language. We are dedicated to providing the most reliable technology for marine tank gauging operations. This includes automated and portable level gauging for cargo, ballast and service tank applications. Our turnkey solutions integrate operations, maintenance and support throughout the lifetime of your vessel or offshore application.
To learn more about Honeywell’s marine offerings visit www.honeywellmarine.com or www.tanksystem.com
® 2014 Honeywell International Inc. All rights reserved.
TO
TANKEROperator � June/July 201406
INDUSTRY - PROFILE - CONCORDIA MARITIME
Concordia Maritimechanges tack
Majority owned by the Stena Sphere grouping of companies, tanker owner Concordia
Maritime is changing its philosophy of locking in vessels on period charters to playing
the spot market.
Primarily set up to own units of the
Stena Group’s tanker fleet 30 years
ago, the listed company has moved
most of its vessels into the spot
market, since coming off their respective
timecharter commitments.
CEO Kim Ullman, who took up office on
1st January this year, explained that with
future prospects looking positive for the
products tanker sector, now was the time to
start following the spot market and not lock
into long term deals at today’s levels.
Today, Concordia Maritime owns 11
tankers. Included in the 11 are 10 P-MAX
types and one Suezmax. In addition there are
two IMO II type MRs under construction.
Thus far, nine of the 10 P-MAX tankers are
operating on the spot market with only one on
timecharter. The Suezmax is operated in the
Stena Sonangol Suezmax pool, also on the
spot market.
In 2010, all the P-MAXes were operating on
long term charters, but today that figure stands
at only one - Stena Paris - which is on charter
to Total.
The spot market P-MAX types are
commercially operated by Stena Bulk (three in
heavy products), Stena Weco (three in light
products/edible oils) and Shell Singapore (two
in light and heavy products). The entire fleet is
ice classed, either 1A, or 1B.
The rationale behind Concordia Maritime’s
thinking on the charter market going forward
is that there will be around 4-5% net increase
in the fleet size per year, given the current
orderbook, but demand is likely to rise by 5-
6% primarily on the back of increased
tonne/miles, as refining capacity moves to the
Middle East and Asia and the world’s
economic recovery gains momentum.
Explaining the difference, Concordia’s open
market vessels generated an average income of
around $16,000 per day, compared with
$13,000 per day TCE for the whole of 2013.
However, the spot market tends to be very
fragile in nature. This led to Concordia
Maritime and other analysts to believe that
activity in the newbuilding market over the
past 12 months indicated a future trend of
lower peaks in the spot market, compared with
the strong years 2007–2008. At the same time,
underlying demand will make the market’s
troughs shallower than those seen, for
example, in 2010–2012.
As well as in Europe, refineries have, or are
due to close in Australia, which gives the
products trades more opportunities for the
import of petrochemicals into areas where
refinery capacity has all but diminished.
Products will be exported from the newly built
refineries in the Middle East, Asia and India.
Vessel conversionsThree of the P-MAXes have been converted
into IMO III types, meaning that they can lift
edible and palm oils and two others have been
prepared for possible future conversions.
Ullman explained that the company would
keep a few P-MAXes in the DPP trades to
give greater flexibility in chartering options.
The P-MAXes were designed for a
deadweight of 65,200 tonnes on a relatively
shallow scantling draft of 13 m but have a
post-panamax beam of 40 m. They are
described as small Panamaxes, or large MRs,
having 30% more carrying capacity than an
average MR.
Ullman recently embarked on a road show
to explain the company’s new chartering
strategy and said that the results of the change
in philosophy would be analysed at the end of
this year before the company embarks on any
more acquisitions.
Concordia is somewhat unique in that the
company operates with only six employees,
based in Gothenburg, Zug and Bermuda. All
of the commercial operations are handled by
Concordia Maritime’s Kim Ullman.
Concordia Maritime and Stena Bulk have 10 IMO2MAX MRs on order at GSI.
DR
DOYR
OCKI
ING
WPDEELIKE Y
O YOD
TER?ATWAOU’RE IN OU FEEL
SPECIFIC
TENDERIN
TALUAATEVVA
TIONCAAT
NG
ION
ange a livro arT
MARINE PROJECT MANAGER
erience the simplicity
ve one-to-one web
M
way to get everything you want out of your next docking.dableoject Manager is the easy, effective and afforSimplicity itself, Marine Pr
mation into one place.ed inforequirall the rocess – quickly pullingough every step of the pres you thrspecific needs, it tak
ound superintendents’eveloped for mariners by mariners, and built arD
.so much easieres everythingoject Manager makd templates. Marine Proreadsheets and Wspr
xcelE,aditional way using paperr,get about managing vessel dockings the trorF
ol.under contreeping costse helps you plan and manage the job quickly, while ksoftwarur intuitiveOganising your next docking. ain of oron’t sink under the strD
of planning and managing your next docking.ocess eamlining the pration by stress and frustrave time, strS
� CEO- Kim Ullman, formerly CEO Stena LNG, executive vice president
Stena Bulk, managing director Stena Weco, among other posts within
the group.
Concordia Maritime fact file
The P-MAX Stena Perros seen leaving Gothenburg.
TO
Used hereThe world’s most chosen ENC service for ECDIS
To find out more about why AVCS is the world’s most chosen ENC service, visit www.admiralty.co.uk, or contact your ADMIRALTY Chart Agent.
› The most comprehensive global coverage available› 100% Official, certification provided› Operates on all ECDIS makes› Free unique ADMIRALTY Information Overlay feature
TANKEROperator � June/July 201410
INDUSTRY - PROFILE - ECDIS LTD
Six years of solidgrowth
UK-based training establishment ECDIS Ltd has come a long way sinceits formation in 2008.
About 75% of the company’s
turnover now emanates from
outside the UK and the company’s
original service, generic and type
specific ECDIS training, today only makes up
a small percentage of around 2-3% the
turnover, managing director Mark Broster
said.
He explained that the company now has two
distinct offerings- the training courses and a
simulator construction arm, which includes the
integration of all the sensors needed.
Starting operations with generic and type
specific ECDIS training, the company has
since diversified into bespoke navigation
simulator design and construction for clients
with specific needs, such as tug owners and
ports, as well as shipping companies wishing
to set up their own training facilities.
Simulation and ECDIS/e-Navigation
consultancy and auditing is also undertaken
when requested. One example of bespoke
simulation undertaken was for bridge wing
operations, as distinct from the central bridge
navigation centre.
Also offered is training on board ship where
an instructor will join a vessel and undertake
bridge team management and/or navigation
equipment training, such as with a type
specific ECDIS, plus unofficial navigation
team auditing. Sometimes it proves cheaper
for a company to undertake training on board
a vessel than send their navigators away for a
week to a training centre, Broster said.
He also said that he was looking to diversify
into other training areas, such as for
engineering disciplines, however, he admitted
that recruiting experienced people was proving
to be difficult.
Thus far, the company has undertaken more
than 100 major shipments of simulation
equipment, all of which were manufactured in
the UK. A 360 deg bridge simulator can be
tested, flattened down for transportation and
reconstructed on site in four days. Obviously
this does not include the simulator design and
original construction.
A 3D design department has been set up,
which is responsible for building bespoke
simulation models in great detail by area
mapping, gathering reference points, client
testing and the delivery process.
At its UK training centre (The Enav
Centre), located near Fareham, Hampshire,
which has been significantly expanded
recently, the company offers STCW training
courses, ranging from bespoke bridge team
management, crew resource management,
human element and command assessment.
HELM coveredFor example, MCA required bridge team
training courses at management level on
human element, leadership and management
(HELM) are offered. Other courses are also
offered, including bridge team management
and a bridge procedures and resource
management courses. A bespoke, company
specific bridge team management course is
also offered.
In addition, anti-piracy courses are available
in co-operation with Edson Tiger, which can
involve maritime security operatives
and simulation training packages.
Within the Enav centre are six mini-
simulators in cubicles for ECDIS
skills development, or interactive rule
of the road training, plus a full
mission bridge simulator and various
classrooms and instructor locations.
The reason for IMO mandated type
specific ECDIS training is that there
are around 36 manufacturers whose
equipment may vary considerably.
“While one set of basic instructions
would be the ideal approach to
operating an ECDIS, the horse has already
bolted, so we are here to pick up the pieces,”
the company said at its recent open day.
At the open day, speakers said that there
were up to 50% of Masters who did not
understand an ECDIS and tended to delegate
its use to a junior navigating officer. This is
more often than not an age situation, whereby
a younger person is more likely to be used to
electronic gadgets and not be phased when
faced with a digital navigation tool.
ECDIS benefits outlined by the company
included route planning, which should take
considerably less time when using a system
and the ability to define the safety contours,
that is setting limits on water depth, etc.
Richard North, the UK’s Marine Accident
Investigation Branch (MAIB) technical
manager, said that the accident bureau had
noted recurring themes of inadequate training,
primarily on ECDIS, plus complacency.
“There is an over reliance on aids to
navigation,” he said, mentioning ECDIS, radar
and AIS overlay in particular.
He called for the ECDIS manufacturer’s
handbook to be simplified, as they all tended
to be totally different. The menu structures
should also be standardised, as the various
operating menus were very convoluted and
type specific training was absolutely critical.
“There has to be a balance between
technology and looking out of the window,”
he stressed. The full mission bridge simulator.
The Enav centre includes a Transas ECDIS.
TO
INDUSTRY - LEGAL MATTERS - STS
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 11
Withholding vesselSTS approval
rejectedA recent decision by the Court of Appeal will provide reassurance to the tanker
transhipment trade.
The Court of Appeal ([2014] EWCA
Civ 713) considered the issue of
whether owners had acted
unreasonably in withholding their
consent for the use of two nominated VLCCs
in a ship to ship (STS) transfer of crude oil
from another VLCC at the port of Pasir
Gudang.
At first instance ([2013] EWHC 3678
(COMM)), the judge had found in favour of
the charterers, Arcadia Energy Pte Ltd
(represented by Clyde & Co), ruling that the
owners, Falkonera Shipping Co, had acted
unreasonably in withholding their approval.
The owners obtained permission to appeal
this judgment, the hearing of which took place
on 27th and 28th January, this year. Judgment
was handed down on 5th June, 2014 in which
the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court
decision in favour of charterers.
The facts behind this case were that
Falkonera Shipping had chartered the 1991-
built VLCC Falkonera and the VLCC storage
vessels to Arcadia Energy to perform a
voyage, carrying crude oil from Yemen to the
Far East. Charterers nominated two VLCC
storage vessels to receive the cargo at the
discharge port by way of STS transfer.
Owners withheld their approval of the
proposed VLCCs and the cargo therefore had
to be discharged into smaller vessels, which
shuttled between the Falkonera and the VLCC
storage vessels, causing delay. The owners
brought a claim for demurrage. However, the
charterers denied liability for demurrage and
counter claimed for additional expenses
incurred.
The charterparty contained a specific clause
covering STS transfers: "if charterers require a
ship-to-ship transfer operation.... then all
tankers and/or lightering barges to be used in
the transhipment/lightening shall be subject to
the prior approval of owners, which not to be
unreasonably withheld...all ship-to-ship
transfer operations shall be conducted in
accordance with the recommendations set out
in the latest edition of the ICS/OCIMF ship-to-
ship transfer guide (petroleum)."
The charter also contained the standard
clause 8.1 of BPVoy4: “Charterers shall have
the option of transferring the whole or part of
the cargo... to or from any other vessel
including, but not limited to, an ocean-going
vessel, barge and/or lighter... All transfers of
cargo to or from transfer vessels shall be
carried out in accordance with the
recommendations set out in the latest edition
of the ICS/OCIMF Ship to Ship Transfer
Guide (Petroleum).”
AppealThe owners submitted at first instance that
discharging a VLCC cargo by STS transfer
into another VLCC of materially identical size
is not a routine or standard operation and that
it therefore was not unreasonable for them to
refuse approval of the vessels nominated by
charterers, on the basis that they had concerns
about the STS operation itself.
The judge, however, found that their
withholding of approval was unreasonable.
The owners argued on appeal that their
submission was well founded and that the
judge had been wrong to reject it. The owners
also appealed on the grounds that the judge
had misconstrued the STS Lightering clause
by constraining owners' freedom beyond the
simple requirement that they should not
behave unreasonably.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the judge's
findings, in particular holding that:
� While there might be some force in the
proposition that a VLCC/VLCC transfer
was in a sense 'non-standard', it did not
follow that the owners had acted
reasonably in withholding their approval of
the VLCCs. Rather, it was necessary to
consider what particular reasons, if any,
there might be for owners to withhold their
approval.
� The right to transfer was a right to transfer
to any vessel, including a VLCC. The fact
that the proposed transfer could be
regarded as non-standard was not of itself a
reasonable ground for refusal. If that were
so, the charterers' right to perform such an
operation would be illusory. The owners
must be taken to have contractually
accepted such risks as are inevitably
attendant on any VLCC/VLCC transfer.
� What owners were required to approve was
the vessel and not the STS operation itself.
However, owners were not required to
consider the nominated vessel's
characteristics in a vacuum, but in the
context of the operation contemplated.
� The judge had been right to dismiss
owners' submission at first instance that the
OCIMF Guide, in its then form, made no
mention of VLCC/VLCC transfers, and that
such operations were therefore not
permitted by that publication. The owners
had (as the judge had found) "a settled
policy or at the lowest had reached a clear
position that they simply would not allow
such a transfer," supporting the inference
that owners' refusal was based on their
aversion to VLCC/VLCC transfers in
principle rather than any particular
characteristics of the transferee vessel.
� The judge was also right to find that the
owners would not be justified in
withholding approval of the vessels simply
because there was uncertainty as to whether
a suitable plan of operation could be
devised, or indeed whether there was
TANKEROperator � June/July 201412
INDUSTRY - LEGAL MATTERS - STS
sufficient time in which to plan any STS
operation. The required approval, as stated
above, related to the vessel and it was not
the function of the STS Lightering clause
to allow owners to vet the plans for the
transfer operation before deciding whether
to approve that vessel.
� The owners' specific criticisms of the
mooring plan did not make a withholding
of approval reasonable. The judge had
found that the proposed arrangement was
safe in principle and that the absence of
head lines and stern lines was not
something which gave any reason for
concern. Further, owners' concerns
regarding the vertical aspect of the mooring
lines were found to be without foundation.
The appeal was therefore dismissed. The
owners have indicated that they will be
applying to the Supreme Court for permission
to appeal.
CommentIt is worth noting that about a year after the
first instance trial, on 22nd November, 2013 a
new edition of the OCIMF Guide was
published containing a section dealing with
ship-to-ship transfers involving vessels of a
similar length. The Court of Appeal decided
not to admit the new edition in evidence, but it
was noted in a postscript to the judgment that
the Court of Appeal regarded it as
underscoring the judge's decision that the
previous version upon which owners had
relied, did not intend to outlaw VLCC/VLCC
transfers.
The following comment from the Clyde &
Co legal update of July 2013 following the
first instance decision remains applicable
following the Court of Appeal judgment:
‘The Court construed owners'
reasonableness by reference to both the charter
terms and the specific facts of the case.
Although each case will be fact-dependant,
this decision provides useful guidance as to
how the Court is likely to construe similar
contentions made by owners in the future. For
example, an argument that there is insufficient
time to plan the STS transfer as a basis for
refusal to permit a STS transfer is unlikely to
succeed as this is a factor relevant to the
operation itself rather than being relevant to
owners' right to approve the nominated
vessel.’
Owners should be aware that if they do not
act reasonably when considering charterers'
requests to perform STS transfers, they risk
finding themselves in breach of charter. This
case will give comfort to charterers that the
industry practice of VLCC to VLCC STS
transfers is not to be regarded as inherently
suspect, but must be properly considered by
owners on a case by case basis.
It also gives some guidance to owners about
the basis upon which they can and cannot
exercise their right to withhold approval. It
may, therefore, have wider implications for
other situations involving the requirement that
owners act reasonably in relation to their right
to withhold approval for operations that are
apparently permitted (subject only to such
approval) by the charterparty.
*A referewnce to this article apeared in arecent issue of Maritime Advocate and it alsoavailable on Clyde & Co's website. It waswritten by the law firm's Hatty Sumption andPeter Ward.
Fire Fighting & Safety Services:• CO² High / Low Pressure Systems• Fixed Dry Powder & Foam Systems• Gas, Fire & Smoke Detection Systems• Fire Extinguishers• Breathing Apparatus & Escape Sets• Medical Oxygen Resuscitators• Inflatable Lifejackets• Immersion suits and gas tight suits
Calibration Services:• UTI, various makers• Gas detectors, portable• Alcometer• Pressure Calibrators• Temperature Calibrators• Calibration Gas, refillable bottles• Calibration Gas, disposable bottles• Welding gas station
Marine Chemicals, Worldwide Supply Cargo Tank Cleaning Supplies
Ultra-High Tankcleaning Performance: - Ecosolut E-14 for Methanol Standard - Ecosolut E-24 for Vegoil removal
Lifeboat and Davit service approvals:
TO
INDUSTRY - DENMARK REPORT
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 13
Danish fleet expandson the back of
political investmentThe majority of Danish shipping companies appear to have weathered the
storm better than most.
Asympathetic government, flexible
labour relations a very active
maritime cluster involving most
of the segment players are just
some of the driving forces behind Denmark’s
success.
The development of new technology by
Danish equipment manufacturers and
designers has also helped to reduce vessel
operating costs at a time when impending new
regulations threaten to swamp the world’s
shipowners with debt.
The year 2009 was particularly bad for the
Danish shipping industry, however, by the
following year, most of the losses suffered had
been recouped. Record foreign exchange
earnings were posted in 2012 and 2013 of
DKK195 bill and DKK201 bill, respectively,
according to figures produced by the Danish
Shipowners’ Association (DSA).
Shipping industry figures amounted to just
shy of 20% of total Danish exports for those
years and more than 50% of Danish services
export. Thus, shipping continues to be the
largest export industry in Denmark by a large
margin, the DSA claimed.
The ability of Danish shipping companies to
sustain that position can be attributed to the
companies quickly reconfiguring their
business models for lower global growth and
increasing their cost effectiveness, even as the
economic growth did not pick up as forecast in
the second half of 2013 and rates remained at
historical lows across most segments.
This is proof that politics actually does work
and further underscores the need to ensure that
the conditions to conduct maritime business
for Danish shipping companies to maintain
their current position as some of the world’s
most effective shipping companies, the DSA
said.
The Danish merchant fleet has never been
larger. This also applies to the employment in
the industry, both at sea and onshore, in
Denmark, as well as abroad. Almost 80,000
people are working directly in the maritime
industry, nearly 30,000 of them within
shipping. With another 35,000 persons
working in related sectors, altogether 115,000
people are employed in the maritime cluster in
around 11,600 shipping related companies.
Companies relocatingDenmark has been reasonably successful in
attracting shipping companies to relocate to
the country, most notably Swedish tanker
concerns, especially in the chemical sector.
Third party shipmanagement concerns are also
being targeted worldwide and the Danes
recently welcomed Thome Ship Management,
who set up a subsidiary in Copenhagen and
has since signed up its first vessel- a Danish
owned LPG carrier newbuilding.
The establishment of a new business is
claimed to be quick, cost efficient and easy
with online incorporation available. In 2016,
the corporate tax rate will be lowered to 22%
and there are no residency requirements
needed for a company’s management, main
board, or supervisory board.
According to figures produced by the DSA,
After 17 years with NORDEN, of which for almost 10 years he was the as CEO, CarstenMortensen has resigned to take up the position of Group CEO at BW Group.NORDEN’s board said that it is in the process of finding a successor, however, Mortensenwill be available in the interim. He was head of NORDEN during a period when the company has developed into one of thelargest and best operated drycargo and product tanker companies in the world.Mortensen is also the chairman of the DSA.
TANKEROperator � June/July 201414
INDUSTRY - DENMARK REPORT
the size of the Danish flagged merchant fleet
increased from November 2013 to May 2014
in gt terms, however, in dwt, the total was
largely unchanged at 14.7 mill.
Denmark is ranked 16th in the world’s flag
state listing with 420 vessels. For direct
ownership, the country comes in at No 11 with
772 vessels and for vessel operating, Denmark
climbs to No 7 with 1,742 vessels.
The Danish newbuilding programme grew
significantly between November and May with
105 vessels on order in May, totalling 4.7 mill
dwt, compared to 83 in November. Danish
domiciled tanker owners accounted for 40
vessels of 1.44 mill dwt.
Some 25% of the Danish fleet is engaged in
the tanker trades. As of 1st May, 2014, Danish
companies controlled 168 tankers of 4.9 mill
dwt of which four were oil tankers, 93 product
tankers, 70 chemical tankers and one LPG
carrier, the DSA said.
SOx - major concernHowever, there is one major concern on the
horizon for Danish shipping and that is the
question of the SOx regulations. TankerOperator highlighted the DSA’s stance on the
matter in the May issue (see page 2), but since
then, the DSA chairman - NORDEN’s CEO
Carsten Mortensen - has added his weight to
the argument as the association’s annual
general meeting in May.
He said that the authorities were gambling
with both the environment and Danish
competitiveness if they fail to enforce the
upcoming sulphur standards. The rules
governing the use of shipping fuel containing
sulphur will be significantly tightened for
ships in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea from
1st January next year.
Unfortunately, it cannot be taken for granted
that enforcement of the reduction will go hand
in hand with the stringent rules, which will
increase the price of a single trip across the
Baltic Sea by an estimated DKK1 mill in low-
sulphur fuel costs. Only very few ships are
currently subjected to port state controls,
almost none of which include checking the
ships’ fuel, he warned.
‘The Danish shipping industry supports
ambitious environmental legislation, even
when it is financially costly. However, if ships
can continue sailing on traditional, sulphur-
containing fuel at virtually no risk and if the
penalty for discovery is a fine that in no way
matches the savings, some shipowners will
find it hard to resist temptation.
“This poses a huge competitive problem for
Danish shipping companies – and eliminates
the environmental benefit that was the whole
point of the legislation,’ he said.
He thought that Danish shipowners were
already losing long-term contract customers
who were choosing cheaper solutions that
deliberately neglect to take the future sulphur
requirements into account.
The DSA has long been in dialogue with
national and international decision-makers and
authorities. In April, together with other
organisations, such as the Danish Maritime
and the Danish Ecological Council, the
association went to the Danish Minister of the
Environment, Kirsten Brosbøl.
The Minister said that she understood the
industry’s concern and is committed to
working to ensure that the rules are adequately
enforced not only in Denmark but also in the
EU, where many national authorities were
giving the upcoming rules scant attention.
‘We appreciate the government’s
responsiveness when one of Denmark’s biggest
industries raises the alert. However, 2015 is
right around the corner and we are still
seriously concerned that the authorities have
failed to understand the magnitude of the
problem and its tangible consequences in terms
of the environment and Danish shipowners’
competitiveness,’ Mortensen concluded.
Trident Alliance, the shippingindustry initiative for robustenforcement of maritime sulphurregulations, is well on track forlaunch.
At a full-day meeting in Copenhagen on
28th May, hosted by Maersk Maritime
Technology and Wallenius Wilhelmsen
Logistics (WWL), representatives from a
dozen shipping companies negotiated the
basis for the new Trident Alliance.
The companies agreed that the Trident
Alliance will be a coalition of shipowners
and operators who share a common interest
in robust enforcement of maritime sulphur
regulation and are willing to collaborate to
help bring it about. The Alliance will partner
with other groups who share its interest in
robust enforcement, collaborating on
initiatives that support this objective.
The Trident Alliance principles and terms
of reference were agreed. The
representatives also agreed to work towards
the vision of a shipping industry with
effective enforcement of sulphur regulations
to ensure their intended effect is reached and
to eliminate the risk of distortion to the
competitive landscape.
In advance of the meeting, the initiative
received encouragement and support from
the EU's Commissioner for Climate Action,
Connie Hedegaard, along with the Danish
Minister for the Environment, Kirsten
Brosbøl.
"The meeting in Copenhagen was highly
constructive and we all agree that the Trident
Alliance is the right way to handle this
challenge. The public support and attention
we received really added urgency and
focused the discussion. None of us want to
see this evolve into a coffee club; this is an
initiative that will get the work done,”
said Roger Strevens, VP Environment
of WWL. �
Trident Alliance on track forlaunch
A pubic/private partnership hasbeen set up between the DSAand, the Danish MaritimeAuthority and Danish Maritime.
Called Danish Maritime Days, it is an event
that is due to take place between October 6th
-10th. During the week, a series of
conferences, briefings, exhibitions, symposia,
company visits, receptions and dinners will be
held.
At the heart of the week will be the Danish
Maritime Forum, which is due to take place
on 8th and 9th of October, which will bring
together maritime leaders, policy makers and
experts.
The objective will be to focus on the major
global trends affecting the maritime industry,
both short and long term, such as the
changing economic and geopolitical
landscape, new technologies, shifting energy
outlook, environmental pressures and
demographic developments, the organisers
said. �
Danish Maritime Days
TO
INDUSTRY - DENMARK REPORT
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 15
Northern Europeantanker capital
As mentioned many times in Tanker Operator Magazine, Denmark is the Northern
Hemisphere capital of tanker operations.
In Copenhagen alone, there are some of
the world’s most influential tanker
owners and operators, especially in the
products and chemical segments, while
LPG/Ethylene carrier operation is another
growing area.
Starting with Maersk Tankers', its fleet of
product tankers is managed under three
different brands: LR2s through the LR2 Pool
with TORM, Handys and MRs through 100%
managed Handytankers and intermediate
tankers through the Swedish tanker company,
Broström, which was acquired in 2009.
Despite selling 15 VLCCs to Euronav for
$980 mill en bloc, Maersk still operates
around 150 tankers through the various pools.
The APM Moller-Maersk subsidiary benefited
from improved market conditions during the
first quarter of this year and posted a profit of
$28 mill, compared with posting a loss of $15
mill in the same period of 2013. The tanker
concern also managed to slash administrative
costs by 17%.
During the quarter, Maersk Tankers firmed
up orders for two more MRs at Sungdong,
bringing the total up to six to be delivered in
2016-2017. The company said that its core
business from now on in the wet trades will
focus on the product tanker market, having
sold its LNG and LPG interests and now most
of the VLCCs.
Thus far, two VLCCs have been delivered
to Euronav and the remaining 13 are to be
handed over starting in the second quarter of
this year through December.
As reported in the May issue of TankerOperator (page 43), a couple of years ago,
Maersk Maritime Technology (MMT)
analysed every vessel owned, which resulted
in the VLCC Maersk Ingrid undergoing tests
to establish how to reduce the fuel bill.
The vessel was fitted with a combination of
so called fuel saving devices, including a VTI
turbocharger, propeller boss cap fins (PBCF)
and ducts. Following several months of trials,
both with and without the enhancements, a
Mewis Duct together with a PBCF was
calculated to give a 6.2% saving. With all the
enhancements fitted and various other
equipment re-configured, including the de-
rating of the main engine, an 8% fuel saving
was claimed.
With the VLCC sailing at an average of
12.5 knots, the return on investment was two
and a half years, MMT said. The in-house
consultancy also advised that it was more
efficient in fuel saving terms to operate a
VLCC at a steady 13 knots, rather than vary
the speed between say 12 and 14 knots.
Maersk Tankers has been incorporated into
a new APM division- Services and Other
Shipping - with a profit target of $500 mill by
2016. The new division is headed by Morten
Engelstoft who took up the reins as CEO on
1st January this year. He was also appointed
CEO of Maersk Tankers, replacing Hanne
Sorensen who was switched to CEO of
Damco, another APM group company.
Services & Other Shipping consists of
Damco, Maersk Tankers, Maersk Supply
Service and towage and salvage concern
Svitzer. Around 65-70% of the latter’s revenue
comes from harbour towage, although the
company said that the area of salvage
preparedness was growing along with pre-
aligned training, standby and response related
services.
Also promoting their core product tanker
businesses are NORDEN and TORM. Both
companies also have drybulk interests,
although TORM’s exposure to the drybulk
TANKEROperator � June/July 201416
INDUSTRY - DENMARK REPORT
trades has been reduced down the years.
Both operate pools, TORM with Maersk and
others, while NORDEN operates the Norient
Product Pool (NPP) with Interorient of
Cyprus, which is commercially operated from
Copenhagen.
NORDEN owns and operates both Handys
and MRs in NPP and similar to other tanker
operators, NPP is switching its chartering
policy to the spot market, as rates rise, rather
than be locked into long term deals. For 2013,
the company reported that its tanker earnings
were 7% above 12-month timecharter rates.
As at the end of last year, NORDEN owned
24 tankers and operated 46 in the range of
37,000 - 53,000 dwt. The vessels’ employment
and commercial operations have been
outsourced to NPP, which at any one time,
could operate up to 75-80 product tankers, of
which 80% are IMO II/III types.
In addition, NORDEN has another six
tankers on order - four in China and two in
South Korea - as part of the company’s $1 bill
plus investment programme, which consists of
37 vessels overall.
NPP’s charterers are roughly split between
oil majors (28%) and traders (72%). By using
the pool method, Lars Christensen, executive
vice president of NORDEN’s tanker division,
said market presence could be increased with a
greater coverage strategy, economy of scale
reduces operating costs, higher vessel
utilisation reduces ballast legs, plus the ability
a cost-effective alternative to retrofitting fixed
BWTS. In addition, Damen has developed the
world’s first mobile treatment vessel to operate
in ports and support ship de-ballasting
operations.
The first of these customised Damen barges,
fitted with the InvaSave units, is now under
construction for service in the Dutch ports of
Eemshaven and Delfzijl.
Gert Jan Oude Egberink, Damen manager
BWT, said: “We have been looking into what
we can do to help our customers regarding
BWT and finding alternatives for those owners
that may not want to retrofit a BWTS, perhaps
because their ships operate on fixed routes, or
their ships are too old and make the
investment in a system prohibitively
expensive. Ports may also need to provide
back-up, in case a ship’s on board treatment
systems fail.”
As well as avoiding considerable retrofit
investments, the mobile solution means ballast
water only needs treating at the point of
discharge, in contrast to fixed on board BWTS
that also need to treat ballast water at intake.
Damen said that it is able to deliver the
system as a separate mobile container, which
can be put on board, or moved around the port
on a truck. Each InvaSave container unit
handles 300 cu m per hour and is claimed to
be easy to scale up if required by using
multiple container units.
The system has been tested in the
challenging waters of the Wadden Sea and the
IJsselmeer in the Netherlands and is currently
being certified by the Dutch flag state.
“This is all in-house technology and is very
simple to use – essentially it is a plug & play
system in one container,” Oude Egberink
continued. “Vessels only need to have a deck
connection. Using this mobile treatment unit,
owners and operators will be fully compliant
with both the IMO and US regulations.”
He told Tanker Operator; “Our InvaSave
mobile ballast water discharge technology is
aimed at all vessel types that need to comply
with Ballast Water Management regulations.
We can scale up the capacity to match the
need of tankers.”
Retrofit solutionIn addition to its own mobile BWTS, Damen
can also advise on type-approved BWTS for on
board retrofitting, as well as retrofit
engineering and installation. Damen Shiprepair
& Conversion has 16 repair and conversion
yard facilities with 40 drydocks worldwide.
Damen can undertake the on board survey,
3D scans, onsite surveying and pre-
engineering, the integration plan, purchasing,
manufacture the piping, make all the
preparations, do the installation and
commissioning, carry out the trials, plus
provide training and supply the BW
management plan.
“If vessels are coming in for their special
survey when the system has to be installed, we
can do both things at once, providing a turnkey
solution,” Oude Egberink said. “We can install
Damen selected technology, or our customer’s
choice of unit at a Damen, or a non-Damen
yard, or afloat. I think there is no other
company that has this one-stop-shop, with both
the yard and engineering capacity and a vast
knowledge of shipbuilding. We can be the
BWT total solution provider and our customers
have a trusted partner and peace of mind.
“Our One Stop Retrofit Service is also aimed
at tankers. Pending IMO BWMC ratification,
there have not been so many BWT refits in the
market yet. But with the deadlines of USCG
approaching in 2016, many operators are
starting to make their reparations,” he told
Tanker Operator.TO
WE UNDERSTANDBALLAST WATER TREATMENT
Severn Trent De Nora has more than 35 years of leadership and expertise in providing electrolytic disinfection treatment solutions. Setting new standards with the Type-Approved BALPURE® ballast water treatment system, we have created a simple, reliable and flexible solution for both retrofits and newbuilds.
– Easy to install– Easy to operate – Non-corrosive – Operator safe– Suitable for hazardous cargo area installations– Surpasses IMO D-2 standards by ten-fold
To learn why BALPURE is the right ballast water treatment solution for you,contact [email protected] or visit www.balpure.com
Visit us at SMM 2014, Hamburg, Germany, 08–12 September, stand A1.306
USCG CERTIFIED ALTERNATE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (AMS)
TANKEROperator � June/July 201428
TECHNOLOGY - BALLAST WATER TREATMENT
BWTS – potentialeffect on ballast tank
coatings Hempel has circulated an open letter on the possible effect of ballast water management
systems (BWMS) on ballast tank coatings.
Numerous BWMS are being
developed and marketed to meet
the future demands for such
systems according to the BWM
Convention.
Today more than 70 different systems are
commercially available, or under development.
Every BWMS must be type approved by the
flag state (G8 approval process) and further, in
case the system makes use of an ‘active
substance’, an additional approval procedure
(G9 approval process) is to be followed,
whereby the approval is granted by IMO.
The methods for achieving the required
quality of the treatment of the ballast water
differ among the systems and often a
combination of methods is used.
It is virtually impossible for paint
manufacturers to readily assess the possible
influence of all such systems – particularly
those involving chemicals – on the ballast tank
coating systems without detailed information
and maybe testing of each individual BWMS.
The general anticipation, however, is:
� BWMS relying solely on mechanical
treatment (physical separation)
technologies will not adversely affect the
installed ballast tank coating. ·
� BWMS relying on physical treatment
technologies should not adversely affect the
ballast tank coating.
� BWMS using UV light might produce, eg,
ozone, which rapidly reacts with seawater
compounds, or other organic matter. Such
systems may require testing to fully assess
their eventual influence on ballast tank
coating systems.
� BWMS using (generation and) addition of
chemicals to the ballast tank water in
general should be tested for assessing the
compatibility with the ballast tank coating
system.
It is the responsibility of the BWMS
manufacturer to assess the compatibility
between the system and the ballast tank
coating.
Information assisting such assessment is
available in the public domain, but until
recently there was no commonly accepted way
of assessing the potential influence of BWMS
on ballast tank coatings by testing.
Standard testThis changed after MEPC 66 (31st March-4th
Apr 2014), where a standardised test
procedure was agreed with a view to be
employed for BWMS type approvals.
Hempel has carried out such testing of its
ballast tank coatings especially against the
most commonly used active chemical in G9
systems - hypochlorite.
During this testing,
which comprised constant
immersion in hypochlorite
treated seawater at 30 deg
C with weekly addition of
freshly prepared
hypochlorite, damage to
the coating in way of rust,
blister formation,
bleaching, or decrease in
hardness, was not
observed at concentrations
up to 10 ppm of free
chlorine.
Hempel therefore
recognises that BWMS
working solely with
chlorine as an active
ingredient with maximum
concentration of 10 ppm of
free chlorine can be
accepted without further
need for testing of
potential effect on ballast
tank coatings.
This is also in
accordance with IMO
MEPC 64/INF.21
submitted by the
International Paint and
Printing Ink Council
(IPPIC).
Further information about the effect in
ballast tank coating of BWMS using other
active ingredients than chlorine and/or using
chlorine in higher concentrations than 10 ppm
must be provided by the BWMS supplier and
may require further testing according to the
above mentioned agreed test procedures for
proper assessment of the compatibility
between the BWMS and the ballast tank
coating system.
Hempel is available for advising and/or
assisting in carrying out such testing, the paint
manufacturer said. TO
International Registries (U.K.) Limited�������������� � ������ ����������������������������������������
For shipowners and operators, maintaining fuel quality at a time of tightening regulation
requires a clear understanding of the challenges.*
It’s a hard but inescapable fact that the
quality of marine fuel used across the
world’s shipping fleet has been
deteriorating over many years. This has
largely come about as a result of changes to
the refining process, which have had a serious
impact on fuel quality and consistency.
At the same time, environmental legislation
designed to reduce sulphur emissions is
presenting technical challenges to bunker
suppliers and owners, since both low sulphur
residual fuels and ultra-low sulphur distillates
can exhibit specific problems, which can
potentially cause problems in operation.
Taken together, these changes will have a
profound impact over the next 10 to 15 years
as refinery output shifts towards new fuels and
the next wave of pollution regulations begins
to bite.
Across the maritime industry, the pressure to
increase efficiency, reduce operating costs and
limit environmental impact is bringing vessel
speeds down. The effect of increased costs for
the low sulphur fuels needed to operate in the
ECAs is being felt at the same time as freight
rates remain low for many operators, forcing
the requirement to adopt slow steaming
procedures.
It is now widely understood that slow
steaming can reduce the amount of fuel
consumed during a voyage and at the same
time reduce carbon emissions significantly. A
speed reduction of 20% can lead to more than
30% cost saving on the fuel used and bring a
similar reduction in the amount of CO2
emitted.
Yet against these positives, the primary
disadvantage associated with slow steaming is
that ships’ engines were not always designed to
operate under these conditions for long
periods. The result can be poor combustion in
the engine at low loads, which can reduce
efficiency through a build-up of soot deposits
in the engine and exhaust gas economiser.
Such problems are exacerbated by the
overall decline in fuel quality. When shipping
companies buy fuel from bunker suppliers, the
product they receive is generally a blend of
residual fuels and various cutter stocks. The
suppliers must meet the owner’s specification
and ISO standards for bunker fuel and as long
as the product meets the agreed specifications,
their contractual obligation has been met.
These specifications, however, are not a good
guide to the real quality of the fuel when
presented to the engine or boiler for
combustion.
An unstable blend Because low sulphur residual fuels are today
mostly blended to specification from a residual
source that has gone through a secondary
conversion in a refinery, the fuel’s stability is
in many cases very poor.
A particular problem is the increased
severity of the viscosity-breaking process used
by petroleum refiners to meet the increasing
demand for automotive and aviation fuels. The
blending process can cause severe instability
problems in the fuel, which may not be
apparent immediately, but which can cause
severe problems with asphaltenic sludge in
tanks, filters and from the purifier.
The accepted, mechanical means of treating
fuels on board ship are by settling, separation
and filtration, all of which have a limited
physical effect on fuel combustibility. Fuel
problems that begin in the refining process can
be aggravated during shipping and blending.
For owners who want to protect their
investments, many of these issues can be
solved by chemical treatment, which has
proven to be an economic solution to
improving the quality of the fuel and improve
its properties to a reliable level.
Fuel treatment chemicals can be divided into
three categories, pre-combustion, combustion
and post-combustion additives. The types of
additives available today are sometimes
combinations of these categories, designed to
solve the different problems end users are
experiencing.
The issues discussed above relating to
residual fuel will continue to apply on a global
basis, even after the global sulphur limit drops
to 0.5% in either 2020, or 2025. However,
inside the ECAs, where the sulphur content of
the fuel used can be no more than 0.1% after
1st January, 2015, a more radical change will
take place. Owners face the choice of
WSS’ Jonas Östlund.
TANKEROperator � June/July 201430
TECHNOLOGY - EMISSIONS - FUEL QUALITY
complying with the ECA rules through the use
of distillate fuels, or alternative abatement
methods, such as sulphur scrubbers.
Quality problems when using distillate fuels
are fundamentally different from those of
residual fuels and focus around lubricity,
storage stability and microbial contamination.
Lubricity problems are most likely to happen
in the fuels with a lower sulphur content than
0.1%.
The reduction of sulphur is often blamed for
the problems of lubricity with modern fuels.
But this is not entirely true, as the same
refining process during which sulphur is
removed also removes other natural lubrication
components. This means that fuels with similar
sulphur levels can have different lubrication
properties and sulphur level is not always a
safe indicator for lubricity properties of a fuel.
Most distillate fuels are vulnerable to
degradation through a range of reactions. The
results of this degradation can include colour
change, as well as gum and sediment
formation. These can have a severe effect on
quality during long term storage and can also
induce corrosion of the fuel system.
What is not widely known is that distillate
fuel is treated by the refinery with a stabiliser
to protect it against deterioration for six
months. When the six months have elapsed, the
fuel is more or less unprotected from further
deterioration. Owners should consider carefully
the addition of a multi-function fuel stabiliser
during bunkering, which will add protection
against oxidation, sedimentation, colour change
and corrosion.
Practical solutions Understanding marine fuels at a time when
their regulation and performance are subject to
so much change is an additional challenge to
shipowners already facing higher costs and
pressure to slow steam in order to maximise
earnings.
Given the variable quality of residual fuels
today and the lubricity and storage issues
around low sulphur distillate fuels, there is a
clear need for regular testing and treatment to
ensure that maximum value can be extracted
from the fuel. And it is critical to understand
that many of the problems encountered on
board ship are not related to operation of the
engines, but to the fuels used. This clearly
underlines the need for fuel treatment to be
integrated into the vessel’s maintenance
schedules.
Building on 30 years’ of experience
delivering fuel treatments to the maritime
industry, Wilhelmsen Ships Service’s (WSS)
Unitor FuelPower range applies the most
advanced technologies to make certain today’s
fuels can be used with confidence, regardless
of fuel stability, or slow steaming.
The range for use with residual fuels
includes FuelPower Demulsifier, an updated
demulsifier designed to cope with high water
levels in oil emulsions; FuelPower Conditioner,
a new treatment for unstable and incompatible
fuels, which improves fuel reliability and
FuelPower SlowSteam, a low dosage
combustion enhancer and stabiliser.
To help manage the unique challenges of
distillates effectively, WSS has also developed
a new product range, Unitor
DieselPower, specifically for
this fuel type. A series of
advanced formulations helps to
keep fuels bright, stable and
trouble-free, with fewer
problems resulting in lower
costs in operation.
Summing up, Östlund said
that distillates behaved
completely differently to HFO
and the latter’s quality was
changing for the worse. He
thought that there were four
markets drivers -
� Price, which is increasing
and will
continue to do so.
� Quality, which is declining.
� Regulations, which have
added extra
pressure on
shipowners/operators.
� Market rates - owners and
operators are
earning less money.
And then there is the question
of uncertainty of supply of
distillates and low sulphur
fuels. In total only about 1.8%
of the world’s refined products is used for the
marine industry. Will the refiners be interested
in producing a commodity in low demand,
compared with other products? This could lead
to more use of biofuels, which bring there own
problems to the table.
*This article was taken from a paper writtenby Jonas Östlund, product marketing managerfuel, product management, WSS and from arecent presentation he gave in London.
As well as introducing its fueltreatment offering, WSS alsounveiled its new integratedwelding safety products andservices at this year’sPosidonia exhibition.
Combining the latest Unitor welding
equipment with professional support from
product specialists and on board welding
safety inspections, WSS’ enhanced
welding solutions are perfectly in tune
with the current challenges customers face
while maintaining their vessels, the
company claimed.
Danny Ingemann, business director for
marine products outlined the benefits.
“Maintenance and repair welding on board
ships represents a huge challenge for crew,
as they may have little preparation time,
lack suitable modern equipment and work
in confined, often dangerous spaces.
“As a provider of welding solutions we
can build closer relationships with
customers by offering our equipment as
packages and becoming more involved
with safety inspections,”he concluded. �
Welding safety products
TO
THE FOUNDATION FOR SAFETY OF NAVIGATION
AND ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION
SHIP HANDLING RESEARCH
AND TRAINING CENTRE
ILAWA
Our Training Centre offers you:
SPECIALIZED COURSES IN HANDLING OF
LARGE TANKERS!• Two fully equipped manned models representing
With the countdown to SOx and NOx limits well and truly on, there are
many questions that shipowners are constantly asking.
GAS FUELS USED
Source: MAN Diesel & Turbo.
Gas fuel Supply conditions Supply pressure Supply temperature
LNG NG Gas 300 bar 45 +/- 10 deg CMethane
LEG ethane Gas 600 bar 45 +/- 10 deg C
LPG Liquid 30-40 bar 35 +/- 25 deg C
Ethanol Liquid 8-10 bar 35 +/- 25 deg C
Methanol Liquid 8-10 bar 35+/- 25 deg C
TANKEROperator � June/July 201432
TECHNOLOGY - EMISSIONS - ENGINES
and supply system. Basically, the ME-GI
engine has a high pressure supply system, a
common rail type injection system, a
necessary injection pressure of 300 bar
(methane) and 600 bar (ethane), both ethane
and methane can be used as fuel.
As for the ME-LGI types, these act on low
pressure supply systems, an ME type
injection, necessary injection pressure of 500-
600 bar and they are suitable for methanol,
ethanol, LPG, or DME, as fuel.
ME-LGI fuel properties need to be of a
low viscosity, hence the need to lubricate the
moving parts, the flash point must be below
60 deg C, at atmospheric conditions, LPG
and DME is in the gas phase, while the
injected volume is 60% higher with LPG
when compared to diesel fuel.
Finally, Groene said that even with SOx
and NOx limitations, heavy fuel will not go
away. “Diesel engines will prevail,” he
stressed.
New engines developedThis year, MDT will continue its engine
programme evolution with the new ME-C
engines - the G45ME-C9 and G40ME-C9
types. The liquid gas injection (LGI) engine
type will also be introduced. A new
designation ‘.5’ will be given to all of the
engine types.
As for monitoring engine performance,
MDT has introduced standardised technical
initiatives, which at times are ignored, but are
included in the technical specifications given
to the shipyard. These include:
� PMI autotuning.
� Bearing wear monitoring.
� Main bearing temperature monitoring.
� Water in oil monitoring.
� Liner wall temperature monitoring.
Addressing the problem of cold corrosion,
Groene said that this had occurred primarily
at low speed operations in combination with
high fuel efficiency optimising methods. As
the piston moves down during, or after
combustion, the acid is exposed and attacks
the liner surface. As a result, the cylinder
liner can become worn out after a few
thousand hours.
Not sufficientBN 100 luboils were recommended for newer
engines, as the mid-range luboils were
deemed not sufficient to cope with this threat.
One of the procedures for early detection of
cold corrosion is by establishing the
correlation between the cylinder luboil feed
rate, the residual BN in the drain oil and wear
particles, ie iron, ferrous, etc, in the drain oil.
Diesel engineswill prevail.
“
”Ole Groene, MDT
TO
TECHNOLOGY - EMISSIONS - ENGINES
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 33
Last year, Vancouver-basedWaterfront Shipping confirmedthat its methanol carrier projectinvolving a series of 50,000 dwtmethanol carriers, will each bepowered by an MAN B&W ME-LGImain engine running onmethanol.
A Letter of Intent between the two parties
was signed in July last year. MDT officially
designated the ME-LGI engine as ME-B9.3-
LGI.
At the time, Waterfront reported that it was
behind the 2+1 × 6G50ME-LGI engines
ordered by Westfal-Larsen, the 2+1 ×
7S50ME-B9.3-LGI by Mitsui OSK Lines
(MOL), and the 1+1+1 × 6G50ME-LGI
engines with Marinvest/Skagerack Invest.
Hyundai Mipo Dockyard (HMD) will
build the Westfal-Larsen and
Marinvest/Skagerack Invest vessels, while
HHI-EMD, Hyundai Heavy Industries’
engine and machinery division, will construct
the engines. For the MOL contract, Minami
Nippon Shipbuilding will construct the
newbuildings, while Mitsui Engineering &
Shipbuilding (MES) will build the engines.
MDT announced the development of a new
MAN B&W ME-LGI dual fuel engine on 1st
July, 2013. The engine manufacturer
subsequently signed a Letter of Intent – less
than two weeks later – with Vancouver-based
Waterfront Shipping for the use of ME-LGI
engines on board its methanol carriers. The
engines will eventually run on 95%
methanol, ignited by 5% pilot oil.
“Methanol is a sulphur-free fuel and
provides many environmental and clean-
burning benefits. In using methanol-based
marine fuel, we can reduce emissions and
fuel costs at the same time,” said Jone
Hognestad, president, Waterfront Shipping, at
the time of the signing of the Letter of Intent.
A Mitsui 4-cylinder engines was on test in
April of this year at the manufacturer’s
facility in Japan and a field test of one
cylinder on an S50ME-B8/9 engine was
successfully completed the same month.
MDT said that the new engine would be
launched early next year.
The first ME-GI engines ordered will be
fitted on board US shipping company,
TOTE’s two containerships ordered at
NASSCO. The company also has three more
options at the San Diego yard. The vessels
will each be powered by 8L70ME-GI dual-
fuel gas-powered engines. �
Gas engine orders confirmed
TANKEROperator � June/July 201434
TECHNOLOGY - SHIPREPAIR / MAINTENANCE
Improving ship
operating efficiencyQuantifying true ship performance is a very complex, if not impossible task.*
Ships are designed, built and
operated to carry cargo as
efficiently as possible. However,
the desired level of efficiency is
often difficult to achieve during a ship’s
operating life.
The exact causes of the efficiency losses
that occur may be difficult to pinpoint, as there
are numerous contributing factors interacting
with each other.
Traditional methods of monitoring
performance largely rely on data entered in the
ship’s deck and engine logs by officers on
watch. However, these recordings of ship
speed, horsepower, propeller rev/min, slip and
fuel consumption only indicate significant
efficiency losses due to hull and propeller
fouling when there is a significant increase in
propeller slip, or daily fuel consumption.
Since vessel resistance from bad weather, or
deeper drafts can also cause increased power
and fuel consumption, it can be difficult to
isolate the cause of reduced efficiency and to
correct it through hull cleaning, propeller
polishing, or engine tuning.
Today, a performance monitoring system
has to identify the degradation in ship
efficiency and translate this trend or
performance metrics into recommendations for
improving overall fuel efficiency. This paper
attempts to explain some of the issues
involved in developing such a system.
A ship is subjected to wind, waves and
current while in transit. The engine converts
the fuel into propeller torque, which produces
thrust to overcome the resistances and
maintain desired speed. The resistance can
come from the environment as well as rudder
movements and hull and propeller fouling.
The condition of the engine, hull and propeller
can deteriorate over time, thereby requiring
increased power to maintain the same speed.
All these factors, plus the effects of
changing environmental and loading
conditions (draft and trim) are interrelated,
making it difficult to isolate the causes.
Before addressing the question of how to
improve ship efficiency, we need to properly
define efficiency and establish a reasonable
benchmark as the basis for comparison.
Efficiency can be loosely defined as “useful
work done per energy unit consumed.” In
naval architecture, we have:
� Engine efficiency = delivered
HP/fuel consumed.
� Propeller efficiency = thrust HP/delivered
HP.
� Hull Efficiency = effective HP/ thrust HP.
� Propulsive efficiency = engine x propeller
x hull.
During the ship design phase, these
efficiencies are estimated and optimised for a
specific size, service speed and vessel type in
order to configure the size and design of both
engine and propeller. The performance of the
entire ship system is then confirmed during
sea trials and accepted by the shipowner.
SFOC unchangedDuring actual ship operation and loading, the
weather can differ significantly from the calm
and controlled conditions of the sea trials.
However, the specific fuel consumption at
various power outputs should not change
compared to the test results, unless the engine
is out of tune, or the quality and calorific
value of the fuel are in question. As such,
specific fuel consumption is a good metric to
use in detecting degradations in engine
efficiency.
On the other hand, trying to separate the
effects of hull fouling, propeller roughness,
wind, waves, and draft/trim on ship
performance requires extensive
instrumentation. A more cost-effective
approach is to take an aggregate measurement
and compare it with a series of established
benchmarks based on model tests, theoretical
calculations or past records taken at the time
when the hull was clean.
In this case it becomes more interesting to
detect the trends over time rather than the
quantitative values. We now introduce the
following operational efficiency benchmark:
Operational efficiency = actual tonnes permile/baseline tonnes per mile
Operational efficiency is an aggregate
measure of ship performance at a certain speed
and draft/trim, corrected for wind, waves, and
current. Plotting the same metric across the
entire speed range and loading conditions over
time would show the trend in performance
degradation since hull fouling would affect the
ship performance under all these conditions.
To evaluate the effectiveness of weather
routing and speed management in minimising
fuel consumption, we introduce the voyage
efficiency benchmark:
Voyage efficiency = actualconsumed/optimal consumed for the sameloading and schedule.Voyage efficiency is another aggregate
measure of ship performance for a particular
passage. Since weather, current, ship loading
conditions and schedule requirements are
different for each passage, it is necessary to
normalise the performance to the best scenario
one could achieve for the same departure and
arrival times, as well as loading and
environmental conditions during the same
period.
Combining customised ship performance
models with optimisation software, such as
Jeppesen’s Voyage and Vessel Optimization
Solution (VVOS), can help achieve optimised
voyage performance.
*This article was written by Dr Henry Chenwho is a Boeing Associate Technology Fellow,currently employed as chief naval architect atJeppesen Marine. He was formerly thefounder and CEO of Ocean System. whichBoeing/Jeppesen acquired in 2008.
TO
TECHNOLOGY - SHIPREPAIR / MAINTENANCE
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 35
During the past few months, MANDiesel & Turbo’s (MDT) PrimeServhead of retrofits and upgradesChristian Ludwig and Jan Jensen,head of retrofit sales, have givenpresentations at different times onthe upgrading possibilities on MDTdiesel engines to save fuel.
For example, fuel savings of between 10-
15% can be made by de-rating the engine, 6%
by refitting a more efficient propeller, 4% by
load load tuning and 2% by using a pressure
mean indicator (PMI) auto tuning device. The
alpha lubricator could also be upgraded. A one
bar drop in pressure could equal between 0.2
and 0.25 g/kWh fuel loss.
PrimeServ has developed what it calls the
EcoCam, which is a low load tuning method for
engines fitted with one turbocharger, aimed at
achieving flexible exhaust valve timing. It is
claimed to be easy to install and easy to
operate. Its operating range is between 10% and
60% of the load.
It is available for MDT’s S50MC-C and
S60MC-C engines and the intention is to roll
the EcoCam out for other engine types at a later
date, MDT said. Testing on an 6S50MC-C8.1
engine at Mitsui’s engine test bed showed that a
payback time of between 6,000 and 12,000
running hours can be expected and savings of
more than 6 g/kWh SFOC for 10% and around
1.75 g/kWh at 60% load
can be achieved.
Another fuel saving
device tested on an
S50MC-C type engine in
Japan in May was a fuel
atomiser optimisation
programme for MDT
engine designs. This is
claimed to be NOx
compliant by class and is
compatible with the
combustion chamber and
the atomisers can be
delivered for the full load
range.
It is scheduled to be
ready for delivery for
selected S50MC/MC-C
engines by the third
quarter of this year.
Following this roll out, it
is expected to be ready
for other engine types by
the fourth quarter of
2014.
The savings claimed
are around 3-4 g/kWh,
while low load atomisers
can deliver savings of
between 2-3 g/kWh. An
atomiser is claimed to be a simple and low cost
retrofit product enabling the crew to undertake
the work involved.
Engine de-ratingAs mentioned on page 45 of the May issue of
Tanker Operator, de-rating the engine can offer
significant savings, but at a cost of €1.3 mill
and once accomplished, the conversion is very
difficult to reverse. The savings can be
increased by the fitting of a Kappel type
propeller, which comes in all sizes and in both
fixed and controllable pitch mode, MDT said.
Various ship type specific studies have been
undertaken, both for optimised and low speed
solutions.
ME engines can also be retrofitted to ME-GI
types. MDT has evaluated indicative costs for
ME-C and MC- C engines ranging from 50
bore to 98 bore (see table above) and has given
examples of the cost breakdown in percentage
terms. By far the largest cost component is the
shipyard work, including the installation, which
will total around 40% of the overall cost
involved.
Making up 25% each are the project
management and the fuel gas supply system,
while the engine retrofit will take up the
remaining 10%.
A major project currently underway is the
retrofitting QatarGas STASCO-managed Q-
MAX LNGCs’ twin 7S70ME-C type engines.
The engines are being replaced by ME-GI
types. The project started around three years
ago as a pilot ABS/MDT scheme.
Retrofitting and upgrading to save fuel
Engine type Components Installation
6S50ME/ME-C 0.83 0.30
6S50MC/MC-C 1.80 0.50
6S60ME/ME-C 0.83 0.30
6S60MC/MC-C 1.90 0.50
6S70ME/ME-C 0.87 0.30
6S70MC/MC-C 1.96 0.50
6K80ME/ME-C 1.12 0.30
6K80MC/MC-C 1.63 0.50
6S90ME/ME-C 1.06 0.30
6S90MC/MC-C 1.75 0.50
12K98ME/ME-C 2.00 0.60
12K98MC/MC-C 3.60 1.00
Indicative prices for engine modifications (Eur mill)
Source:MDT.
TO
Source: MDT.
TANKEROperator � June/July 201436
TECHNOLOGY - EFFICIENCY
SeaEngine will join SeaTrim,
SeaPlanner, SeaTrend and
SeaLogger later this year.
SeaEngine’s performance
monitoring trials are currently underway, the
company said.
At present, each of the modules are being
marketed as an independent system, however,
from this summer, the suite will be offered as
one integrated unit, as well as standalone
software.
SeaEngine is a tool for monitoring and
improving the performance of 2 - and 4 -
stroke engines on board vessels. It includes an
on board data collection software guiding the
engineers through an effective performance test
protocol, taking all the relevant parameters for
engine performance into account.
After submitting the relevant parameters,
data is checked and analysed automatically and
then the performance test results are made
available from a web reporting portal from
where the those ashore can monitor the
performance of each vessel’s engines in detail,
eg a slowly deteriorating performance like
turbocharger efficiency can be traced
In addition to the web reports, a full review
of the engine condition with suggestions for
additional adjustments, or improvements, is
provided quarterly by FORCE Technology’s
team of engine experts.
SeaEngine is currently being tested on board
12 vessels representing different vessel types.
It was developed within a project called EEOS
(Energy Efficient Operation of Ships), which is
partially funded by The Danish Maritime Fund.
This project combines FORCE Technology’s
experience of on board system software
development, theoretical research from the
Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and
operational experience from a group of the
leading Danish shipowners, including
Lauritzen Bulkers, Evergas and Uni-Tankers.
The EEOS project is still ongoing and as an
end product, an integrated, holistic ship
performance monitoring and optimisation
decision support tool -SeaSuite - will be
launched later this year.
SeaSuite will include modules for voyage
optimisation (SeaPlanner), trim optimisation
(SeaTrim), hull and propeller performance
(SeaTrend), the engine performance
(SeaEngine) and a performance data logging
system (SeaLogger).
FORCE
Technology said
that only the latest
engine types are
fitted with
monitoring
systems, so the
majority are not
fitted with
technology, such
as SeaEngine,
thus far.
Today, more
than 500 ships are
sailing with, or
have ordered one,
or more of the
ship performance
systems, the company claimed.
The company is a firm believer that
standalone systems will soon be a thing of the
past. The trend going forward is for increased
data sharing and the utilisation of knowledge
gained from other applications, due to
increasing fuel prices and the technical
advances now becoming available.
The most obvious advantage of data
integration is that the customers is the
enhanced and automated use of cross-platform
data exchange. Officers will avoid having to
note, evaluate ad transfer data manually
between separate systems, as with integration,
this will happen automatically.
Data capturing will have a flexible, but most
often higher, degree of automation built in,
thus making the data feed more consistent,
more frequent and less dependent on the
quality of interpretation by individuals, the
company said in a recent article.
Some 65-70% of the company’s business
now involves retrofitting and optimisation. One
example is FORCE Technology’s co-operative
venture with Becker Marine for the Mewis
Duct development. The company is now the
major test bed for the system. Thus far, about
15 projects have been tested.
The scope of the test incorporates two
phases -
� Optimisation of the pre-swirl fin system
(definition of the final setting angle).
� Subsequent full speed range comparison of
the propulsive performance against the base
case - vessel without a duct fitted.
Thus the results serve as a basis for
confirmation of the predicted power saving
effect.
Based on the above, FORCE Technology
documented the predicted power savings of an
average of 5-6%. A few projects were also
tested in full scale sea conditions both with
and without a duct fitted to verify the power
savings.
On board monitoringand performance
toolsCopenhagen-based FORCE Technology’s suite of fuel saving on board systems is soon tobe increased to five. These modules were designed to maximise fuel efficiency and thus
reduce CO2 emissions.
TOTurbocharger efficiency graph. Source: FORCE Technology.
TECHNOLOGY - TANK SERVICING
June/July 2014 � TANKEROperator 37
Under the terms of this new
legislation, which came into force
in July 2013, all vessels carrying
hazardous cargoes are required to
be fitted with a secondary pressure valve
system to provide backup in the event of a
failure in primary valves to avoid cargo
overpressure.
The consequences of cargo overpressure are
serious. Changes in air pressures during
loading, or unloading, or variations in the
temperature of gases, or vapours, while at sea
can compromise the integrity of the tank,
causing extensive and costly damage. In
addition, there is a risk of fire, or pollution,
where breaches lead to dangerous gases, or
liquids, being released.
The recognition of pressure sensor and alarm
systems, such as PSM’s VentSafe solution, as
an alternative means of protecting cargo tanks
from overpressure offers a fast and cost-
effective alternative for shipowners who need
to modify their vessels to comply with the new
legislation.
Meeting the requirements of both the latest
guidance and the original Solas II regulations
(SOLAS II-2/59.1 1998), PSM’s ict 1000
pressure transmitters offer an economical
retrofit solution as part of the end to end
VentSafe pressure measurement system.
In the UAE, PSM has already assisted one
shipowner to conform with the new
regulations, working in partnership with its
locally-based accredited sales and engineering
partner Tile Marine. Following an initial
survey carried out on an Aframax locally by
Tile Marine, PSM was asked to design and
supply a complete system. An end-to-end
project, including installation, commissioning
and testing, the work was completed in
February of this year.
An initial survey was carried out to establish
the precise mechanical and electrical
requirements for monitoring cargo tank
overpressure in the vessel, providing input as
part of the system specification process.
Individual ict 1000 pressure transmitters
were installed for each of the 12 cargo tanks
and the two slop tanks. These were connected
to a PC in the cargo control room that runs the
VentSafe specific monitoring, display and
alarm software using the transmitters’ integral
Modbus communication system. Providing a
central monitoring station, the PC display
indicates the status of each tank, as well as the
actual pressure in a single co-ordinated source.
Pre-configuredThe PC was pre-configured with the tank
details and descriptions, as well as the four
alarm setpoints required by the regulations. In
the event of a pressure hazard, the system
alerts the crew by issuing local audible and
visual warnings. Where required, optional relay
outputs can be provided for remote alarm
control.
For fully protected submersion, the ict 1000
transmitters are available with a choice of
flanged, or threaded, fittings for installation
direct to the tank top, or piping, into the
Cargo overpressuresolution - a case
studyOne of the latest environmental regulations introduced to affect
tankers is the IACS UI SC 140.*
Pressure transmitter and protective conduitfor the signal cable.
Man overboard safety and rescue is our concern and speciality
Hvaleyrarbraut 3 Hafnarfjordur, IS-220
Iceland Tel: +354 5651375
Main partners:
UK: Energy Marine Ltd. Tel: +44 (0)1525 851234
USA: Marine Rescue Technologies Inc. Tel: +1 772 388 1326
Markusnet Type MS is designed for man overboard recovery on all types of ships, offshore installations and dams with less than 40 metre height from water level upto rescue deck or platform.
Markus Scramble net Type SCN6 is a mobile light weight scramble-net / cradle recovery system for deck vessels and offshore installations with either rail or special fastenings inside bulwark where they are to be used. Less than 1/6 of the weight of traditional scramble-nets.
Markus MOB boat rescue-net is light, quick fastening, takes little space, provides easy and fast method to place the casualty in the net, is soft but firm around the casualty, provides easy lift by one or two persons and is easy to repack after use.
*This article was written by Mark Jones, salesdirector, PSM.
Deck area of the Aframax Omera Queen.
TO
Fast, intuitive route planning and navigation monitoring
FMD-3300 [23.1" LCD]FMD-3200 [19" LCD]
�Multifunction display capability, featuring ECDIS, Conning Information Display, Radar/Chart Radar and Alert Management
�Instant chart redraw delivered by FURUNO’s advanced chart drawing engine, making redraw latency a thing of the past
�Task based operation making the ECDIS operation simple and intuitive
�Fast, precise route planning, monitoring and navigation data management
FURUNO provides thoroughgoing ECDIS training:
FURUNO’s ECDIS training programs consist of:
• Generic ECDIS training in accordance with IMO ECDIS Model Course 1.27. Presently, the generic ECDIS training is available at INSTC Denmark only.
• FURUNO type specific ECDIS training. The FURUNO type specific ECDIS training is available at INSTC Denmark, INSTC Singapore and through the NavSkills network of training centers:
• FURUNO Deutschland GmbH (Germany), Thesi Consulting (Italy), GMC Maritime Training Center (Greece), OCEAN TRAINING CENTER (Turkey), RHME/Imtech Marine (UAE), Odessa Maritime Training Center (Ukraine), A.S. Moloobhoy & Sons (India), FURUNO Shanghai (China), COMPASS Training Center (Philippines), VERITAS Maritime Training Center (Philippines) and Pivot Maritime International (Australia).
Please contact INSTC Denmark at [email protected] for further details.
Tank equipment product ranges combineScanjet Marine and Scanvent arecombining their product range tocreate what is claimed to be themost comprehensive internal tankequipment package available fortankers and FPSOs.