NEW rules to reduce ship sulphur emissions are resulting in a major hike in operating expenses for ship managers, reports the American Journal of Transportation.
Norbulk Shipping fleet manager Sacha Cornell declared that using low sulphur fuel can add as much as US$20,000 to annual ship operation costs.
'I would guesstimate that the extra cost for additional sampling, onboard test kits, increased purifier maintenance, supply and installation of cermet piston rings, treatment chemicals, additional filtration equipment is in the region of between US$10,000 and $20,000 per ship per annum,' said Mr Cornell.
Citing an example, Mr Cornell recalled a vessel receiving a batch of low sulphur fuel in Rotterdam. After 24 hours of use, the ship's purifier and fuel system were blocked.
'Until the vessel had consumed all the bunkers, the crew had no option but to handle the problem onboard which is not a good situation for any engineer or ship owner to be in, especially when you are unable to make a claim against bunker supplier,' said Mr Cornell.
MAN Energy Solutions director of new technologies Kjeld Aabo commented on Mr Cornell's statements.
'It is very sad to hear there still are issues but it's definitely not something which is being reported [to CIMAC and ISO].'
'In the beginning of 2020 we saw quite an increase in cylinder liner scuffing and excessive wear is, of course, not acceptable. By August, we were back to normal,' said Mr Aabo.
Mr Cornell highlighted the importance of crew training.
'Crew training is vitally important. When you talk to some crews about the importance of the sampling process, and how to make sure that the sampling is done well, and is a true representative sample, I find, unfortunately, a lot of times they're not fully aware of the implications if they do not get it right. There should be more education in this area,' said Mr Cornell.
Bunker consultant Neil Lamerton agreed with Mr Cornell.
'Often the crew on board have no idea of the value of bunkers. Obviously, engineers are very good at using the fuel. But I think some owners and managers can do better at educating them on the commercial aspects of what they're actually doing. They need to know what it means financially to the company if it all goes wrong, not just the technical, operational aspect,' Mr Lamerton.
SeaNews Turkey
Norbulk Shipping fleet manager Sacha Cornell declared that using low sulphur fuel can add as much as US$20,000 to annual ship operation costs.
'I would guesstimate that the extra cost for additional sampling, onboard test kits, increased purifier maintenance, supply and installation of cermet piston rings, treatment chemicals, additional filtration equipment is in the region of between US$10,000 and $20,000 per ship per annum,' said Mr Cornell.
Citing an example, Mr Cornell recalled a vessel receiving a batch of low sulphur fuel in Rotterdam. After 24 hours of use, the ship's purifier and fuel system were blocked.
'Until the vessel had consumed all the bunkers, the crew had no option but to handle the problem onboard which is not a good situation for any engineer or ship owner to be in, especially when you are unable to make a claim against bunker supplier,' said Mr Cornell.
MAN Energy Solutions director of new technologies Kjeld Aabo commented on Mr Cornell's statements.
'It is very sad to hear there still are issues but it's definitely not something which is being reported [to CIMAC and ISO].'
'In the beginning of 2020 we saw quite an increase in cylinder liner scuffing and excessive wear is, of course, not acceptable. By August, we were back to normal,' said Mr Aabo.
Mr Cornell highlighted the importance of crew training.
'Crew training is vitally important. When you talk to some crews about the importance of the sampling process, and how to make sure that the sampling is done well, and is a true representative sample, I find, unfortunately, a lot of times they're not fully aware of the implications if they do not get it right. There should be more education in this area,' said Mr Cornell.
Bunker consultant Neil Lamerton agreed with Mr Cornell.
'Often the crew on board have no idea of the value of bunkers. Obviously, engineers are very good at using the fuel. But I think some owners and managers can do better at educating them on the commercial aspects of what they're actually doing. They need to know what it means financially to the company if it all goes wrong, not just the technical, operational aspect,' Mr Lamerton.
SeaNews Turkey