There is a great deal of talk, not to say controversy, about the use of gas as fuel and its claimed propensity to reduce the risk of engine damage. But marine insurers say they need to understand this new risk they are being asked to underwrite.
Now the London market’s Joint Hull Committee has announced it will research the risks involved in using gaseous fuels, a move that is widely welcome. Captain Rahul Khanna, senior risk consultant at Allianz Global Corporate Solutions, has said that although some owners have started operating dual-fuel vessels that burn gas, no one has considered the problems that will arise if things go wrong. LNG certainly has attractions as a green fuel, but owners must find out how to meet demanding new requirements which will be introduced with the IMO’s low-sulphur requirements to reduce emissions to 0.5% by 2020.
Of course, a big attraction of gaseous fuel is that it can reduce the risk of engine damage, but this underlines the need for insurers to understand the new risk they are underwriting. JHC chairman Peter Townsend has asked its risk sub-committee, chaired by Chris Turberville, head of marine, hull and liability at Allianz, to research the insurance implications of gas-fuelled propulsion. The group will undertake a technical investigation, looking at storage of the fuel, sulphur emissions and lubrication, particularly whether using gaseous fuel will create problems similar to those that stem from cat fines in conventional fuel.
In fact, underwriters have already started to adopt the committee’s guidance on engine damage from cat fines. Captain Khanna said that cat fines had taken centre stage for underwriters, reflecting the scale of direct and indirect claims linked to the problem, and that insurers had welcomed the committee’s guidance.
As insurance claims from machinery damage continue to mount, underwriters welcomed an announcement late last year that Port State Control authorities under the Paris MoU and the Tokyo MoU had launched an inspection campaign focused on propulsion machinery. The 45 port states under both MoUs will undertake the concentrated inspection programme to ensure vessels are compliant with the relevant chapter in the Solas convention relating to the upkeep of marine engines, propulsion systems and auxiliary equipment.
These periodic campaigns by the MoUs can reveal surprising deficiencies on some ships, leading to lengthy detentions. The Steamship Mutual P&I Club said inspectors could focus on applicable documents and ensure vessels confirm the safety of propulsion and auxiliary machinery, especially the working order and maintenance of the main engine, auxiliary equipment and their related alarm systems.
The P&I club said that documentation of unmanned machinery needs to be up to date, any oil mist detectors or other automatic shut-off systems need to be operating properly, and all protective arrangements around engines must be in place. Inspectors may also focus on boilers, boiler feed systems, emergency lighting, bilge pump arrangement, ballast pumps and emergency fuel stops.
In another area, the Paris MoU, the most active of all the MoUs, has said its next three inspection programmes will be targeted at operational issues, including hours of work and rest as set out by the IMO’s STCW Convention, inspection of closed spaces and, finally, the new Maritime Labour Convention.
Richard Schiferli, secretary general of the Paris MoU, told a recent London meeting that cuts to crew numbers and more pressure affecting onboard work conditions were emerging as the greatest threat to ship safety. He said that while the physical structure and maintenance of ships had improved greatly in recent years, reductions in crewing levels and increased working hours presented new risks.
Alarm about the issue had already prompted the Paris MoU (representing 27 countries in Europe and around the North Atlantic) to launch an inspection programme of cruiseship operational safety; this was completed in December. Preliminary results from this programme were positive, said the secretary general, but even if those findings were confirmed when the full data was analysed, it should be no reason for complacency.
“After what happened on the Costa Concordia, there were serious concerns about the operational safety of cruiseships, and we at the Paris MoU felt that before politicians started any ‘knee-jerk’ reactions, we should look into the reality,” he said. Virtually every cruiseship that visited the Paris MoU region over the past six months had been inspected, he added.
Meanwhile, cruiseship casualties continue to throw up hefty claims for hull and machinery underwriters as the number of new vessels coming on stream continues to rise. And often the cause of the mishap is machinery problems. The latest at the time of writing is the 90,940gt Celebrity Constellation that encountered problems with one of its gas turbine propulsion engines. Emergency engine repairs were arranged in Key West, while the 2002-built vessel’s cruise itinerary had to be amended.
Now the London market’s Joint Hull Committee has announced it will research the risks involved in using gaseous fuels, a move that is widely welcome. Captain Rahul Khanna, senior risk consultant at Allianz Global Corporate Solutions, has said that although some owners have started operating dual-fuel vessels that burn gas, no one has considered the problems that will arise if things go wrong. LNG certainly has attractions as a green fuel, but owners must find out how to meet demanding new requirements which will be introduced with the IMO’s low-sulphur requirements to reduce emissions to 0.5% by 2020.
Of course, a big attraction of gaseous fuel is that it can reduce the risk of engine damage, but this underlines the need for insurers to understand the new risk they are underwriting. JHC chairman Peter Townsend has asked its risk sub-committee, chaired by Chris Turberville, head of marine, hull and liability at Allianz, to research the insurance implications of gas-fuelled propulsion. The group will undertake a technical investigation, looking at storage of the fuel, sulphur emissions and lubrication, particularly whether using gaseous fuel will create problems similar to those that stem from cat fines in conventional fuel.
In fact, underwriters have already started to adopt the committee’s guidance on engine damage from cat fines. Captain Khanna said that cat fines had taken centre stage for underwriters, reflecting the scale of direct and indirect claims linked to the problem, and that insurers had welcomed the committee’s guidance.
As insurance claims from machinery damage continue to mount, underwriters welcomed an announcement late last year that Port State Control authorities under the Paris MoU and the Tokyo MoU had launched an inspection campaign focused on propulsion machinery. The 45 port states under both MoUs will undertake the concentrated inspection programme to ensure vessels are compliant with the relevant chapter in the Solas convention relating to the upkeep of marine engines, propulsion systems and auxiliary equipment.
These periodic campaigns by the MoUs can reveal surprising deficiencies on some ships, leading to lengthy detentions. The Steamship Mutual P&I Club said inspectors could focus on applicable documents and ensure vessels confirm the safety of propulsion and auxiliary machinery, especially the working order and maintenance of the main engine, auxiliary equipment and their related alarm systems.
The P&I club said that documentation of unmanned machinery needs to be up to date, any oil mist detectors or other automatic shut-off systems need to be operating properly, and all protective arrangements around engines must be in place. Inspectors may also focus on boilers, boiler feed systems, emergency lighting, bilge pump arrangement, ballast pumps and emergency fuel stops.
In another area, the Paris MoU, the most active of all the MoUs, has said its next three inspection programmes will be targeted at operational issues, including hours of work and rest as set out by the IMO’s STCW Convention, inspection of closed spaces and, finally, the new Maritime Labour Convention.
Richard Schiferli, secretary general of the Paris MoU, told a recent London meeting that cuts to crew numbers and more pressure affecting onboard work conditions were emerging as the greatest threat to ship safety. He said that while the physical structure and maintenance of ships had improved greatly in recent years, reductions in crewing levels and increased working hours presented new risks.
Alarm about the issue had already prompted the Paris MoU (representing 27 countries in Europe and around the North Atlantic) to launch an inspection programme of cruiseship operational safety; this was completed in December. Preliminary results from this programme were positive, said the secretary general, but even if those findings were confirmed when the full data was analysed, it should be no reason for complacency.
“After what happened on the Costa Concordia, there were serious concerns about the operational safety of cruiseships, and we at the Paris MoU felt that before politicians started any ‘knee-jerk’ reactions, we should look into the reality,” he said. Virtually every cruiseship that visited the Paris MoU region over the past six months had been inspected, he added.
Meanwhile, cruiseship casualties continue to throw up hefty claims for hull and machinery underwriters as the number of new vessels coming on stream continues to rise. And often the cause of the mishap is machinery problems. The latest at the time of writing is the 90,940gt Celebrity Constellation that encountered problems with one of its gas turbine propulsion engines. Emergency engine repairs were arranged in Key West, while the 2002-built vessel’s cruise itinerary had to be amended.