World News
Parker Kittiwake Adds its Voice to ISO 8217:2016 Concerns
Parker Kittiwake has added its voice to those concerned over the draft ISO 8217:2016 standard, with the company saying the proposed changes will "significantly" increase operators' risks of catastrophic engine failure.
"We would caution that some of the proposed amends to the ISO 8217 fuel quality standard would be unfavourable to ship owners and operators, most significantly as they would offer far less protection to the fuel buyer against damage caused by lower quality fuel oil," said Larry Rumbol, Marine Condition Monitoring Market Development Manager at Parker Kittiwake.
As Rumbol wrote for Ship & Bunker in March, one of the proposed changes, to Clause 8, would mean that a recipient couldn't consider a bunker out of specification "unless the test result exceeds the specification limit value by more than the 95 percent confidence limit," meaning that the limit for the concentration of cat fines would be permitted to rise to 72 ppm from 60 ppm.
Rumbol explains that if the draft ISO 8217:2016 is adopted, it would "prove perilous" for crucial ship components, including cylinder liners, and would come in the face of explicit industry recommendations from MAN Diesel & Turbo SE (MAN), Wärtsilä Corporation (Wärtsilä), and others that only bunkers with a concentration of no more than 15 ppm are utilised.
"Cat fines are already presenting a significant headache for shipowners and operators, and the proposed changes to ISO 8217 will only amplify this," concluded Rumbol.
Parker Kittawake is one of a number of companies voicing concern over ISO 8217:2016, after Veritas Petroleum Services (VPS) and INTERTANKO in February raised concerns over proposed revisions to the ISO 8217 specifications for marine fuels as well.
In March, Raghuvir Bhavnani, Vice President of Viswalab Singapore Pte Ltd (Viswa Lab) called on shipowners to vote against a change to the wording of clause 5 in ISO 8217:2016 for similar reasons.
Key Bunker Prices More
| VLSFO | MGO | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $/mt | +/- | $/mt | +/- | |
| Singapore | 506.50 | 6.50 | 622.50 | 7.00 |
| Rotterdam | 460.00 | 1.50 | 630.00 | 8.50 |
| Houston | 472.50 | 0.50 | 625.00 | 1.50 |
| Fujairah | 501.00 | 6.00 | 721.00 | 8.00 |
| Global 20 Ports Average | 529.00 | 2.50 | 724.00 | 1.50 |
| Global 4 Ports Average | 485.00 | 3.50 | 649.50 | 5.00 |
| Global Average Bunker Price | 571.00 | 4.00 | 755.50 | 0.00 |
Popular Now More
-
Apr 23Initial Ship & Bunker analysis shows ships would need to use between 17.6% and 23.3% biofuel in B100 terms to avoid penalty charges in 2028. -
Apr 24FincoEnergies has partially acquired the business operations of bunker supplier Oliehandel Klaas de Boer. -
Apr 22Carbon capture's profitability under the IMO 2028 deal will depend upon the system used and how the carbon is disposed of, a Value Maritime representative tells Ship & Bunker.