CARB: compliance problems with ultra low sulfur fuel oil

ARB staff has found that, without taking precautions, there is a high likelihood of a violation of the sulfur limit with these fuels.

Based on reviews of bunker delivery notes, these fuels, as purchased, are generally reported to be below, but close to, the 0.1% sulfur regulatory limit. However, shipboard in-use samples collected and tested by ARB staff have sometimes been found to exceed the regulatory limit.

The discrepancy could be due to shipboard contamination with high sulfur fuels in tanks or pipes, or other factors.

The ARB this week issued a notice to alert vessel operators that there is a risk of exceeding the sulfur limit when using these fuels, and to suggest possible steps that operators can take to reduce the likelihood of noncompliance.

Download the notice HERE

NTSB: Search fails to locate El Faro pinger

The second stage of the search will now start, attempting to find the vessel using side scan sonar.

 

The USNS Apache arrived at the last known position of the El Faro on October 23, and began searching for the vessel with a Towed Pinger Locator (TPL).

The search area consists of a 10 nautical mile by 15 nautical mile area, in which the USNS Apache towed the TPL on five search lines across the search area in order to detect the acoustic signal associated with the El Faro’s pinger.

The USNS Apache concluded the first phase of the pinger locator search on October 26, 2015, with negative results.

The NTSB says that the TPL’s ability to detect the El Faro’s pinger may be affected by the orientation of the vessel as it lays on the sea floor or the current condition and functionality of the pinger.

The second phase of the search began yesterday, using the Orion side-scan sonar system. The second phase of the search will be conducted over the same search area. This phase will consist of 13 search tracks and will take about 14 days to complete. The side scan sonar system will be used to locate the El Faro, and if found, create an image of the vessel.

If the ship is found on the sea floor, its Voyage Data Recorder or “black box” can be retrieved to help investigators determine the El Faro’s final moments. It is suspected that the ship sank in Hurricane Joaquin on October 1 and is lying on the sea bottom in 15,000 feet of water near the Crooked Islands in the Bahamas. All 33 onboard are presumed lost.

Fednav takes delivery of first BWTS equipped Laker

The ship, the 34,500 dwt ocean going laker Federal Biscay, is fitted with a ballast water treatment system (BWTS) — a first for ships transiting the Great Lakes, says Fednav, the largest international operator in the Great Lakes/Saint Lawrence Seaway System.

Fednav announced in April that it would equip all 12 ships in its Oshima shipyard newbuild program with BallastAce ballast water treatment systems (BWTS) (see earlier story).

Developed by JFE Engineering Corporation in Japan, the BallastAce system will be effective in both fresh and salt water. BallastAce operates through a combination of filtration and sodium hypochlorite (bleach) injection into the ship’s ballast system.

“This is a pivotal step in protecting the Great Lakes against invasive species and preserving biodiversity in the region,” said Paul Pathy, president and co-CEO of Fednav Limited. “Fednav is proud to be the first shipping company to deploy such systems, and we are pleased that the Federal Biscay is serving as a test ship for this technology.”

Fednav will start using BallastAce in the Great Lakes at the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 2016.

With the assistance of Fednav, the BallastAce system (which is already USCG AMS approved) will continue the necessary testing for full U.S .Coast Guard type approval for fresh, brackish, and salt water at the GSI facility in Superior, WI, and at MERC in Baltimore, MD. During the first six months of 2016, the system installed on the Federal Biscay will be be used for the shipboard testing element of the type approval requirements.

Fednav expects that the IMO Ballast Water Management Convention, to which Canada is a signatory, will most likely enter into force in 2016, the year the U.S. Coast Guard and EPA require the installation of systems on ships trading in US waters.

CARB approves barge mounted alternative to shore power

AEG’s Advanced Maritime Emission Control System (AMECS), essentially, takes a barge-mounted  scrubber system to the ship. Unlike existing shore power options, it does not require retrofits to each vessel.

“AMECS is a game-changer in the fields of emission control and air quality. Multiple AMECS units can remove thousands of tons of pollutants each year,” said Ruben Garcia, President of AEG. “These mobile barge-mounted systems use patented technology to attach to the auxiliary exhaust stacks of nearly any vessel entering port – at-berth or at-anchor – eliminating the need for expensive ship retrofits, and providing the public with cleaner air.”

AMECS is approved for simultaneous emission capture from two exhaust stacks of a single ship, with independently verified test results proving 90% to 99% reduction of the particulate matter (PM), nitrous oxides (NOx), and sulfur dioxides (SO2) found in diesel exhaust.

“CARB’s approval of AMECS as an alternative to the at-berth emissions reductions rule provides the flexibility our shipping lines need while protecting our environment and creating new jobs for our communities,” said representatives from the Port of Long Beach, a strong supporter of AMECS throughout its development.

In 2013, the Port of Long Beach provided about $2 million in seed money to help test the  AMECS system.

“We’re thrilled any time we can find more tools to reduce emissions and continue to improve community health. That’s why we fund projects like the demonstration and testing of these new technologies, through our Technology Advancement Program,” said Board of Harbor Commissioners President Lori Ann Guzmán. “We’ve made a lot of progress in reducing air pollution, and we are nurturing new technologies like these to help us do even more.”

Assessing court’s ruling on VGP ballast water requirements

An “action item” alert from law firm Blank Rome sheds some light onto the significance of this decision.

Blank Rome notes that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the issue to the EPA to redraft the ballast water sections of the VGP.

The firm says that “the differences between the VGP ballast water provisions, International Maritime Organization (“IMO”) Ballast Water Management Convention, and U.S. Coast Guard’s ballast water regulations have posed a number of compliance challenges thus far, which may be further exacerbated by possible new VGP requirements. While substantive changes to the VGP ballast provisions, if any, are likely years away, shipowners and operators should be aware, closely monitor, and be prepared to comment on a new draft VGP in the future.”

“Most notably,” says Blank Rome, “the court stated that the EPA failed to adequately explain why stricter technology-based effluent standards should not be applied, failed to give fair and thorough consideration to onshore treatment options, and failed to adequately explain why pre-2009 Lakers were exempted. The court instructed the EPA to reconsider the VGP ballast water provisions in accordance with its ruling. In the meantime, the 2013 VGP will remain in effect.”

“The possibility that the EPA may alter its VGP ballast water provisions does, however, create uncertainty for those striving to comply with both the VGP and U.S. Coast Guard ballast water requirements,” notes Blank Rome. “The U.S. Coast Guard’s ballast water regulations, like the current VGP ballast water requirements, for the most part mirror the IMO Ballast Water Management Convention, though there are some differences. Ship owners and operators have struggled to understand and comply with these overlapping requirements. Any changes to the EPA’s ballast water requirements will require extensive discussion with the U.S. Coast Guard to ensure any new VGP ballast water requirements can co-exist with the U.S. Coast Guard and IMO regimes.

“The ruling does not impact the U.S. Coast Guard’s ballast water management system type approval process. That said, should the EPA create stricter technology-based effluent limitations (TBELs) than the U.S. Coast Guard and IMO standards, it will be even more challenging for vessels to comply with both the U.S. Coast Guard and EPA standards because the systems approved by the U.S. Coast Guard and required to be installed may or may not meet the stricter VGP TBELs. It is also unclear how the EPA would enforce stricter TBELs as the Coast Guard generally conducts the vessel inspections and passes information on possible violations to the EPA.”

Read the full text of the Blank Rome action item HERE

Navy tug on way to seek El Faro wreckage and VDR

The tug is deploying to a search area northeast of Crooked Island in the Bahamas island chain, which is the last known location of the vessel.

The initial search area is 100 square miles, and water depth is estimated to be 15,000 feet across the expected search area. Transit to this search area is expected to take four-to-five days due to weather.

Apache is equipped with several pieces of underwater search equipment, including a voyage data recorder locator, side-scan sonar and an underwater remote operated vehicle.

The Navy’s mission will be to first locate the ship and then, if possible, to retrieve the voyage data recorder (VDR) – commonly known as a black box.

The U.S. Navy operates some of the world’s most advanced underwater search and salvage systems. Though this equipment is typically used to search for and recover downed military ships and aircraft, the Navy has a long history in assisting other federal agencies in underwater search and salvage operations, including the search and recovery of TWA 800 and the space shuttle Challenger. In 2013, the Navy assisted the government of Australia in its search for missing Malaysian Airliner MH 370.

USN Apache is a fleet ocean tug operated by the Military Sealift Command. The ship provides towing, diving and standby submarine rescue services for the Navy.

The ship is 226 feet long and has a crew of approximately 22 civilian mariners and uniformed Navy personnel.
The crew will be joined by a team from the Navy’s Supervisor of Diving and Salvage.

Also on board is the NTSB Investigator-in-Charge, Tom Roth-Roffy, and representatives from the USCG, TOTE and ABS, all parties to the NTSB investigation (see new story).

Euro MPs want to fast track setting of shipping GHG target

 

Specifically, the resolution “calls for all the Parties to work through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to develop a global policy framework to enable an effective response, and to take measures to set adequate targets before the end of 2016 for achieving the necessary reductions in the light of the 2 °C target [for a limit on global warming].”

The resolution has drawn a very guarded response from European shipowners.

“We are happy to see that the European Parliament recognizes the importance of a global solution for international shipping and gives a vote of confidence to the IMO, which should be allowed to pursue its efforts,” said Patrick Verhoeven, Secretary General of ECSA, the European Community Shipowners Association. “We are however also concerned by the deadline adopted by MEPs on Wednesday. 2016 is right around the corner and as such it is rather unrealistic to expect the IMO to come up with a solution in a matter of months. A unilateral European push for a hard deadline may be counterproductive.”

ECSA calls IMO’s track record in developing technical CO2 energy efficiency measures for the maritime sector “impressive.”

Following the adoption of the amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, which came into force worldwide in 2011 and which now apply to about 95% of the global merchant fleet, international shipping is the only industrial sector already covered by mandatory and binding global measures, notes ECSA. IMO also recently adopted the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), which requires all ships constructed after 2025 to be 30% more efficient that those built in the 2000s, with further efficiency improvements going forward. Finally, the shipping industry itself, prompted by an increase in bunker prices, has made strides in increasing its energy efficiency and curbing its CO2 emissions.

As a result of recent efforts, the contribution of shipping to global CO2 emissions has in fact dropped, says ECSA.

According to the latest IMO Green House Gas study, published in 2014, international shipping (while transporting about 90% of world trade) produces about 2.2% of the world’s total CO2 emissions. This figure was 2.8% in 2007, and the total CO2 emissions from shipping went down by over 10% between 2007 and 2012. This was despite continuing growth in maritime trade which means that shipping is already delivering carbon neutral growth.

“The 2016 deadline is not consistent with the steps already taken at EU level” commented Benoit Loicq, ECSA Safety and Environment Director. “By pushing for an extremely tight deadline, the EU would essentially undermine the IMO procedure. If the EU would then focus on regional measures, it would be backtracking on its own policy.”

ECSA says the EU Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) Regulation is intended to be the first phase of a stepwise approach geared towards a global (read IMO) solution by allowing to determine the real contribution of shipping to global CO2 emissions.

“The course of action that has been agreed is to start with an accurate picture of the shipping industry’s CO2 emissions in 2018 (i.e. two years after the MEP-backed deadline),” says Mr. Loicq. “If we now backtrack and skip the data collection phase altogether, how would it be possible to set realistic and fair targets?”

Crowley in strategic partnership for BWTS retrofits

The agreement includes technical services, engineering, integration, commissioning, training, scheduled delivery and spare parts.

The GloEn-Patrol treatment system utilizes a filter to remove 50 micron or larger size organisms and medium-pressure UV lamps to disinfect smaller organisms.

GloEn-Patrol models treat from 50 to 6,000 cubic meters of ballast water per hour. They have IMO-type approval and certification from many classification societies including American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) and DNV GL, and U.S. Coast Guard Alternate Management Systems (USCG AMS) for non-hazardous areas such as engine rooms, and explosion proof models for installation in areas such as the main decks of articulated tug barges (ATBs) and tankers.  

“We found Panasia ballast water treatment systems to be a good operational and functional fit for our vessels, backed with a level of commitment and service we require,” said Bill Metcalf, Crowley vice president of strategic engineering. “Panasia and its management team is fully committed to our vessels’ safety and the environmental performance of our ballast water systems, and we are pleased to have them as our partner.”

Crowley says that DNV GL is completing the required tasks for the Panasia system to secure USCG type approval will provide its report by October, 2016.

DHI Group has been chosen for shipboard tests and Golden Bear Facilities has begun the work on the land-based tests, all under DNV GL’s guidance, and supervision to comply with the Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program.

Shipping fights proposed $26 billion a year CO2 tax

 

The aim of COP 21 is to achieve a new international agreement on the climate, applicable to all countries, with the aim of keeping global warming below 2°C. This will mean a big reduction in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. International shipping is a major generator of GHG and IMO, the UN agency that covers shipping, has been working steadily on measures to reduce them.

At COP 21, however, shipping will be in the cross-hairs of any number of interests that want to see it cut GHG even further and that will be pushing for various tough measures to see that this happens.

Even before COP 21 gets underway, an OECD think tank called the International Transport Forum has produced a policy brief calling for shipping to pay a carbon tax of around $25 per ton of CO2 generated. The policy brief doesn’t get into how the CO2 emissions would be measured or the tax collected, but it does suggest that the considerable revenues generated (around $26 billion a year) could go to the Green Climate Fund, which has been set up to finance climate mitigation projects in developing countries.

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), argues that the $25 a ton suggested by the International Transport Forum would be almost three times higher than the carbon price paid by shore based industries in developed nations. About 70% of the world merchant fleet is registered in UNFCCC “non-Annex I” developing countries, and maritime trade is of vital benefit to rich and emerging economies alike.

ICS emphasizes that shipping is committed to reducing CO2 and has a responsibility to contribute to the achievement of the United Nations 2°C climate change goal. But the UNFCCC recognizes that developed and developing nations should accept differing commitments, and shipping is no different, especially in view of its vital role in the movement of about 90% of global trade.

While China and India, for example, have already made positive CO2 reduction commitments to COP 21, says ICS, these will not deliver absolute CO2 reductions for several years. Some richer nations, however, consistent with the UNFCCC CBDR principle, have made more ambitious commitments. Shipping meanwhile has already reduced its total CO2 emissions by more than 10% (2007- 2012) and CO2 per tonne-mile by around 20% (2005 – 2015). It is therefore on course for carbon neutral growth.

“While shipping may currently have CO2 emissions comparable to a major OECD economy, it is inappropriate for the ITF to propose that the industry should be treated like an OECD economy,” said ICS Secretary General, Peter Hinchliffe.

The position of ICS remains that if IMO Member States should decide to adopt a shipping MBM (Market Based Measure) , the industry’s clear preference is for a fuel levy, rather than an emissions trading scheme or other complex alternatives that would distort global shipping markets. However, if a levy was developed by IMO, ICS believes that any money collected should be proportionate to international shipping’s share of the world’s total CO2 emissions (2.2% in 2012 compared to 2.8% in 2007), not the $26 billion dollars a year that a $25 per ton CO2 tax would raise.

Read the ITF Policy Brief HERE

Read the full ICS response HEREMBM

ABS offers guide for “SOx Scrubber Ready” ships

 

Instead, when ordering a newbuilding they may prefer to order a ship that is “SOx scrubber ready.”

Classification society ABS says that, Iin order to facilitate future modifications, ship buyers and shipbuilders must make a significant effort to figure out what features should be incorporated on a vessel and incorporate these in the shipbuilding contract.

To support shipowners taking this path, ABS has published the ABS Guide for SOx Scrubber Ready Vessels to support members and clients in preparing newbuilds for future outfitting with a SOx exhaust gas cleaning system (EGCS).

The guide supports the ABS classification notation for SOx Scrubber Ready Vessels by formalizing the process for clients who wish to plan for retrofit of a SOx scrubber at a future date by providing a detailed review and approval and an associated notation.

The SOx Scrubber Ready notation is in addition to ABS EGCS notations that may be assigned for vessels fitted with an exhaust emission abatement system, including SOx scrubbers, selective catalytic reduction systems and exhaust gas recirculation arrangements for NOx emission control, in accordance with the ABS Guide for Exhaust Emission Abatement.

More HERE and HERE

 

LOAD MORE