Breaking news! Five global organizations have just signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to ensure the safety and security of global trade. This is a huge step forward in protecting our beloved planet and its precious resources. Let's give a round of applause to these amazing organizations!
Regulating Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) has implications for safety, legal and facilitation instruments under the purview of the international Maritime Organization (IMO). The first session of a joint IMO working group to address common high-priority issues across various instruments was held in September (7-9), in remote session. The session was preceded by an IMO MASS Seminar (5-6 September) which brought together stakeholders to share insights and views.
The working group was established following a regulatory scoping exercise on Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), that was designed to assess existing IMO instruments to see how they might apply to MASS and what gaps existed to permit their operation. The scoping exercise was conducted by the following committees: Maritime Safety committee (MSC), Legal Committee (LEG) and Facilitation Committee (FAL) – for relevant treaties under their purview.
MSC agreed on Road Map of developing a goal-based instrument regulating the operation of maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS), which, as a first step would be in the form of a non-mandatory Code for adoption in the second half of 2024 while a mandatory MASS Code is to be developed thereafter for entry into force on 1 January 2028.
The Joint Working Group developed a table – intended as a living document – to identity preferred options for addressing common issues, such as: role of MASS master and crew; responsibilities of Mass master and crew; competencies required for MASS master and crew; identification and meaning of term “remote operator” and their responsibilities.
A draft work plan was agreed, for approval by the three committees, which envisages the Committees reviewing the report of the first session and a second Joint Working Group to be convened in 2023.
The Joint Working Group agreed that a seminar on legal issues, including implications under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), would be beneficial.
The Joint MSC-LEG-FAL Working Group on Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) has been established as a cross-cutting mechanism to address common high-priority issues identified by the regulatory scoping exercises for the use of MASS conducted by the three committees.
Source: IMO
September 14, 2022 BIMCO
Singapore-based offshore shipbuilding group Keppel FELS has signed a framework agreement with Norwegian technology provider LNT Marine which will give Keppel access to LNT Marine’s LNT A-BOX gas containment system.
The agreement is a precursor for projects Keppel is currently working on where the IMO type A tank system developed by LNT Marine can be retrofitted or integrated into newbuild vessels, according to Keppel.
The two companies signed a memorandum of understanding earlier this year to work together to develop floating storage and fuel tank solutions designed to hold LNG or ammonia either as cargo or as fuel using LNT’s proprietary LNT A-BOX containment system.
Keppel said that, with the system, its Keppel Offshore and Marine shipyard will be able to offer more comprehensive solutions in the design, construction or conversion of a variety of LNG and ammonia vessels.
The fuel tank solutions under development are suitable both for retrofitting and for newbuilds. To complement the fuel tank development, the companies are also working on bunkering barges as well as floating storage units to support the bunkering services.
The LNT A-BOX containment system was commercialised in 2019, after 10 years of research and development, according to LNT. The first LNG carrier with the system, 45,000-m3 Saga Dawn, loaded its first cargo in April 2020.
Bureau Veritas has awarded an AIP to liquefied gas handling systems manufacture and design company Gas and Heat for a containment tank enabling the transport of LNG and ammonia (source: BV)
Bureau Veritas has awarded an AIP to liquefied gas handling systems manufacture and design company Gas and Heat (GH), for a containment tank enabling the transport of LNG and ammonia.
GH undertook a study with BV to demonstrate IMO Type C cargo/fuel tanks made of a grade of austenitic steel defined as an ’alternative material’ in IMO’s codes of safety for shipbuilding and containment practices for gas or other low-flashpoint fuels (IGC/IGF codes), can transport both LNG and ammonia for seagoing and inland navigation.
Bureau Veritas approved the grade of austenitic steel used by GH in June 2022, and in the study, the companies confirmed the compatibility of the material with ammonia, verifiying its use with a specific stress, corrosion cracking test performed by GH and then approved by Bureau Veritas in August 2022.
“For this innovative material in the shipping world, 12 specimens were prepared for the tests in accordance with ISO 16540. ISO 16540 provides guidelines to evaluate the corrosion of metals and alloys by determining their resistance to stress corrosion cracking using the four-point bend (FPB) method. This methodology includes procedures for metals that have no distinct yield point in their stress-strain behavior as well as metals with a distinct yield point,” a statement from BV said.
“Throughout the test, the specimens were loaded as FPB to the specified minimum yield strength of the base material. Tests were then performed in three different conditions: at ambient temperature, -20°C, and -33°C, in an environment of pure ammonia. After the completion of all tests, each specimen was visually examined at x10 magnification by a stereoscopic microscope and subjected to fluorescent liquid penetrant examination to detect any visible surface crack. An additional tomographic scan was performed to ascertain that no inner crack was detected. The outcomes successfully demonstrated that cargo/fuel tanks made of austenitic steel can carry both LNG and ammonia, for seagoing and inland navigation.”
BV said it was involved from the very earliest stages, validating the stress test methodology and reviewing each phase of the test.
“We confirmed the applied methodology opens the way to design and build LNG/ammonia tanks that comply with the international code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk (IGC Code) and the international code of safety for ships using gases or other low-flashpoint fuels (IGF Code), as well as applicable BV classification rules for seagoing and inland navigation,” BV said.
Bureau Veritas M&O vice president South East Europe, Black Sea & Adriatic Zone Paillette Palaiologouhas already secured one contract which includes the supply of cargo tanks for inland navigation of LNG/ammonia and one for a seagoing LNG/ammonia fuel supply system.
Source: https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/firms-developing-imo-types-a-and-c-tanks-for-lng-and-ammonia-transport-72849
September 14, 2022 Maritime Safety News
The foundation phase of a project to bring stakeholders together from the global north and global south to tackle maritime emissions is moving towards its final stages, following a series of technical workshops across the Caribbean, Africa and the Pacific. IMO Coordinated Actions to Reduce Emissions from Shipping (IMO CARES) will support coordination to accelerate demonstration of green technologies and their deployment globally in a manner that facilitates blue economic growth in developing regions.
The preparatory phase of IMO CARES is funded by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and undertakes all the preparatory activities to develop and design a sustainable global CARES programme, which is expected to be a long-term initiative.
As part of the foundation phase, workshops were organized between June and August in collaboration with Maritime Technology Cooperation Centers for Caribbean, Africa and Pacific, part of a global network of MTCCs. Gathering feedback from stakeholders in the respective regions was a major step towards the establishment of a multi-stakeholder coalition with a view to the launch of the full IMO CARES Programme in 2023.
Building on from the success of the workshops, meetings were undertaken with R&D Centres, International financial institutions, UN agencies and others to identify their needs and how stakeholders might collaborate under an IMO CARES framework. “Future advancements in maritime technical cooperation depend upon continued close collaboration between member states, the IMO, maritime organisations as well as financial institutions,” said Mr. Essam Al Ammari, Permanent Representative to the International Maritime Organization for Saudi Arabia.
Source: https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pages/WhatsNew-1748.aspx
Gibson Shipbrokers is warning of potentially unintended consequences from the IMO’s new pending carbon intensity indexing system that could in the near term create more CO2 emissions instead of the goal of reducing emissions. In their new analysis of the tanker market, Gibson points to circumstances that could create friction between owners and charterers and a potentially negative effect on the market leading to the scrapping of older vessels.
The new IMO regulations that become effective at the first of the year include both the Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Design Index (EEXI) and the Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII). Gibson points out that the EEXI is straightforward placing the responsibility for the technical and design elements that impact the vessel’s performance on the owner. They can choose to make modifications to the vessel to improve its ranking or accept the consequences of lowered desirability and rates for vessels that do not perform as well.
The challenge they point out with the CII rating is that they are retrospective on a ship’s operations. A key part of the calculation will be the CO2 emitted, cargo transported, and the distance sailed, which Gibson highlights can be managed through trading patterns. Other factors including the design of the vessel, maintenance, and warranted fuel consumption will be solely the vessel owner’s but according to Gibson, a dispute could arise if a vessel is not properly described and does not fulfill the description in a charter contract.
A vessel’s CII rating can be manipulated through its trading pattern primarily by assigning the vessel to longer distances to average down the factors over mileage. This is where Gibson sees the greater probability of unintended consequences and potential for conflict between owners and charterers.
New, more efficient vessels which traditionally would be employed on longer voyages Gibson points out can be operated on shorter haul voyages because of the greater efficiency of their design. Less efficient ships that would likely have the lowest CII ranking could improve their performance by operating longer distances, which, according to Gibson, could result in higher CO2 emissions than historically because these vessels are now sailing longer trips to average down their CII scoring.
Also, because the CII is retrospective, Gibson highlights that a charterer could trade the vessel less efficiently and return the vessel to the owner with an inferior rating. Owners will have to guard against this potential or they could be put at a commercial disadvantage following the charter. The vessel could be returned with a lower rating which would reduce future earnings potential based on operations on a prior charter.
While the short-term unintended consequence could be higher CO2 emissions, Gibson also highlights that older, less efficient vessels will also be less economically desirable on longer routes. They expect that this will result in reduced trading opportunities and may eventually create pressure to scrap older vessels.
Any measures to reduce tonnage and the resulting capacity could have a positive effect on the tanker market but an adverse impact on the global oil market with further increased transportation costs. Orders of new tankers have fallen to a modern low. Lars Barstad, Chief Executive Officer of Frontline, for example, last month in the company’s financial report pointed out that “Supply and demand for oil and product transportation has gradually been tightening as the world recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic… With the lowest orderbook as a percentage of the fleet seen in decades, and oil supply and demand normalizing,” he forecasted a tightening marketing with rising charter rates.
Gibson is calling on regulators to avoid further unintended consequences and be sensitive to industry practices in future regulations. They warn that the industry takes time to evolve and by distorting trading patterns to achieve CII rankings the result could be more CO2 than less in the near term while the industry works to maintain its economic viability.
Source: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/gibson-unintended-consequences-of-imo-s-cii-could-raise-co2-emissions
On 1 January 2020, a new limit on the sulphur content in the fuel oil used on board ships came into force, marking a significant milestone to improve air quality, preserve the environment and protect human health.
Known as “IMO 2020”, the rule limits the sulphur in the fuel oil used on board ships operating outside designated emission control areas to 0.50% m/m (mass by mass) – a significant reduction from the previous limit of 3.5%. Within specific designated emission control areas the limits were already stricter (0.10%). This new limit was made compulsory following an amendment to Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).
The resulting reduction in sulphur oxide (SOx) emissions from ships is having major health and environmental benefits for the world, particularly for populations living close to ports and coasts. Sulphur oxides are harmful to human health, causing respiratory, cardiovascular and lung disease. Once released in the atmosphere, SOx can lead to acid rain, which impacts crops, forests and aquatic species and contributes to the acidification of the oceans.
Before the entry into force of the new limit, most ships were using heavy fuel oil. Derived as a residue from crude oil distillation, heavy fuel oil had a much higher sulphur content which, following combustion in the engine, ended up in ships’ emissions. Now, the vast majority of ships are using very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) to comply with the new limit, and no safety issues have to date been reported to IMO.
5 changes – Sulphur 2020 – infographic web
1. How significant is the reduction in sulphur oxides emissions?
We have seen a substantial cut in the limit for sulphur content of fuel oil for ships operated outside designated emission control areas: from 3.50% m/m (mass by mass) to 0.50% m/m.
There is an even stricter limit of 0.10% m/m in effect in emission control areas (ECAS) which have been established by IMO. The four ECAS are: the Baltic Sea area; the North Sea area; the North American area (covering designated coastal areas off the United States and Canada); and the United States Caribbean Sea area (around Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands).
In 2022, MEPC 78 agreed to designate the entire Mediterranean Sea as an emission control area, meaning that ships will – from 2025 – have to comply with more stringent controls on sulphur oxide emissions. The Committee approved proposed amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, with a view to adoption at MEPC 79, which will designate the Mediterranean Sea, as a whole, as an Emission Control Area for Sulphur Oxides (SOx-ECA) and particulate matter. The amendment could enter into force in mid-2024, with the new limit taking effect from 2025.
2. What are the impacts of the new limit on human health?
Simply put, limiting sulphur oxides emissions from ships reduces air pollution as well as particulate matter, which are tiny harmful particles which form when fuel is burnt.
The new limit was forecast to lead to a 77% drop in overall sulphur oxide emissions from ships – a reduction equivalent to 8.5 million metric tonnes of SOx. Sulphur oxides are linked to asthma, pulmonary, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Reducing these harmful emissions will therefore improve the health of populations, especially those living near ports and coasts, and help prevent premature deaths.
A study on the human health impacts of SOx emissions from ships, submitted to IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2016 by Finland, estimated that by not reducing the SOx limit for ships from 2020, the air pollution from ships would contribute to more than 570,000 additional premature deaths worldwide between 2020-2025.
IMO 2020 – A Breath of Fresh Air – download the infographic (PDF) by clicking on the image.
3. What must ships do to comply with the new IMO regulations?
The IMO MARPOL regulations limit the sulphur content in fuel oil. This means ships must use fuel oil which is inherently low enough in sulphur, or install an appropriate exhaust “alternative” method, in order to meet IMO requirements.
Refineries may blend fuel oil with a high (non-compliant) sulphur content with fuel oil with a sulphur content lower than the required sulphur content to achieve a compliant fuel oil. Additives may be added to enhance other properties, such as lubricity.
Some ships limit the air pollutants by installing exhaust gas cleaning systems, also known as “scrubbers”. This is accepted by flag States as an alternative means to meet the sulphur limit requirement. These scrubbers are designed to remove sulphur oxides from the ship’s engine and boiler exhaust gases. A ship fitted with a scrubber can use heavy fuel oil, since the sulphur oxides emissions will be reduced to a level equivalent to the required fuel oil sulphur limit. By mid-July 2020, some 2,359 systems had formally been reported to IMO as an approved “equivalent method” by Administrations (flag States).
Ships can have engines which use alternative fuels, which may contain low or zero sulphur, for example liquefied natural gas or biofuels.
4. What is IMO doing to ensure compliance with the 0.50% limit?
Monitoring compliance and enforcing the new limit falls under the remit of Governments and national authorities of Member States that are Parties to MARPOL Annex VI. Flag States (the State of registry of a ship) and port States have rights and responsibilities to enforce compliance. IMO has adopted 2019 Guidelines for port State control under MARPOL Annex VI Chapter 3 (download here).
Ahead of the entry into force of the new limit, on 1 January 2020, IMO worked with Member States as well as industry (including the shipping industry and the bunker supply and refining industry) to identify and mitigate transitional issues so that ships may meet the new requirement.
This work included developing guidance and standardised forms for reporting fuel oil non availability if a ship cannot obtain compliant fuel oil, as well as considering verification and control issues.
In October 2018, IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) adopted a MARPOL amendment to prohibit the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil for combustion purposes for propulsion or operation on board a ship – unless the ship has an exhaust gas cleaning system (“scrubber”) fitted. The amendment entered into force in March 2020 and is intended as an additional measure to support consistent implementation and compliance and provide a means for effective enforcement by States, particularly port State control.
A set of guidelines for the consistent implementation of the MARPOL regulation was developed by IMO and issued by the MEPC.
5. Are new fuels being used to meet the 2020 limit?
Yes, new blends of fuel oil for ships have been developed. For example, a gas oil, with a very low sulphur content can be blended with heavy fuel oil to lower its sulphur content.
Ships can also choose to switch to a different fuel altogether. Or they may continue to purchase heavy fuel oil, but install ”scrubbers” to reduce the output of SOx in order to levels that ensure compliance with the requirement.
Of course, some ships were already using low sulphur fuel oil to meet the even more stringent limits of 0.10% m/m when trading in the established emission control areas (ECAS). So those fuel oil blends suitable for ECAS also meet the 0.50% m/m limit.
6. Are low sulphur blend fuel oils safe? Can new low sulphur fuels cause problems for a ship’s engine?
All fuel oil for combustion purposes on a ship must meet required fuel oil quality standards, as set out in IMO MARPOL Annex VI (regulation 18.3). For example, the fuel oil must not include any added substance or chemical waste that jeopardizes the safety of ships or adversely affects the performance of the machinery.
Through 2020, and into 2021 to date, IMO has not received any reports of safety issues linked to VLSFO.
Nonetheless, during 2020, an IMO correspondence group was established to consider fuel oil safety issues in general and consider the need for further mandatory requirements to ensure fuel oil supplied meets the required standards and required quality. The report of the group (MSC 102/6) is available on IMODOCS). The report will be discussed at the next IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) session, MSC 103 in May 2021.
Prior to that meeting, the Sub-Committee on Prevention of Pollution from Ships (PPR 8, schedule to meet in remote session 22-26 March 2021) will further consider VLSFO fuel quality issues, including possible effects on black carbon emissions.
Guidance on best practice for fuel oil suppliers has also been issued. The Guidance is intended to assist fuel oil purchasers and users in assuring the quality of fuel oil delivered to and used on board ships, with respect to both compliance with the MARPOL requirements and the safe and efficient operation of the ship. The guidance pertains to aspects of the fuel oil purchase up to the loading of the purchased fuel oil on board.
Regulations in the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) cover issues such as flashpoint (SOLAS regulation II- 2/4.2.1).
An International Standardization Organization (ISO) standard (ISO 8217) specifies the requirements for fuels for use in marine diesel engines and boilers.
ISO has issued a further standard: ISO/PAS 23263:2019 Petroleum products – Fuels (class F) – Considerations for fuel suppliers and users regarding marine fuel quality in view of the implementation of maximum 0.50 % sulphur in 2020. It addresses quality considerations that apply to marine fuels in view of the implementation of the sulphur 2020 limit and the range of marine fuels that will be placed on the market in response. It defines general requirements that apply to all 0.50% sulphur fuels and confirms the applicability of ISO 8217 for those fuels. It gives technical considerations which might apply to particular fuels for the following characteristics: kinematic viscosity; cold flow properties; stability; ignition characteristics; and catalyst fines. Additionally, it provides considerations on the compatibility between fuels and gives additional information on ISO 8217.
7. What did IMO do to help shipowners comply with the 0.50% sulphur limit?
To assist ship operators and owners to plan ahead for the 0.50% sulphur 2020 limit, the MEPC approved various guidance and guidelines.
The 2019 Guidelines on consistent implementation of 0.50% sulphur limit under MARPOL Annex VI adopted by resolution MEPC.320(74) are available here.
These comprehensive guidelines include a template for a “Fuel Oil Non-Availability Report (FONAR)” set out in Appendix 1 and a “Technical review of identified possible potential safety implications associated with the use of 2020 compliant fuels” set out in appendix 2.
Guidance on ship implementation planning (issued November 2018) can be downloaded here.
The ship implementation planning guidance includes sections on: risk assessment and mitigation plan (impact of new fuels); fuel oil system modifications and tank cleaning (if needed); fuel oil capacity and segregation capability; procurement of compliant fuel; fuel oil changeover plan (conventional residual fuel oils to 0.50% sulphur compliant fuel oil); and documentation and reporting.
Guidance on best practice for fuel oil suppliers was also issued. The Guidance is intended to assist fuel oil purchasers and users in assuring the quality of fuel oil delivered to and used on board ships, with respect to both compliance with the MARPOL requirements and the safe and efficient operation of the ship. The guidance pertains to aspects of the fuel oil purchase up to the loading of the purchased fuel oil on board.
A full list of guidance and guidelines can be found on the infographic.
8. What is the “carriage ban” and how does it work?
The carriage ban refers to the MARPOL amendment adopted in 2018 to prohibit the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil for combustion purposes for propulsion or operation on board a ship – unless the ship has an exhaust gas cleaning system (“scrubber”) fitted.
The amendment is intended as an additional measure to support consistent implementation and compliance and provides a means for effective enforcement by States, particularly port State control.
The specific provision requires that fuel oil used on board ships shall not exceed 0.50% sulphur limit. The amended provision to prohibit the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil reads as follows: “The sulphur content of fuel oil used or carried for use on board a ship shall not exceed 0.50% m/m.”
This MARPOL amendment entered into force on 1 March 2020. The full text of the MARPOL amendment can be downloaded here.
As a result, carriage of fuel oil for use on board ships is now prohibited if the sulphur content exceeds 0.50%.
Regulation 2.9 of MARPOL Annex VI provides the definition for ‘fuel oil’ – “Fuel oil means any fuel delivered to and intended for combustion purposes for propulsion or operation on board a ship, including gas, distillate and residual fuels.”
The provision does not apply to fuel oil being carried as cargo.
9. Do small ships have to comply with the sulphur limit?
Yes, the MARPOL regulations apply to all ships. Only larger ships of 400 gross tonnage and above engaged in voyages to ports or offshore terminals under the jurisdiction of other Parties have to obtain an International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate, issued by the ship’s flag State. But all sizes of ships must use fuel oil that meets the 0.50% limit since 1 January 2020.
Some smaller ships were already using fuel oil that meets the limit, such as a marine distillate suitable for their engines.
10. Does the sulphur limit only apply to ships on international voyages?
The sulphur oxides regulation (MARPOL Annex VI, regulation 14) applies to all ships, whether they are on international voyages, between two or more countries; or domestic voyages, solely within the waters of a Party to the MARPOL Annex.
11. Are all types of scrubbers allowed under IMO rules?
Yes, so long as they achieve the same level of emissions reduction.
Regulation 4 of MARPOL Annex VI allows for Administrations (flag States) to approve “equivalents” – any “fitting, material, appliance or apparatus to be fitted in a ship or other procedures, alternative fuel oils, or compliance methods used as an alternative to that required” – that enables the same standards of emission control to be met.
For reduction of sulphur oxide emissions, flag States have accepted and approved scrubbers – otherwise known as “Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems” (EGCS) as meeting the requirements for sulphur oxide reduction.
There is an important requirement in the same regulation on Equivalents, which says that in paragraph 4 “The Administration of a Party that allows the use of an equivalent …. shall endeavour not to impair or damage its environment, human health, property, or resources, or those of other States”.
IMO has adopted strict criteria for discharge of washwater from EGCS. Any residues generated by the EGC unit, usually in a closed-loop configuration, should be delivered ashore to adequate reception facilities. Such residues should not be discharged to the sea or incinerated on board.
Open-loop scrubbers add water to the exhaust gas which turns sulphur oxides (SOx) to sulphates/sulphuric acid, before returning washwater to the sea. The washwater must meet strict criteria, including a pH of no less than 6.5. There are also strict limits on discharge of PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) and nitrates.
The guidelines, with the washwater criteria, (last revised and adopted in 2015), have been under review by the IMO Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR). The Sub-Committee finalized its work on revising the 2015 Guidelines in February 2020 and they will be submitted to MEPC 76 for adoption.
In May 2019, the Marine Environment Protection committee (MEPC) asked the PPR Sub-Committee to look into “Evaluation and harmonization of rules and guidance on the discharge of liquid effluents from EGCS into waters, including conditions and areas”.
To assist the discussions, a report from a task team established by the Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP) was submitted. This report contains the conclusions of the task team in relation to the available evidence on the environmental effects of discharge water from EGCS, as well as recommendations on the data, tools and approaches that could be used as basis for conducting a risk assessment of the possible effects of discharges.
Following discussion in a working group, the PPR Sub-Committee (February 2020) agreed to recommend to the MEPC that its future work should look at evaluation and harmonization of rules and guidance on the discharge of discharge water from EGCS into the aquatic environment, including conditions and areas.
The scope of the work should include:
• risk assessment (development of risk assessment guidelines for the evaluation of possible harmful effects of the discharge water from EGCS, taking into account existing methods and mathematical models);
• impact assessment (to consider developing impact assessment guidelines);
• delivery of EGCS residues (developing guidance on delivery of EGCS residues to port reception facilities, regarding volumes and composition of residues);
• regulatory matters (including assessing state of technology for EGCS discharge water treatment and control, identifying possible regulatory measures, developing a database of local/regional restrictions/conditions on the discharge water from EGCS;
• database of substances (establishing a database of substances identified in EGCS discharge water, covering physico-chemical data, ecotoxicological data and toxicological data, leading to relevant endpoints for risk assessment purposes).
The MEPC was invited to approve the planned scope of work and to consider involving GESAMP for scientific advice.
In 2021, MEPC 77 adopted the updated Guidelines for exhaust gas cleaning systems (resolution MEPC.340(77)), which specify the criteria for the testing, survey, certification and verification of EGCS as well as discharge water quality criteria.
In April 2022, IMO’s Sub-Committee on Prevention of Pollution (PPR 9) considered issues related to discharge from exhaust gas cleaning systems (EGCS). Subsequently, in June 2022, MEPC 78 approved:
• MEPC Circular on 2022 Guidelines for risk and impact assessments of the discharge water from exhaust gas cleaning systems, to provide information on recommended methodology for risk and impact assessments that Member States should follow when considering local or regional regulations to protect the sensitive waters/environment from the discharge water from EGCS.
• MEPC Circular on 2022 Guidance regarding the delivery of EGCS residues to port reception facilities, providing best practices intended to assist both ship operators and port States in assuring the proper management and disposal of EGCS residues and stored discharge water from EGCSs into port reception facilities.
12. Why have some ports already banned discharge of washwater?
Some IMO Member States have taken a precautionary approach towards washwater discharge and have taken measures to limit or restrict discharge of washwater in their local ports and coastlines.
States have the right under UNCLOS to adopt their own laws and measures to reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from ships in their ports, internal waters and territorial seas.
13. Where can I find out which ships have scrubbers or are using other equivalents?
The IMO GISIS module on MARPOL annex VI includes a list of notifications received from IMO Member States in relation to Regulation 4.2 Equivalent compliance method. You can view the database here.
14. Is a FONAR a waiver?
No.
The 2019 Guidelines on consistent implementation of 0.50% sulphur limit under MARPOL Annex VI adopted by resolution MEPC.320(74) here clearly state (in APPENDIX 1):
• “3.1 A fuel oil non-availability report is not an exemption. According to regulation 18.2 of MARPOL Annex VI, it is the responsibility of the Party of the destination port, through its competent authority, to scrutinize the information provided and take action, as appropriate.”
• “3.2 In the case of insufficiently supported and/or repeated claims of non-availability, the Party may require additional documentation and substantiation of fuel oil non-availability claims. The ship/operator may also be subject to more extensive inspections or examinations while in port.”
• “3.3 Ships/operators are expected to take into account logistical conditions and/or terminal/port policies when planning bunkering, including but not limited to having to change berth or anchor within a port or terminal in order to obtain compliant fuel.”
• “3.4 Ships/operators are expected to prepare as far as reasonably practicable to be able to operate on compliant fuel oils. This could include, but is not limited to, fuel oils with different viscosity and different sulphur content not exceeding regulatory requirements (requiring different lube oils) as well as requiring heating and/or other treatment on board.”
How does shipping compare to other forms of transport in terms of air pollution?
Ships do emit pollutants and other harmful emissions, but they have always been and remain the most sustainable way to transport commodities and goods.
When considering the emissions per tonne of cargo carried, per kilometre travelled, studies have shown that ships are by far the most energy-efficient form of transportation, compared with other modes such as aviation, road trucks and even railways.
Ships transport large quantities of vital goods across the world’s oceans – and seaborne trade continues to increase. In 2019, seaborne trade by volume reached 11.08 billion tons. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, a fall of 4.1% was forecast, according to UNCTAD – but shipping continued to move huge volumes of trade.
Meanwhile, ships are increasingly becoming even more energy efficient. IMO regulations on energy efficiency support the transition to ever greener and cleaner shipping. A ship which is more energy efficient burns less fuel so emits less air pollution. Click here to read more on the IMO Strategy on the reduction of GHG emissions from ships.
Source: IMO
September 9, 2022 GENERAL
Lim expressed his heartfelt condolences to the members of the Royal Family, the Government, the people of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Commonwealth
“It is with great sorrow and sadness that we have learned of the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. The entire Membership of the International Maritime Organization and the staff share the grief with deep sympathy at this difficult time,” Lim said.
“I had the immense honour and privilege to meet Her Majesty here at IMO. Her genuine interest in shipping and maritime matters was remarkable.”
The UK plays host to the headquarters of the IMO, the regulatory body governing global shipping. Queen Elizabeth II opened the new building of IMO in 1983 and also visited the Organization to mark its 70th anniversary.
Source:https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/imo/imos-kitack-lim-pays-tribute-queen-elizabeth-ii
September 9, 2022 GENERAL
There has been an estimated 77% drop in overall Sulphur Oxide emissions from ships since the entry into effect of the “IMO 2020” regulations in January 2020, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) said.
The reduction is equivalent to 8.5 million metric tonnes of sulphur oxides, which are linked to causing asthma, pulmonary, cardiovascular, and respiratory diseases.
To remind, the 2020 Sulphur Cap has limited the use of sulphur in fuel oil used on board ships operating outside of designated emission control areas to 0.50 percent m/m down from 3.50 percent m/m limit.
The majority of ships trading worldwide switched from using heavy fuel oil to using very low sulphuf fuel oil (VLSFO.) Generally speaking, these are new blends of fuel oil, produced by refineries to meet the new limit, in accordance with IMO guidance and ISO standards.
Over the past two years, to meet the new regulation, ships have also burnt alternative fuels such as LNG, and methanol. Vessels that continued to use heavy fuel oil fitted their ships with exhaust gas cleaning systems (scrubbers).
Through 2020, and into 2021 to date, IMO has not received any reports of safety issues linked to VLSFO, the organization said.
Source: https://www.offshore-energy.biz/imo-points-to-77-pct-drop-in-sox-emissions-from-ships-since-2020/
September 8, 2022 GENERAL
THE secretary-general of the UN’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has arrived in Odessa to inspect the 28,358-dwt Liberian-flagged bulk carrier Helga, one of the ships under the Black Sea Grain Initiative approved to export grain from Ukraine.
Secretary-general Kitack Lim was able to gain first-hand experience of the Black Sea Grain Initiative and hear how ship safety and port management is being implemented, reported Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide.
‘I am deeply appreciative to see the strong commitment of the seafarers to support the initiative. I am pleased that the designated maritime humanitarian corridor under the initiative is allowing seafarers to do their job and deliver vital foodstuffs,’ Mr. Lim said.
Mr Lim was the guest of Ukrainian Infrastructure Minister Oleksandr Kubrakov.
The Black Sea Grain Initiative allows for the export of significant volumes of foodstuffs. The Joint Coordination Centre has been established in Istanbul, with representatives from Ukraine, the Russian Federation and Turkey under UN auspices, to coordinate the safe passage of ships of all flags.
As of September 1, the total tonnage of grain and other foodstuffs exported from the three Ukrainian ports is 1,677,396 tonnes. A total of 146 voyages (78 inbound and 68 outbound) have been enabled so far.
Source: https://www.seanews.com.tr/imo-chief-in-odessa-to-check-ukraine-grain-exports/194331/
September 5, 2022 GENERAL
Following approval at the 46th meeting of the IMO Facilitation Committee (FAL 46) in May, the IAPH Cybersecurity Guidelines for Ports and Port Facilities have been formally referenced in the IMO Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk Management. These are the first ever set of guidelines on the topic focused on ports and port facilities at the IMO which is a great achievement for the sector. Furthermore, with approval at FAL 46 and the 104th session of the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC 104), the proposed amendments to the Guidelines for setting up a Maritime Single Window were welcomed, and the IMO have subsequently updated their circular containing the revised Guidance. We would like to thank Pascal Olivier, chairman of the Data Collaboration Committee for his efforts in driving this work forward, as well as all contributors from the Committee, and partners, BIMCO and the International Harbour Masters Association (IHMA), for their contributions to the MSW guidelines. This was certainly a summer of success for IAPH’s work at the IMO and we look forward to resuming our Technical Committee meetings in the coming months to continue the progress made. Furthermore, IAPH is working with the IMO and BIMCO to organise two awareness-raising events this fall and early next year about the 2024 deadline for the mandatory implementation of the Maritime Single Window concept. More information on those will follow soon.
Source: IAPH