HFO

Sort by:

Filter by:



Alerts(5)Arctic(52)Casualties(1)Emissions(17)Finance(1)Fines(1)Fishery(1)Fuels(28)Green Shipping(6)Infographic(3)Opinions(6)Pollution(3)Ports(2)Regulation(3)Safety(3)Sustainability(4)Technology(7)Videos(1)

Infographic: LNG reduces GHG emissions by 21%

SEA\LNG and SGMF launched a study according to which GHG reductions of up to 21% are achievable now from LNG as a marine fuel, in comparison to the existent oil-based marine fuels over the entire life-cycle from Well-to-Wake (WtW). The study also confirms that emissions from SOx, NOx and particulate matter, are close to zero when using LNG compared with current conventional oil-based marine fuels.

LR provides verification to Genoil’s HSFO conversion to 2020-compliant fuel

Lloyd’s Register witnessed a process demonstration, in which the exploration and drilling company Genoil used a hydroconversion upgrader to convert high sulphur heavy fuel oil into IMO 2020-compliant marine fuel. During the desulphurisation process, the sulphur content of an HSFO was reduced from 1.72% to 0.38%.

IG Clubs continues survey triggers for tankers carrying HFO

As part of the industry’s efforts to ensure higher ship standards, the International Group of P&I Clubs (IG Clubs) continues to implement survey triggers for seagoing vessels of 10 years of age or more carrying HFO, the American P&I Club reminded in a new circular. 

Banning HFO from Arctic gets closer

IMO has been pushed to ban heavy fuel oil (HFO) for use and carriage as a fuel in the Arctic. However, on the one hand some want the ban to take place as soon as possible. On the other hand, many are those that support the idea of not banning HFO before knowing the result of an assessment of the impacts, regarding both the environment and the economy of Arctic indigenous and local communities and industries.

New fuels, new challenges?

Unni Einemo, Director, International Bunker Industry Association comments on possible challenges that will arise due to the 2020 sulphur cap. Ms. Einemo notes that in the ideal scenario, enough fuels of acceptable quality will be available in order to meet future demand. However, this scenario is too optimistic and the shipping industry must prepare to deal with future issues.

Danish maritime authority supports progress in PPR 6

Danish Maritime Authority discussed about the agreements made on PPR 6 and focused on the progress the IMO members made towards the  Organization’s final preparations for the new global sulphur regulation. More importantly, the Authority highlighted that the participants agreed on a number of measures for consistent implementation and enforcement of the new rules.

IBIA to participate in IMO’s PPR 6

IBIA announced that it will be present at the 6th session of the IMO’s Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR 6), which will endeavour to complete work on remaining issues relating to consistent implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit set to take effect from 1 January 2020.

PPR 6 starts discussions with focus on 2020 sulphur cap

IMO’s Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response meets this week, from 18 to 22 February at IMO headquarters. The meeting will focus on finalizing draft Guidelines on the implementation of the 0.50% sulphur limit under MARPOL Annex VI. The Guidelines aim to help the preparations for uniform implementation of the lower limit for sulphur content in ships’ fuel oil.

Clean Arctic Alliance: PPR 6 must focus on Arctic HFO ban

As the meeting of IMO’s Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR 6) opens today in London, the Clean Arctic Alliance called on Member States to give emphasis to the target of establishing a ban on the use and carriage of heavy fuel oil by shipping in the Arctic. The actual adoption of the ban is expected to take place on 2021, with the industry making its decision on what fuels it will use during 2022. The ban will apply in 2023.

Poll

Do you think the entire shipping industry will be completely digitalized by 2025?

maritime events