Technical Discussion

• IFO 500
• Edwan Rizal Johari
  MISC Berhad
  GMT 05:36
  12th Jul 2007

  Dear ALL,
  
  I'm Edwan. I'm from MISC (formerly known as Malaysia International Shipping Corporation). We are planning to use IFO 500 as it's told to be very cheap.
  If there's no harm using it, we will replace the current usage of IFO 380. The main concerns from us are as below:
  
  1. Price of IFO 500
  2. Calorific value of IFO 500
  3. Energy required to heat IFO 500
  
  Hopefully we could discuss upon this matter.
  
  Thanking you in advance
  
  Edwan
  MISC Berhad
  Malaysia
• Goran Jonsson
  Pacific Petroleum Ltd.
  GMT 08:09
  12th Jul 2007
  IP: x.x.164.185

  You may consider using a combustion improving fuel additive in order to avoid extensive black smoke emission which also will dissolve much of the petroleum based sediments in the fuel and help to keep the fuel line clean. The use of such additive will add about $ 5.50/MT to the cost but on the other hand it may also reduce the fuel consumption around 3% well covering the cost for the additive. You can find more information on www.pacificpetroleum.gr website.
• Edwan Rizal Johari
  MISC Berhad
  GMT 02:46
  20th Jul 2007
  IP: x.x.27.144

  Dear Sir,
  
  Thank you for your reply.
  How to work out the estimated additional heating required to heat up the 500cst oil to 13cst compare with 380cst oil? could you please provide me with the price and calorific value of this 500cst oil.
  
  Thanking you in advance.
  
  edwan
  
• Goran Jonsson
  Pacific Petroleum Ltd.
  GMT 07:08
  20th Jul 2007
  IP: x.x.67.121

  Hello again.
  You can find the formula on the following site.
  http://www.bunkerworld.com/technical/tech_net_egy.htm
  regarding the calorific value for IFO 500 cSt.
  RGDS
  Goran Jonsson.
• Dan Krokosky
  Chevron Shipping Co. LLC. (HQ)
  GMT 20:20
  25th Jul 2007
  IP: x.x.4.23

  Unless you have a brand new ship designed for this 500 cst I would not use it. New modern liner ships have extra robust purifiers designed for this fuel. Other wise you are asking for reliability problems over the long term. You might save ten dollars a ton over 380 but it is not worth it. Here are some caloric values. Enjoy. )
  
  For the net combustion energy, I have done some calculations for 380 and 500 cSt, for both higher density and 991 max product
  
  - 380 cSt , density 1009, ash : 0.05, S : 2.65 , water 0.05 % : 40.06 MJ/kg
  - 500 cSt, density 1009, ash : 0.05;S : 3 %, water 0.05 % : 39.95 MJ/kg
  
  - 380 cSt , density 990 , ash : 0.05, S : 2.65 , water 0.05 % : 40.33 MJ/kg
  - 500 cSt, density 990, ash : 0.05;S : 3 %, water 0.05 % : 40.22 MJ/kg
  
  For a gasoil with density 860 and 0.5 % S : net combustion energy : 42,74 MJ/kg
  Same density 0.2 % S : 42.84 MJ/kg
  
  Gasoil density : 0.875, 0.5 % S: 42.56 MJ/kg
  Gasoil density : 0.875, 0.2 % S : 42.66 MJ/kg