Dr. Ram VisViswa Lab Corp.GMT 23:48
21st May 2008 A series of articles have appeared giving expression to anonymous industry sources - perhaps meaning parties like suppliers. The views expressed are intended to counter these articles with the concerns of the fuel user community due to the spate of fuel related problems experienced.
There are three ideas being propagated:
The myth that bunker fuel quality will have to be poor and that the fuel users will have to live with it. Why bother fixing the problem of contaminated or problem bunker fuels, when the marine industry has long accepted inferior fuels and the problems that go along with it very patiently?
The most egregious and misleading myth – “There are over 3 million chemicals and it is impossible to test for and identify all of them in the fuel”. Addressing the last one first and assuming one accepts that there is adulteration, the whole process has to make easy monetary sense. For instance, the adulterant has to be a substance that will not be detected by routine tests of ISO 8217; it should not be difficult to transport and blend; it should easily mix with bunker fuel and look and smell no different from the bunker fuel.
Most of the 3 million chemicals do not qualify. The obvious choice for possible contaminants that would go undetected long enough, is be refinery waste streams, petrochemical waste streams, used lubes, waste products and also substances such as shale oil and other cutter stock which can help manipulate the density and viscosity of the bunker fuel. Over the years, testing hundreds of samples in Viswa Lab, it is seen that these contaminants fall into about 11 groups. If we ensure that these 11 groups of contaminants do not show up in the bunker fuel, it is a good bet that nearly 90% of the current problems that are being experienced, will go away. It is difficult to understand why it would be "impossible to provide no contaminants guarantee".
Famous lawyers have a simple rule: "If you cannot convince the judge, confuse him."
The case of styrene is one such. In over twenty cases reported to this lab, styrene and DCPD each above 100 ppm has caused seizure of main engine fuel pumps bringing the engine to a halt in mid sea and posing a real danger to safety and security. The empirical data never said about styrene in isolation. There have been samples with 600 ppm styrene and no problems reported to the lab. The only issue is Styrene plus DCPD. Therefore all talk of no styrene clause etc. is superfluous and confusing.
Secondly, innumerable fuels tested in Viswa Lab using GCMS do not show any contaminants. Contaminants are seen only in some ports. In these ports they are seen with unvarying regularity. It is a no-brainer that things “happen” in these ports.
Finally, the argument being advanced of “retaining status quo” or why complain now after putting up for years. The marine industry has accepted inferior fuels and the problems that go with it very patiently and for very long. There has been a resurgence of these problems with renewed vigor and causing deeper concern because, in the last 16 months (since Marpol Annex VI went into effect) the number of problem fuels and fuel-related machinery problems and damage have increased several fold. One of the more dramatic ones is the breakage of piston rings (in many cases all piston rings) in over 33 vessels. The situation is as dangerous and ridiculous as having to stop your Mercedes Benz car in an autobahn (highway) and change piston rings.
A stage has been reached where bunker fuels have to be of a better quality, whatever the costs maybe. In fact, the position taken by Intertanko on this issue seems to echo the collective feeling of all fuel users who should be the ultimate deciding party.
Let us honestly admit that waste streams are indeed added to bunker fuel (there are several ports where we do not find it at all). Let us make a commitment that we will supply better quality fuel to the ship. Let us accept that the people sailing the ships are not inferior human beings whose lives and problems can continue to be ignored. Let us not permit the status quo to continue by providing ingenious arguments and confusing explanations.
- Viswa Lab Technical Advisory Group
