2012 - the year of efficiency discussion
9th January 2013 01:58 GMT

In my first blog of 2012 I challenged owners and operators with the question:  How often do you check your fuel consumption? And do you keep a record of your daily, weekly or monthly usage?

I was aware that the common answer to this question would be ‘every day at noon’.  

But my question was aimed more at eliciting consideration of how do you use the data to help you to:

  • improve fuel consumption,
  • understand the impact of voyage routing and weather, cargo loading, hull cleanliness, engine operation?
  • how do you gather the data – paper or electronic?
  • what trend and other analysis approaches do you use?

Why this focus on monitoring?

For a number of reasons:

  • In October 2012 the EC announced that it will pursue a monitoring approach to manage CO2 emissions from shipping rather than a market based measure as an initial stage. The EC consultation meeting on its approach to monitor and report individual ships CO2 emissions was held on 5 December. An outline EU Regulation is expected from the EC by early 2013. The outline will then be debated, amended as necessary and agreed by Parliament and Council of Ministers.
  • At IMO the spotlight on monitoring this year started at IMO MEPC 63 meeting in February 2012 where MEPC requested papers to be submitted in relation to “fuel consumption measurement”. The USA proposal IMO MEPC64/5/6 and /7 maintained the spotlight on monitoring of CO2 emissions.* The proposal envisages, as its first phase, monitoring of fuel consumptions together with equipment efficiency. Determination of CO2 emissions is most commonly done using fuel consumption data multiplied by a carbon conversion factor.
  • IMarEST has submitted an information paper to IMO (MEPC65/INF3) – authored by a number of individuals with extensive experience of the subject including requirements on monitoring/reporting from a regulatory framework and onboard approaches. The paper uses industry experience and outlines a goal based approach to monitoring of fuel and GHG emissions. It uses ISO standard ISO 14064:1 to highlight the principles necessary to monitor GHG emissions and raises specific issues relevant to the shipping industry.**
  • Bunkerworld and Sustainable Shipping in an article 6 December and Lloyd's List in an article 29 November sets out an outline of issues and considerations – taken in part from the IMarEST information paper.
The IMarEST paper is a positive development in terms of a goal based approach to monitoring but there are challenges that remain. Personally for me the two remaining critical challenges are:

  • understanding how in detail fuel consumption and operational and maintenance choices interact.
  • educate regulators and others about monitoring onboard. Monitoring onboard is not comparable to doing the same activity on land. For example:
- land based installations do not have to work within the constraints generated by a floating ‘installation’ (ship) which is subject to wind and waves and where monitoring is subject to the impact of heel and trim.
- land based oil storage tanks tend to be uniformly shaped while ship bunker tanks are different shapes on the same ship and include angles etc which needs to be taken into account when working out tank volume and fuel quantity.
2013 promises to continue the focus on monitoring and therefore on efficiency.

*The US submission, entitled US proposal to reduce GHG emissions, is available in full on Sustainable Shipping in the list of MEPC 64 papers.
** The IMarEST information paper (MEPC65/INF3) is available in full in the Sustainable Shipping library under MEPC 65 papers


Anne-Marie Warris,
9th January 2013 01:58 GMT

Comments on this Blog
Heinz Otto - Windships
19th January 2013
Hi Dr. Anne-Marie Warris,
"IMO and climate change" -
my best wishes for you and your work within the worldshipping family.
Her deep knowledge is a treasure for the advance of a greener shipping.
My commitment is concerned with the relationships between heavy fuel oil, ship exhaust and climate influences.
And so there is a time pressure by the statements of climate scientists, which can not followed by the IMO regulations , which you describes so completely .
A faster approach - besides scrubbers, LNG, slow steaming, etc, in my view, is the use of wind, when mass goods are transported between continents.
In the agenda of the GST in 2013, in March here in hamburg no working group on wind propulsion is provided, and that I am complaining.
Alone as a guest Skysails was found.
Where are the examples from Ireland, the Netherlands or Germany?
So far I feel the GST-2013 as another GREEN washing Congress - without signals of change.
Continue your further work on change, take all your power to get results for a shipping world with less exhaust.

Best regards, Heinz Otto, www.windships.de
PS.:
Might it be, you remember a previous contact during COP-15?

Comments have been closed for this article.

Post your Comments on this Blog

Please sign in by clicking here to post comments.

Not registered? Click here and register for FREE.