An insightful look at the environmental issues
that are affecting the shipping industry.
Contents Introduction /01
Plotting the course to a Environmental issues have never been higher on the shipping
A paradigm shift in the
agenda. Today’s marine industry is under increasing pressure to
marine industry 03 comply with evolving regulations and become cleaner and greener.
sustainable vessel 04
of the 51 IMO While climate change and carbon management grab the headlines,
Conventions relate to there is a host of other environmental challenges to be met; sulphur
What’s on the radar? A look ahead
environmental issues and nitrogen oxide emissions reduction, ship recycling and ballast
at forthcoming international legislation 10
water management among them.
A deeper look 13
Fuels and exhaust emissions 14
At Lloyd’s Register, we understand that environmental stewardship
Ballast water management 18 is only one obligation which the shipping community must meet.
Ship recycling 20
Owners and operators must also provide transparency, corporate
– the proportion of responsibility and maintain profitability, all while operating safely.
Volatile organic compounds 28 gases caused by We have been at the forefront of environmental initiatives in the
Hull coatings 30
international shipping marine industry for many years, from world-renowned exhaust
CO2 emissions emissions research in the 1990s to involvement in the development
Get in touch 32
of the new Ship Recycling Convention in 2009.
Our contribution to the development of marine regulations and
standards gives us the expertise to help businesses understand
and meet their obligations, while our independence allows us to
give impartial advice. At the same time, our global research and
of a ship’s lightweight development network helps us deliver the services that enable
is recycled businesses to operate more safely and sustainably.
Plotting the course to a greener future Plotting the course to a greener future 02/03
A paradigm shift in
the marine industry
Across the marine industry, we are witnessing
a paradigm shift in operations and thinking.
There are many and varied reasons Ship design, of course, is a key issue. These are just some of the issues which
for this change – they include For the last three or four decades most make up the new paradigm, but it will
increases in the cost of marine fuels cargo ships have followed an orthodox, be some time before new orthodoxies
and continued globalisation, as well or commonly accepted, template of are reached. In the meantime, owners
as environmental regulation and an engine design – a large diesel power will need to make decisions with significant
increase in stakeholder expectations. plant supported by three generators, commercial consequences. Through our
burning heavy fuel oil. With the advent of knowledge, insight, technical resources
These factors have provoked a heightened statutory NOX and SOX emissions controls, and global reach, Lloyd’s Register is
focus on the environmental impact of this may well change; the entry into force available to help provide assurance
shipping. In particular, fuel efficiency of the revised MARPOL Annex VI this year throughout this process.
and exhaust emissions are driving the has set the stage for how these controls
interest in alternative fuels and more will be applied on an international level 1.5
efficient vessel designs. up to and beyond 2020. 1.4
Shipping has not seen this combination Concerns over emissions have also 1.2
of issues in recent memory and certainly widened to include CO2. Since at present 1.1
not a combination developing at the it is far from clear how any regulation of
Net registered tonnes (millions)
pace we see today. CO2 emissions will be applied, it is too
early to speculate on how future ship 0.9
The shipping industry has been through design will be affected. However, 0.8
a number of paradigm shifts over the it is clear that the long-term trend is 0.7
centuries. Lloyd’s Register’s Rules have that ‘energy’, in whatever form, is going 0.6
followed these transitions; 250 years to cost more. The shipping industry’s 0.5
ago the main mode of propulsion was commitment to fuel economy will
sail, but by 1835 we had introduced continue to grow and it will inevitably
Rules for steam propulsion and our first seek to employ technical and operating
Rules for diesel driven ships appeared in measures to reduce fuel cost. 0.2
1914. The graph (right) adapted from 0.1
the 1950 Swedish Handbook of Sea Add to the emissions debate the rise
1830 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 1900 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50
Transport illustrates this progression. of retrospective legislation – as entry
into force dates come and go before
The marine industry has managed ratification of IMO Conventions is The development of the Swedish
paradigm shifts before and has achieved – and the picture grows more merchant fleet from1830 to 1950.
emerged stronger and well equipped complex. The Ballast Water Management
to deal with the increase in world and Anti-fouling Conventions, and sail propulsion
trade that they heralded. Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention steam propulsion
are three examples: all have implications diesel engine propulsion
for shipowners where retrofitting of
environmental technology is concerned.
Plotting the course to a greener future Plotting the course to a greener future 04/05
What will tomorrow’s sustainable vessel look like,
and how will it differ from other vessels?
These are key questions in marine circles.
Of course, it’s impossible to answer Influencing legislation, promoting Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP)
these questions in detail because environmental protection for existing ships.
science and engineering developments Of course, the vessel of the future won’t
are happening so fast and simply be possible without legislation to guide Standards
can’t be predicted. its development and enforce compliance. Lloyd’s Register has been involved in
We make sure we are involved in the international standardisation since the
But there are ways in which we can help development of forthcoming legislation emergence of ISO 9001, the quality
drive and develop the key technologies which so that we can influence the changes management system standard, in 1985.
will shape the green ships of the future. and reflect them in our Rules. We contribute to standards development
at both the national and international
Research On the issue of SOx and NOx emissions, level, in some cases serving on
Through our strategic research agenda, we participated in and led one of the committees and in working groups. We
we are assessing and developing some IMO’s Informal Cross Government/ chaired the committee that drafted the
of the technologies which may help Industry Scientific Groups of Experts, first PAS 28000 on supply chain security
the industry become more sustainable established to evaluate the effects of and acted as Group leader for standards
in the near future and for the long term. the different fuel options proposed under within the new ISO 30000 series –
Though we can’t actually predict what the revision of Annex VI of the MARPOL Management Systems for Ship Recycling.
a future vessel will look like, we can be Convention. Its report helped the IMO
confident that ship design will focus on to choose the right option to address Sustainability
reuse and recycling, materials, hull design, prevailing concerns and adopt the Finally, no discussion of tomorrow’s
propulsion and fuels, and these are the changes to the Annex. We also assisted sustainable vessel of the future is
areas on which our research is focused. the industry in making considerable complete without considering what
progress in the area of environmentally we mean by the word ‘sustainability’.
Human factors sound ship recycling by developing the Implicit in it is the recognition that
In addition, we have come to understand first Green Passport based on the 2003 environmental, social and economic
that in looking at the vessel of the future IMO Guidelines on Ship Recycling. This considerations must be balanced.
we need to consider the human element. has subsequently become part of the Without addressing social and
People are widely accepted as the greatest Ship Recycling Convention as the environmental issues, a business
source of operational risk to modern Inventory of Hazardous Materials. experiencing short-term economic
ships – fatigue, poor leadership, lack of success cannot expect to remain
experience and poor maintenance are Now, we are using our experience successful into the future. Similarly,
just a few of the ways that the human and knowledge to address the latest environmental initiatives will be threatened
element can impact on operations. challenge which shipping faces; climate if they are not economically viable or do
Therefore, to make a business more change. As the IMO progresses on not take into consideration the well-
sustainable, it needs a well-trained, greenhouse gas issues, we are undertaking being of those involved or affected.
well-motivated and effective workforce. an IMO-commissioned study to assess the
Through our human factors services and potential emission reduction resulting
publications we are working to help from implementation of the Energy
owners and operators incorporate this Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for
vital element into their operations. new ships and the Ship Energy
Developing tomorrow’s sustainable vessel Developing tomorrow’s sustainable vessel 06/07
Meeting the sustainable vessel Research case studies:
Working with the industry to develop
challenge through research the green ship of the future
China Europe Other projects
Lloyd’s Register Classification Society Lloyd’s Register is one of 26 partners to We are also working on ‘green ship of
(China) [LRCS] and Shenzhen-listed the Danish joint industry project ‘Green the future’ projects with other industry
Shanghai Bestway Marine Engineering Ship of the Future’. The project offers a organisations in South America and Asia.
Design (Bestway) are jointly developing a framework within which technologies The projects aim to tackle the sustainable
new fuel-efficient bulk carrier in response capable of obtaining a 30% reduction in vessel challenge by focusing on the
to increasing pressure from owners and CO2 emissions and a 90% reduction in following criteria:
regulators for shipbuilders to offer NOX and SOX emissions can be developed
environmentally friendlier and more and demonstrated. (2007 emission levels – Safety of operations and crew
cost-effective vessels. are used as a baseline.) – Technical feasibility
– The balance between ‘planet, people
The project will focus on finding energy- and profit’
At Lloyd’s Register, we have a Low carbon shipping Nuclear power efficient alternatives for a 35,000 dwt – Cost effectivenes
detailed research agenda which Lloyd’s Register, together with 16 We are currently exploring the ‘Handysize’ bulk carrier and will focus on – Life cycle thinking.
is addressing the sustainable industrial partners and five UK reintroduction of nuclear propulsion two areas: energy-efficiency research into
vessel challenge. universities, is researching low carbon for merchant ships. Research is focused the ship’s hull and systems, and technical
shipping. The project is analysing the on the technical challenges of nuclear approval and implementation of the
This includes: shipping industry to develop a holistic propulsion for tankers, bulk carriers, proposed solutions. The research uses
understanding of the contractual, container ships and cruise ships, as the IMO’s Energy Efficiency Design Index
Green ship of the future technological and financial issues well as refuelling and waste-disposal as a benchmark.
involved in optimising future ship issues. The programme has been
Low carbon shipping concepts to achieve maximum reduction expanded to include public health,
of carbon emissions. manning, training, operational, risk
Propulsion technologies: and regulatory requirements.
– Propeller and system efficiencies Propulsion technologies
– Hydrogen fuel cells We are reviewing potential improvements Bio-fuels
– Nuclear power to current propulsion technologies. Early As world leaders continue to discuss
– Battery-powered ships, gas-fuelled results include fuel efficiency gains of up carbon emission reduction goals, much
ships and onshore power supplies to 20% by optimising the hull shape, consideration is being given to the role of
– Fuels based on renewable energy such while savings of about 8% have also bio-fuels in the transport sector. We are
as bio-fuels. been shown to be possible by applying currently conducting safety reviews of
appropriate coatings to the hull. Further the use of bio-fuels on existing ships with
Designs for ship recycling potential fuel savings of up to 8% have industry stakeholders and learning more
been demonstrated by replacing an old about the potential future use of bio-fuel
A few of these projects are outlined here: turbo-charger, and by improving the fuel engines. Current research in the UK
injection system, savings of between 5 to includes a project to power a fishing
Design for ship recycling 7% have been shown to be feasible. vessel on 100% bio-diesel and another
We are conducting research on the While these technologies are available fishing vessel on pure plant oil. We are
concept of design for recycling, working now, we have to establish that the also building our understanding of the
with a world authority on recycling savings can be achieved in real situations different sources of bio-fuels and their
from a leading UK university and and that there is no impact on ship implementation issues.
using their knowledge gained from safety. The knowledge we gain will help
land-based industries. The outcome inform the development of our Rules and
will enable guidelines and rules to Regulations.
be drafted for implementation by
designers and builders.
Developing tomorrow’s sustainable vessel Developing tomorrow’s sustainable vessel 08/09
Human factors case study: Environmental Protection Standards case study:
People and the environment – case study: Making ISO14001
an audit for V.Ships UASC shows the way relevant
V.Ships, the world’s largest ship manager, We carried out in-depth interviews over Middle East-based container ship Speaking on the decision to opt for The international standard, ISO14001,
was looking to further improve its 12 months with crew and shore-based operator United Arab Shipping Company the EP notation for its vessels, UASC’s originally published in 1996 and revised
environmental risk management and management. These were analysed to (UASC) showed its commitment to Vice President – Fleet Technical, in 2004, was developed by an
asked Lloyd’s Register to carry out an provide the management team with a environmental awareness by opting for Mohammad Al Sayed, said: “As part international committee of experts
audit. What made this audit different better insight into the steps necessary to our Environmental Protection notation of UASC’s environmental planning and which included Lloyd’s Register
was that it not only checked compliance foster a real and positive safety culture on its largest Lloyd’s Register classed strategy, opting for Lloyd’s Register’s representatives. During the revision
with the international environmental and move further away from a culture of box ships built to date. EP notation for these vessels provided process, we provided regular updates
Convention, MARPOL, but it also focused simply doing enough to be compliant. a framework to enable us to work on developments to clients and also set
on the company’s people and Among the additional environmental towards in meeting UASC’s up a group, in conjunction with Lloyd’s
management culture. Together, we features fitted to the UASC vessels in environmental vision.” Register Quality Assurance, to support
developed a year-long environmental order to obtain the EP notation are: the understanding of ISO14001 in the
audit – the first of its kind, it addressed marine environment. Many shipowners,
human factors which could affect safety – an electronically controlled main operators and builders use ISO14001,
culture, such as issues around blame, engine in accordance with MARPOL both for new builds and repair, as a
motivation, communication and the need Annex VI NOx requirements means of managing their environmental
to lead by example. – segregated low-sulphur bunker tanks impact and demonstrating their
– a refrigerant leak detection system commitment to environmental protection.
to continuously monitor leakage
UASC owned MAYSSAN, which has – operational features to minimise
been awarded Lloyd’s Register’s the translocation of organisms in
Environmental Protection notation.
How can we help? How can we help? How can we help?
Human factors services Environmental ISO14001 Practical Pack
Protection (EP) notation
We provide human factors support Safety Culture Toolkit Lloyd’s Register’s Environmental updated to reflect operational For standards to be of benefit to
to help ensure safe and effective Evaluates an organisation’s safety Protection service is designed to help feedback and any developments organisations, it is also important that
performance of new and existing vessels culture with respect to key behavioural shipowners and operators control in technology and legislation. they are explained clearly. To help the
through good ergonomics, working indicators to provide recommendations operational pollution and demonstrate marine community implement ISO14001,
environments and working practices. for improvement. The service involves their proactive approach to clients and With an Environmental Protection we have developed a CD-Rom-based
interviews with staff. regulatory authorities. notation in place, an organisation Practical Pack for Ship Operators. This
Technical Services can publicly demonstrate its provides shipping industry-specific
Design and assurance of physical Safety Culture Evaluation Toolkit The service is based on our voluntary commitment to running an guidance and advice on the ISO14001
ergonomics; cognitive ergonomics; Provides an understanding of an Rules for Environmental Protection. environmentally sound business. environmental management standard
and socio-technical systems. organisation’s relative strengths and These set standards for the design and and helps ship operators establish
weaknesses in achieving continual safety operation of all ship types, covering For more information please visit: environmental management systems.
Human Factors Integration improvements. Through analysis of areas such as NOX and SOx emissions, oil www.lr.org/ep
Assessment of the feasibility of the incidents, and survey and scenario-based pollution prevention, refrigerants & fire- For more information please visit:
role of people in a system, the usability interviews and workshops, we develop fighting agents, garbage handling and www.lr.org/pp
of human-machine interfaces and the a safety culture profile and identify ballast water management. The Rules
sustainability of the required level of short-term and longer-term solutions are formulated using environmental risk
human performance. for improvement. assessment techniques and are regularly
For more information please visit:
Environmental roadmap Environmental roadmap
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
What’s on the radar? Anti-Fouling Systems Convention
Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan
Entered into force September 2008.
Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep Jan Apr Jul Sep
A look ahead at forthcoming Bio-fouling Guidelines Voluntary bio-fouling guidelines are likely in 2011
international legislation Ballast Water Management Convention Possible entry into force: 2012
Since the 1970s, the answers to the environmental questions facing the maritime MARPOL Convention
world have been spearheaded by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Annex I: Oil Prohibition of the use and carriage of heavy grade oil in the Antarctic sea expected to come into effect in 2012
the body which regulates shipping through international consensus. New chapter on ship-to-ship oil transfer operation (STS Plan) and clearer definition of tanks (regulation 1) enter into force January 1, 2011
During this time, the IMO has Our environmental roadmap outlines Annex III: Prevention of pollution by harmful substances Amendments to Annex III (including IMDG Code becoming mandatory under MARPOL) entered into force on January 1, 2010
successfully adopted a number of the key existing and forthcoming in packaged form
international treaties, such as the environmental legislation from the
MARPOL Convention with its six IMO up to the end of 2016, identifying Annex V: Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships Revised Annex V expected to enter into force in 2013
Annexes, the Anti-fouling Systems future compliance dates and emerging
Convention and the Ballast Water regulations. While we are only looking Annex VI: Prevention of air pollution from ships Revised Annex VI enters into force July 1, 2010
Management Convention. at international legislation here, there
are of course many national and regional New ECA-SOX North American ECA-SOx expected to come into effect August 2012
The majority of these are in force today requirements affecting owners and
and contributing to the protection of operators, such as EU Directives, the Controls inside ECA-SOX Maximum sulphur content limit reduces to 1.00% m/m on July 1, 2010 Maximum sulphur content limit reduces
the environment both in water and in California Air Resources Board (CARB) to 0.10% m/m on January 1, 2015
air, while others are on a steady course regulations and other local or port- Controls outside ECA-SOX Maximum sulphur content limit reduces to 3.50% m/m on January 1, 2012
towards ratification. In fact, 21 of the specific requirements.
51 IMO Conventions relate to Alternative equivalent SOX controls Exhaust gas cleaning systems may be approved for use inside and outside ECA-SOx from July 1, 2010
NOX controls – new construction Tier II controls come into effect from January 1, 2011 Tier III controls come into
effect from January 1, 2016
ECA-NOX North American ECA-NOX
expected to come into
effect in 2016
NOX controls – ships constructed January 1, 1990 – December 31, 1999 Anticipate availability of first ‘approved methods’ during 2012
ODS Record Book ODS Record Book is required from July 1, 2010
VOC Management Plan VOC Management Plans required from July 1, 2010
Biofuels Guidelines Updated Guidelines on the carriage of bio-fuel blends expected to come into effect from January 1, 2011
of the 51 IMO Ship Recycling Convention Entry into force is expected sometime between 2012 and 2015
to environmental Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) EEDI guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis EEDI could become mandatory in 2014
issues Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) EEOI guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis
Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) SEEMP guidelines may already be used on a voluntary basis
GHG market-based measures Discussions ongoing at the IMO
Key effective/compliance dates. Length of bar does not indicate time-scale
A deeper look
The arena of environmental compliance in shipping is vast,
but there are some key areas currently presenting the marine
industry with critical challenges and questions. Here we take
a deeper look at six of these – fuels and exhaust emissions,
ballast water management, ship recycling, energy, volatile
organic compounds and hull coatings – and the key issues
and legislation surrounding them. >
Fuels and exhaust emissions Fuels and exhaust emissions 14/15
Annex VI and future ship design – Legislation:
Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention
the impact of exhaust emission controls The revised MARPOL Annex VI comes into force on July 1, 2010.
The principal amendments are step changes to the limits for NOX
and SOX emissions. The revised Annex also introduces the concept
of Emission Control Areas (ECAs) – as opposed to the previous
SECAs. ECAs may be NOx, SOX or both NOX and SOX control areas.
The revised MARPOL Annex VI sets out substantial NOX emissions
NOX requirements continue to apply only to installed diesel
changes in exhaust emission controls which will engines over 130 kW. Different tiers of control have been
have far reaching effects on shipping. introduced based on ship construction date, with the limit value
determined on the basis of engine rated speed. However, in
the case of additional or non-identical replacement engines the
Up to now, however, the initial The first stage reductions, while It is the dramatic second stage of NOX So where does this leave the industry? applicable Tier will be set by the installation date. Tier III limits
controls have not really resulted in important, do not represent a radical and SOX reductions which will see major Well, taking into account the various apply only inside NOX Emission Control Areas.
any particular differentiation within change either. The July 1, 2010 reduction changes arising in the options for factors (only some of which are known
the industry or between ships. to 1.00% within Emission Control Areas compliance. It is clear that there will be a or at least reasonably predictable) – ship Tier Ship Total weighted cycle emission limit (g/kWh)
construction n = engine’s rated speed (rpm)
established to limit SOX and particulate distinction between ships built before or construction date; known and likely date on
Those ships currently subject to the NOX matter emissions (ECA-SOX – as the after January 1, 2016; the SOX controls trading areas; the establishment of or after n < 130 n = 130–1999 n ≥ 2000
controls have generally been fitted with existing SECAs are restyled under the will apply to all ships, while the Tier III further ECAs; technology availability and
I January 1 17.0 45.n-0.2 9.8
certified engines, while for ships currently revised Annex) will be met by increasing NOX controls will apply only to ships built performance; payback potential of capital 2000
subject to SOX controls (which really the low-sulphur blend ratio. The in 2016 or later when operating in investments; petroleum fuel price and
means ships operating within the existing reduction outside ECA-SOx to 3.50%, Emission Control Areas established to availability; and alternative fuel and II January 1 14.4 44.n-0.23 7.7
North Sea and Baltic SOX Emission meanwhile, is not a major challenge – limit NOX emissions – ECA-NOX. Further engine types – a range of radically and
Control Areas (SECAs)), compliance has even now less than 12% of the fuels in distinctions will occur based on areas of fundamentally different primary or III January 1 3.4 9.n-0.2 2.0
been achieved through the bunkering the IMO sulphur monitoring programme intended operation; some ships will never secondary control options for compliance 2016*
and use of fuel oils manufactured to are over that limit, and only just over enter, or never leave, either SOX or NOX will become available.
*Depending on the outcome of a review (to be concluded in 2013) as to the
meet the initial 1.5% sulphur limit. 2% exceed 4.0%. Under these ECAs, while others will operate both availability of the required technology, this date could be deferred.
circumstances, the drive to employ inside and outside them for some of the Consequently, the fuel and machinery
The Annex’s global fuel oil sulphur limit secondary controls, such as exhaust time. How much time may well change configuration used by the majority of Existing engines over 5MW, of 90 litres and above per cylinder,
of 4.5% has not really been a factor; the gas cleaning systems (which are now during a ship’s lifespan and is further ships for the last few decades will installed on ships constructed between January 1, 1990 and
IMO’s fuel oil sulphur monitoring a potential compliance option both complicated by the potential for new change. The existing ‘one-size-fits-all’ December 31,1999 are required to limit NOX emissions to
programme (which has been running inside and outside ECA-SOX) may be ECAs to be established. Already, the approach will not apply in future – Tier I levels – if a so-called ‘approved method’ for NOX emission
since 1999) shows that, even before limited. Similarly, the reductions in the North American ECA (covering both SOX instead, shipowners considering new control is commercially available.
Annex VI came into force in 2005, fuel NOX limits to the Tier II levels will, it is and NOX) has been accepted by the IMO orders or scheduling drydockings for
oil sulphur content as bunkered never expected, continue to be met using and there is a high likelihood that other existing ships will need to carefully assess SOX and particulate matter emissions
exceeded 4.5% by more than a fraction in-engine controls. areas will seek similar status. the available compliance options and The revised Annex introduces a number of changes to the
of one per cent – a situation which is select the one that works best for them maximum allowable sulphur content of fuel oil, both inside
continuing to date. Additionally, while SOX controls may – and for the future value of the ship. and outside SOX and particulate matter Emission Control Areas.
be either operational (bunkering a fuel Compliance using alternative means such as exhaust
oil of the required sulphur content) or gas cleaning systems is also allowed.
equipment-based (using an exhaust gas
cleaning system), the Tier III NOX controls Fuel oil sulphur limits outside Fuel oil sulphur limits inside SOX
SOX and particulate matter ECAs and particulate matter ECAs
will, in all probability, require systems
to be fitted at the time the engine 4.50% m/m before 1.50% m/m before July 1, 2010
“The existing ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach is constructed. January 1, 2012
will not apply in future.” 3.50% m/m on and after
January 1, 2012
1.00% m/m on and after
July 1, 2010
0.50% m/m on and after 0.10% m/m on and after
January 1, 2020* January 1, 2015
*Depending on the outcome of a review (to be concluded in 2018) as to the
availability of the required fuel oil, this date could be deferred to January 1, 2025.
Fuels and exhaust emissions Fuels and exhaust emissions 16/17
Case study: Legislation:
The next generation of fuel monitoring: At berth requirements –
FOBAS Onboard with Lab-On-A-Ship™ providing the answers
We have been working with NanoNord Lauritzen is positive that Lab-On-A-Ship™ The ‘at berth’ requirements of EC On arrival at an EU port if a ship first
A/S of Aalborg, Denmark, on an will enable it to optimise its ships’ Directive 2005/33/EC have been the goes to anchor and then later moves
innovative approach to ensuring that fuel operations, thus reducing both their cause of considerable interest and to a berth alongside is it required to
oils are adequately pre-treated and then environmental impact and operating uncertainty. In force since January 1, use a 0.1% m/m maximum sulphur
burned in the most efficient manner. costs. Lauritzen Technical Manager, Poul 2010, the Directive requires that ships fuel oil during that passage from
Martin Kondrup, commented: “Our goal burn fuel oil with a maximum sulphur anchorage to berth?
Lab-On-A-Ship™ is an onboard fuel oil, is to extend the onboard measurement content of 0.1% when ‘at berth’. However, If the particular EU member state
lubricating oil and exhaust emission capability to encompass the highly considerable concerns still exist as to considers that anchorage to be part of
monitoring system. It allows ships’ variable fuels and lubricant quality issues compliance, associated technical issues the ‘port’, thereby making change-over
engineers to take the actions necessary to encountered by shipping. This will and how the requirements are likely necessary while at anchor, the ship is not
optimise both fuel oil treatment and use represent a substantial step forward in to be enforced. required to use a 0.1% m/m maximum
on a truly informed basis with the benefit making the correct machinery sulphur fuel oil during the passage from
of further support through shore-based management decisions which enable To assist shipowners and others in anchorage to berth.
trend and event analysis. targeted action, the minimisation of understanding the operational realities of
waste and impact on the environment.” compliance, we have prepared a set of What will happen if it is necessary for
The pilot application of Lab-On-A-Ship™ frequently asked questions (FAQs). These a ship to have certain modifications
on the ships of Lauritzen Bulkers AS, The Lab-On-A-Ship™ project is also being provide clarification and guidance on to machinery, storage arrangements,
Copenhagen is a key project. As a first piloted on three other ships. Initial around 60 different issues, including: piping or control systems before being
step, the Lab-On-A-Ship™ systems were findings are expected during 2010. able to use a 0.1% m/m maximum
installed on two of Lauritzen’s ships Do the requirements apply whenever sulphur fuel oil but those modifications
– Sofie Bulker and Amine Bulker. In parallel, a ship is anchored in EU waters? have not yet been installed?
Lloyd’s Register’s FOBAS team was Since the requirement is given as This very much depends on the range
commissioned to provide in-depth fuel ‘…ships at berth in EU ports…’ it would of views which will be taken by the
oil management training to the ship’s be considered that if a ship anchors within individual member states. As indicated
engineers, superintendents and technical EU waters but outside a zone controlled by the European Commission’s
management. by a particular port or navigation authority Recommendation, published December
(i.e. to effect repairs or awaiting orders) 29, 2009, compliance is still required;
then the requirement does not apply. it is up to the member state, if they wish
to be so guided, to consider the degree
Does the change-over requirement to which actions have been taken to
apply to ships which are ‘at berth’ prepare the ship and its equipment
How can we help? for less than two hours? when deciding what penalty to apply
in particular cases.
Fuel and exhaust emissions services Yes. The ‘two hours’ given in the
Directive only applies where there is a
published timetable which gives the time The full FAQs can be downloaded at
Lloyd’s Register’s FOBAS services help shipowners and Fuel System Audit ‘at berth’ as less than two hours (i.e. in www.lr.org/fobas
operators to manage fuel quality and comply with Our fuel system audit tests the effectiveness of a vessel’s the case of ferries on scheduled services).
emissions controls. treatment system. In a fuel quality or machinery damage dispute, There is not a general exemption for
it can help establish that a system is well maintained. ships which will be ‘at berth’ for less
Fuel Oil Bunker Analysis than two hours.
Through our collaboration with Intertek, the leading global Fuel Change-over Plan
fuel testing laboratory, we can offer rapid independent The Fuel Change-over Plan provides step-by-step guidance covering
verification of fuel quality against international standards and all aspects of change-over to low-sulphur fuel, helping ensure
environmental legislation, helping businesses manage the risk compliance with international, regional and local SOX requirements.
from poor quality fuel.
Exhaust emissions services
FOBAS Engine We provide a wide range of services in this challenging area.
FOBAS Engine analyses eight key indicators to gain an insight In addition to providing advice and practical guidance on
into the operational performance of marine engines. Through regulations and compliance options, we evaluate exhaust gas
this holistic approach, we provide practical guidance to help measurement proposals to help meet your needs and objectives.
correct any issues and achieve efficient engine performance.
For more information please visit:
Ballast water management Ballast water management 18/19
Looking ahead at retrofitting – Legislation:
The Ballast Water
the challenges of retrospective legislation Management Convention
The International Convention for the Control and Management
of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments will come into force 12
months after ratification by 30 states, representing 35% of world
merchant shipping tonnage. At the time of writing, 22 states,
representing more than 22% of the world’s tonnage, have
The International Ballast Water Management Convention is not Owners should ensure that there is space ratified the Convention.
on board to fit a treatment system, and
yet in force and, since the process is dependent on government enough available power (some have quite The Convention will apply to all ships engaged on international
ratification, it is difficult to predict when it might happen. large power requirements). They should voyages that carry ballast water. Initially ships will be required to
also make provision for control systems, treat or exchange ballast water, but a mandatory requirement to
such as control air or fresh water install and use a ballast water treatment system is being phased
Nevertheless, shipowners need to This retrospective aspect is one which is They will also need to consider whether supplies, storage of chemicals that may in based on the timescales set out below.
think ahead as they will, at some being seen more often, as compliance retrofitting can be carried out at sea or if be used in the system and any fire
stage in the not too distant future, dates pass before Conventions are a repair yard is required. If it can be done protection and extinction measures that Ballast Year of ship construction
be required to install and use ballast ratified. For owners, it means looking at sea, can the work be wholly or partly may be required. For tankers, owners capacity
water treatment systems. ahead and assessing the options as soon carried out by the ship’s staff? The must consider whether the system is Before 2009* 2009+ 2009-2011 2012+
as possible. logistics of installation, including access certified as gas safe.
While this presents a challenge for any to the chosen location, are also a vital < 1500 m 3
BWE or BWT BWT only
owner, the Convention’s requirement for The feasibility of retrofitting ballast consideration. The recommendation from Lloyd’s BWT only
systems to be retrofitted on existing water treatment technology Register is, if possible and if a suitable from 2016
vessels means it is those with ships in encompasses a host of issues. Owners For newbuilds, while a system must still approved system is available, to install
1500 – BWE or BWT BWT only
service who will potentially find achieving will need to research available treatment be researched and identified, the one at new build or at the very least to 5000 m3 until 2014; BWT
compliance most onerous. systems and their associated costs challenges are perhaps more design the vessel so that retrofit is simplified. only from 2014
(including initial outlay, installation and straightforward.
> 5000 m3 BWE or BWT BWE or BWT BWT only
running costs) and power consumption, While owners consider these questions, until 2016 until 2016;
as well as availability of consumables and another aspect of the Convention – BWT only BWT only
service agents. the interim provision for ballast water from 2016 from 2016
exchange, which will be phased out *These ships need to comply at the first intermediate or renewal survey
according to ballast water capacity – is after the anniversary of the date of delivery in the year of compliance.
already an accepted part of operations BWE – ballast water exchange
How can we help? for many internationally trading vessels. BWT – ballast water treatment
There is now a large number of national, Due to the uncertainty regarding the availability of approved ballast
Ballast water management services and some regional, requirements which water treatment systems, the IMO adopted a resolution which
require that ships undertake exchange recommends that, for ships constructed in 2009 with a ballast
Lloyd’s Register offers a comprehensive range of ballast water For those businesses that have a ballast water management – some mandatory and some voluntary. water capacity of less than 5000m3, a treatment system need not
management services that cover: plan in place already, we can review and approve it against These are largely similar, stipulating that be fitted until the second annual survey under the Convention or
– development and approval of ballast water management the Lloyd’s Register Group assessment procedure and the exchange takes place at a minimum by December 31, 2011, whichever is earlier. For ships built in 2010,
plans (and the bwmp notation) IMO guidelines. Wherever we find that a satisfactory plan distance from land in a specified depth it is considered that sufficient systems will be available. However,
– approval of treatment systems. is in operation, we issue a ballast water management plan of water, and that a ballast water the IMO will review the situation in October 2010.
certificate, accompanied by the appropriate descriptive note, management plan is prepared and kept
We can help develop a safe, practical strategy to reduce the demonstrating to relevant authorities and organisations that on board. And while ballast water At present there are eight fully approved ballast water
risks associated with ballast waste management and meet the ship has a documented, verified procedure for ballast exchange does have some safety treatment systems available on the market. Approximately
environmental responsibilities. By adopting our systematic water management. implications, these are well understood 20 additional systems are activity pursuing approval and a further
procedures, businesses can be confident of meeting national and can be mitigated with good planning 30 or so systems are at various stages of development. A number
regulations and the IMO’s Ballast Water Convention and its Understanding treatment technology and crew training. of systems have already been installed on ships voluntarily or to
associated guidelines. Our Guide to Ballast Water Treatment Technology provides an comply with local regulations.
independent appraisal of commercially available and developing Ballast water exchange remains a
Our ballast water management plans are specific to each ship ballast water treatment technologies and their testing and temporary solution, however. For owners Shipbuilders and owners should consider installation of ballast water
and draw on our wide experience and research. Each ship’s approval status. and operators, planning for the treatment systems for ships scheduled to be built in 2010 and later.
plan will address and account for all key ballast water issues installation and use of treatment systems As a minimum, owners should ensure that new vessels can retrofit
while helping to ensure that overall structural integrity and For more information please visit: should start now. the required treatment systems when the Convention comes into force.
operational safety of the ship is not compromised. www.lr.org/bwm
Ship recycling Ship recycling 20/21
Waiting for ratification – Legislation:
The Ship Recycling Convention
life before the recycling Convention On May 15, 2009, at a diplomatic conference in Hong Kong,
the International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally
Sound Recycling of Ships was adopted by 63 member states of
the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
The Convention will enter into force when it has been ratified
Today, most ship scrapping takes place in South Asia – mainly Old lighting ballasts on a ship may be by 15 states, representing 40% of the world fleet – something
contaminated with polychlorinated that is likely to occur between 2012 and 2015. Its aim is to
in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan where demand is high for biphenyls (PCBs), which are persistent
lay down legally binding and globally applicable ship recycling
steel scrap. Some 95-98% of a ship’s lightweight is recycled. regulations for international shipping and for ship recycling
facilities, and it will have serious ramifications for shipowners,
builders, repairers and breakers.
Over the last ten years, from being However, while the industry waits for For most shipping companies, their Additionally, shipowners in the vanguard
the concern only of buyers and the Convention to enter into force, the end-of life solution policies have yet to of environmental compliance are also Overall, the Convention can be described as a response to
sellers of old ships, the end-of-life most significant regulatory framework change, but there are a growing number adopting the requirements for the the lack of regulation and standards in ship breaking practice
process for ships has attracted affecting ship recycling remains the Basel of companies who are seeking safer and Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) – especially where safety, environmental and quality standards
interest from many concerned about Convention. This came into force in more environmentally friendly methods which will be mandatory under the are concerned. It covers the entire ship life cycle, from design
safety and environmental impact response to the shipping of hazardous of recycling ships. These owners are Recycling Convention. and construction, through in-service operation to dismantling
during the process and afterwards. waste to developing countries and to reviewing their end-of life policies or and requires:
Eastern Europe by ‘traders’ seeking to actively managing the demolition and Today, and for the immediate future,
If ship recycling has been efficient in circumvent expensive and closely regulated recycling process. Maersk is one such a combination of factors needs to be – ships to have an Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) –
terms of providing a ready supply of waste disposal in their own countries. company. It has now recycled 20 ships weighed up and a decision made by also known as the Green Passport
steel and other metals for re-use, there However, it was not specifically drafted to in one yard without serious injury to the the owners involved. The application of – new builds to exclude certain hazardous materials
has been a cost in terms of lives lost include the concept of ships themselves yard workforce. Such experiences have international conventions is, of course, – ship recycling facilities to be authorised by the national
and local environmental impact. being defined as ‘hazardous waste’. helped spur the formation of the often uneven. Safe and environmentally authority
International Ship Recycling Association sound ship recycling is essentially in its – ship recycling facilities to provide an approved ‘ship recycling
Cutting apart big steel structures is a In some cases, ships have been identified (ISRA) which is building a body of ship infancy and there is no such thing as just plan’ detailing how the ship will be recycled
complex and hazardous business. Even as ‘hazardous waste’ by concerned recyclers to help provide confidence to one acceptable technique. The Industry – ships flying the flag of Parties to the Convention to be
though a high proportion by weight of authorities. A recent example was the owners looking for more control over the Working Group on Ship Recycling has recycled only in authorised recycling facilities
the ship’s structure is re-usable, there 50,700 ton LNG carrier, Margaret Hill. In recycling process. China has become a produced guidance for owners to help them – ship recycling facilities which are located in Parties to
are significant amounts of plastics and early August 2009 the ship was detained destination of choice for many of these decide what to do in this interim period. the Convention to recycle only ships which they are
other materials that should be handled by the UK Environment Agency as she owners seeking more control of the authorised to recycle.
carefully and appropriately. Noting ‘the attempted to sail to India (she has since demolition facilities.
growing concerns about safety, health been released and is reported to be Associated regulatory requirements include:
and the environment and welfare waiting at a shipyard for a conversion
matters’, the Ship Recycling Convention project). This was a clear example of a – The ILO requirements for Safety and Welfare in Ship
was adopted by the IMO last year. merchant ship destined for scrap being Recycling Facilities
designated as ‘dangerous goods’ or – The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
‘hazardous waste’ by an OECD Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal
government. It sets an interesting – The European Waste Shipment Regulations (and other
precedent since the Margaret Hill was regional equivalents).
unlikely to be dissimilar in terms of
construction materials to any other ship
of a ship’s lightweight
of her type and generation. is recycled
Ship recycling Ship recycling 22/23
Significant demand for the Green Passport
Many shipowners are adopting the Ship Here are some of their comments on GEM Odfjell
Recycling Convention requirements. obtaining a Green Passport and on Captain Robert Ferguson, Head of Marine Helge Olsen, Senior Vice President Ship
Among them, FLOPEC, Gulf Energy environmental compliance in general: Safety and Environment: “Any useful Management in Odfjell: “For Odfjell,
Maritime (GEM) PJSC, Wallenius Marine ‘tools’, such as Green Passport, are Green Passport underpins our
AB, Odfjell Management AS and FLOPEC welcome to a responsible shipping commitment to people’s health and the
Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (CMAL) Rear Admiral Aland Molestina, President company in the successful environmental environment. We are pleased to have
have all attained a Lloyd’s Register of the FLOPEC Board: “…as an operation of the vessel and show Lloyd’s Register on our team to help us
approved Inventory of Hazardous Materials environmentally conscious company, one commitment to environmental protection.” implement Green Passports in the best
(Green Passport) for ships in their fleets, of our priorities was to ensure compliance possible way.”
demonstrating an ongoing commitment to with the environmental requirements of Wallenius
safeguarding the environment and early our traditional trading areas.” Per Tunell, Head of Environmental Caledonian
Gulf Castle is one of 11 GEM tankers compliance with the legislation. Management: “...we always try to Guy Platten, Managing Director of
with a Green Passport. be well ahead of coming rules and CMAL: “We are constantly looking for
regulations that concern environmental new ways to address environmental
issues. In fact, it is one of our principles. issues, whether it’s looking at alternative
Therefore it was completely according to fuels for the ferries of the future or how
our strategy to start working with Inventory best to recycle ferries safely at the end of
of Hazardous Materials at an early stage.” their operational life. The Green Passport
is a great example of proactively working
“We are pleased to have Lloyd’s Register on our with industry colleagues to take action
now to help assure environmental
team to help us implement Green Passports in protection in the future.”
the best possible way.”
Senior Vice President, Ship Management, Odjfell
FLOPEC’s Pichincha, a 105,000 dwt
Aframax tanker, was the first
Lloyd’s Register-classed ship to
be delivered in 2010.
How can we help?
Ship recycling services
Inventory of Hazardous Materials approval and Our Guide to the Inventory of Hazardous Materials (Green
verification (Green Passport) Passport) was published in May to help prepare the industry
In 2004, Lloyd’s Register was the first classification society to for the new regulations.
issue an independently verified Green Passport – now known
as the Inventory of Hazardous Materials and a key requirement Assessing recycling standards
of the Ship Recycling Convention. Through this service, we Through Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance (LRQA) we provide
help owners and operators achieve compliance with the certification to the international ship recycling standard – ISO30000.
Convention. We also provide a list of companies that can
assist in compiling the Inventory, helping to control costs. The Audit during dismantling
Inventory can help to promote better hazard management We discuss the requirements for controlling the dismantling process,
on board ship and enable better long-term liability planning. and provide: consultancy services before the dismantling starts; an
It also helps companies to demonstrate their commitment to assessment of the facility (against agreed standards); and supervision
improving environmental standards and provides measurable of the dismantling process in co-operation with the recycling facility.
and achievable objectives for ISO14001 certified companies.
For more information please visit: Wallenius Marine AB attained a Lloyd’s Register-approved
www.lr.org/greenpassport Green Passport for its vehicle carrier, Tristan.
Energy Energy 24/25
Putting theory into practice – Legislation:
Energy efficiency tools from the IMO
making the IMO energy The IMO has developed a range of voluntary measures aimed
efficiency tools effective at helping the marine industry achieve fuel efficiencies and a
reduction in emissions.
Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI)
This is intended to stimulate improved energy efficiency in new
The non-shipping world is looking critically at the marine ships at the design stage. Interim guidelines for its application
and verification will be applied on a voluntary basis for a trial
industry’s contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions period to assess the practicalities of their application. IMO
and asking how they can be reduced. member governments and observer organisations will be
encouraged to provide feedback so that the guidelines can be
improved and subsequently upgraded to a statutory instrument.
It’s a complex discussion and there However, these tools are voluntary, And there are other issues which will also – EEDI verifications will often require data
are different views on how best to and may not yield the expected savings need to be addressed during the voluntary interpolation at the trials stage where Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI)
reduce greenhouse gas emissions unless they are translated into mandatory application period. Some of the concerns the ship cannot be tested in the fully The EEOI is intended to standardise fuel efficiency assessment
from shipping. regulation. As such, it is expected that expressed by industry include: laden condition. Standard methods for ships in service and is directly related to bunker consumption.
the IMO will in future move to a statutory need to be developed for such cases. It has been devised to help shipowners and operators evaluate
It is estimated that shipping (both Energy Efficient Design Index in order – Optimisation of EEDI at the design ship performance with regard to CO2 emissions so they can
domestic and international) contributes to further advance reduction in CO2 stage for a specific operational speed – Specific fuel consumption will be improve fuel efficiency over time. Unlike the EEDI, the Indicator
2.7% to global CO2 emissions annually emissions from new ships. Before this may conflict in practice with the obtained from engine builders data files is not set to become mandatory.
– a similar amount to that emitted by happens, the industry will need to requirements of operational modes, but these may have been generated for
Germany or Japan. To limit global evaluate the options to ensure a smooth leading to poor design decisions and NOX rather than CO2 and may require Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP)
temperature increase to around 2°C, transition to low-carbon shipping. higher subsequent energy some interpretation. In conjunction with the above measures, the IMO has
it is thought that global GHG emissions The IMO is also discussing various consumption. released guidance for the development of a Ship Energy
will need to be reduced by 50% across market-based measures. Addressing these issues is critical to Efficiency Management Plan which incorporates best practice
the world, with developed countries – EEDI as defined now may lead to lower make sure the eventual statutory EEDI for fuel efficient ship operations. Although this may form
reducing their GHG emissions by 80% To make the EEDI mandatory and power margin ships which would is as robust as possible. In the meantime, part of a company’s environmental management system,
compared to 1990 levels. effective, baselines or control limits will increase potential safety risks (during some operators are already making use it is not mandatory at this stage. The EEOI can be used to
need to be agreed for various ship types, operation in heavy seas, for example). of the tools, showing that the industry check SEEMP effectiveness.
The IMO’s Energy Efficiency Design Index something which IMO will be deliberating This concern has been raised for some is already embracing the concept while
(EEDI), in conjunction with the proposed at future Marine Environmental specific ship types such as ro-ro vessels. mandatory instruments are forthcoming.
Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan Protection Committee meetings.
(SEEMP) and Energy Efficiency Operational – EEDI will lead to slower ships. Reducing
Indicator (EEOI) should help the industry speeds could lead to cargo modal
achieve fuel efficiencies and a consequent shifts that could potentially have a
reduction in greehouse gas emissions. negative impact on overall transport-
The potential for improvement is quite related emissions.
significant: industry consensus points
to a 50% overall increase in the energy
efficiency of shipping in the long term.
– the proportion of
“The potential for improvement is quite global greenhouse gases
significant: industry consensus points caused by international
to a 50% overall increase in the energy shipping CO2 emissions
efficiency of shipping in the long term.”
Energy Energy 26/27
Finding ways to save energy Case study:
Our ship energy audit service helps owners identify Investigating shipboard power
potential energy savings in a wide variety of ways, management culture
from analysis of operating systems to the cultural
practices that govern them. In order to insure against blackout, two While there are times when two Fuel consumption reduction:
auxiliary engines are often operated in generators are required, the audit 29 MT per year
parallel for long periods at less than half showed that both were being used even
load. This is common practice in port, in calm weather during normal passage. CO2 reduction:
at anchor and during tank cleaning and This could have been attributed to the 92 MT per year
Case study: ballast exchange operations. The engine room team being reluctant to rely
operation of diesel engines at low loads on the PMS to start additional generators Estimated saving:
Bright ideas tends to lead to more maintenance and when required. Through our findings, we $11,600 per year (@ $400 per MT)
higher fuel consumption. were able to demonstrate that the PMS
On a big passenger ship, lighting We concluded that the use of energy Fuel consumption reduction: was capable of effectively managing the Estimated cost:
consumes a lot of energy. Since saving lighting and the retrofitting of 457 metric tonnes (MT) per year On board an aframax tanker, we auxiliary engines in automatic mode, None
incandescent light bulbs convert more smart lighting control devices, together evaluated the prevailing shipboard which included a load-dependent start
than 90% of the energy they use to heat, with an improved load factor, would lead CO2 reduction: practices, paying particular attention to: and stop set up. Payback:
the choice of bulbs and their efficiency to a reduction in power consumption 1,440 MT per year the engines’ load factor trends; the Immediate
play a major role in energy conservation. of more than 300 kW and an estimated extent to which the PMS (power We proposed specific corrective actions
We investigated the lighting systems saving of $183,000 per year. In addition, Estimated saving: management system) was used; and the for the engines’ load and recommended
on board a Panamax passenger ship, the reduction in heat generated by the $183,000 per year (@ $400 per MT) ship’s electrical demand management. more effective use of the PMS and the
recording the number of lights and their lighting would reduce the HVAC We found that the engines were often introduction of specific instructions
type and rating to analyse their (heating, ventilating and air conditioning) Estimated cost: being operated manually, leading to concerning manual engine operation.
approximate daily electrical consumption. system load, resulting in additional $130,000 situations where both were running at Our recommendations also included the
The audit identified that extensive use savings. Following the audit, the owner low loads. introduction of benchmarks to help
of 50 watt halogen spotlights and a installed energy saving lighting as part Payback: ensure that compliance with the
lack of lighting control in certain areas of the company’s energy conservation 8.5 months proposals was monitored.
(passenger cabins, for example) were programme.
adding to the ship’s energy consumption.
How can we help?
Ship energy services
We provide a range of ship energy services which can be Our services can assist in determining your CO2 emissions
customised according to a business’s needs. Working closely footprint, calculating ship energy efficiency indices and
with each organisation, we aim to improve energy efficiency implementing energy efficiency measures (including the EEDI,
across the fleet in a number of ways: EEOI and SEEMP).
– Ship energy audit For more information please visit: On a big passenger ship, lighting
– Ship performance monitoring www.lr.org/ses consumes a lot of energy.
– Fleet energy management support
– Design optimisation support
– Advice on alternative technologies.
“Working closely with your
organisation, we aim to improve
energy efficiency across the fleet.”
The human element is a key consideration when conducting ship energy audits.
Volatile organic compounds Volatile organic compounds 28/29
Cleaner air and more Legislation:
VOC Management Plan
oil in the tank Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are emitted as gases
from certain solids or liquids. VOCs include a variety of
chemicals, some of which may have short- and long-term
adverse health effects.
The revised MARPOL Annex VI introduced a new mandatory
Teekay, one of the world’s leading tanker operators, has been requirement (regulation 15.6) regarding Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOC) emissions control. This will apply to all
working hard to reduce the amount of crude oil lost as vapour tankers carrying crude oil.
during loading and transportation.
With effect from July 1, 2010, every tanker carrying crude oil
will be required to have on board and implement a ship-specific
Commonly designated Volatile The total investment by operators VOC Management Plan, approved by the Administration.
Organic Compounds or VOCs, these to date has been in the region of The Plan should be prepared taking into account guidelines
hydrocarbon gases are low level US$250 million, with annual operating contained in resolution MEPC.185 (59) and MEPC.1/Circ.680.
pollutants which over time break expenses for these systems at around The purpose of the Plan is to ensure that VOC emissions
down to CO2, becoming greenhouse US$20 million. These systems are all resulting from tanker operations to which regulation 15.6
gases. With worldwide trade in crude installed on a retro-fit basis on board applies are prevented or minimised as much as possible.
oil at around 20 million barrels a ship to reduce VOC emissions during
day and the fuel’s nature as a long- loading. Reductions in VOC emissions in A ship-specific VOC Management Plan must at the least provide
haul cargo, VOCs are a significant Norwegian shuttle operations have been written procedures for minimising VOC emissions during:
contributor to the industry’s around 75%. This is a relatively small
carbon emissions. fleet and affects emissions from a tiny – loading of cargo
percentage of total crude oil shipments. – sea passage, and
Teekay has considerable experience – discharge of cargo.
of operating ships in compliance with Better management of VOCs across the
strict Norwegian VOC management global crude oil supply chain could make Additionally, VOCs generated during crude oil washing need
requirements on behalf of the VOC a big difference even if much simpler and to be considered.
Industry Cooperative. The Cooperative cheaper means are employed. Worldwide
consists of the owners of offshore loaded seaborne transport of crude oil is around If tanker design modifications (such as increasing the pressure
fields (approximately 27 oil companies) in 20 million barrels daily. Crude oil is mostly a of the cargo tanks) are to be made to minimise VOC emissions,
the Norwegian sector. The Cooperative long haul cargo; its tonne per mile proportion strength aspects need to be considered and comprehensive
works to implement VOC recovery of world seaborne trade is high. Teekay’s calculations have to be carried out to confirm the structural
systems on shuttle tankers, ensuring air work in this area has identified a potential strength and other related issues. This information must be
is cleaner and a higher proportion of for reducing VOC emissions by 1–2 million provided within the VOC Management Plan when submitting
crude oil remains in the tanks. Currently, tonnes annually. Such a development it for approval.
17 shuttle tankers operated or owned would require a large collaborative effort
by Teekay have VOC recovery systems in the industry, but would result in a
on board. noticeable reduction in the carbon
footprint of crude transportation by sea.
How can we help?
Assisting owners and operators in
preparing VOC Management Plans
barrels of crude
We have produced a model VOC Management Plan and a These can be downloaded at:
checklist to assist owners in preparing plans for their ships. www.lr.org/documents/181174-draft-voc-management-plan.aspx
oil traded daily,
Hull coatings Hull coatings 30/31
Marine fouling – Legislation:
The Anti-fouling Systems (AFS)
old problem, new solutions Convention
The International Convention on the Control of Harmful
Anti-fouling Systems on Ships (the AFS Convention) entered
into force on September 17, 2008.
It applies to all ships regardless of size and prohibits the
Keeping ships’ hulls and seawater piping systems application of organotin anti-fouling systems. It also requires
that existing organotin anti-fouling systems are either removed
free from marine fouling has been a tremendous from ships’ hulls and replaced with organotin-free systems,
challenge throughout maritime history. or sealed to form a barrier to prevent leaching.
In Europe, the Convention is translated into law by
EU Regulation (EC) No. 782/2003 on the Prohibition
Fouling increases friction drag Organotin-based anti-fouling coatings In recent years, copper-based anti-fouling Fouling on a ship’s hull can lead to of Organotin Compounds on Ships.
and blocks piping systems, affecting were proven to be effective in controlling coatings, mostly with booster biocides increases in fuel consumption of up
ship speed, fuel consumption and marine fouling on ships’ hulls and were added, have successfully replaced the to 40%. Research has shown that Research has shown that without anti-fouling coatings:
manoeuvrability. widely used from the 1970s onwards. organotin-based products while low without the use of anti-fouling coatings,
surface energy fouling releasing coating fuel use would rise by 200 million tonnes Fuel use would rise by
It also contributes to the spread of Their success, however, was short-lived. products, either silicone or fluoropolymer- a year and carbon dioxide and sulphur
invasive alien species. Over the years, Because organotin compounds leached based, have also found increased use on dioxide emissions would rise by 640
various materials and methods have from anti-fouling coatings were found to commercial vessels. million and 12 million tonnes respectively1.
been tried in the fight against fouling, cause persistent toxicity to marine
including manual scrapping, use of ecosystems, their use in anti-fouling Marine fouling also causes blockages Today, new environmental regulations
copper sheathing, and the application systems was banned worldwide by the and corrosion in seawater pipes, valves, and increased awareness of
of organic coatings with added biocides. IMO’s International Convention on the pumps and heat exchangers, resulting environmental protection are pushing million tonnes per year
Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems in costly repair and maintenance. anti-fouling technology further.
on Ships (the AFS Convention) which Electrochemical methods using aluminium Shipowners are demanding high fuel
came into force in 2008. and copper anodes are widely used, efficiency, low ship gas emissions and Carbon dioxide emissions would rise by
while good monitoring and maintenance longer maintenance cycles while paint
of the systems are also essential. makers continue to reduce the VOC
content of paints and the toxic impacts
of biocide release into the environment.
The latest efforts are being directed at
developing not only coating systems
which combine effective anti-fouling million tonnes per year
How can we help? performance with low or no toxicity
Marine coatings expertise to the marine environment, but also
Sulphur dioxide emissions would increase by
greener and more natural anti-fouling
mechanisms which mimic the fouling
Lloyd’s Register provides marine coatings and corrosions resistance of many marine organisms.
expertise in the areas of material selection, failure investigation
and research. In recognition of the importance of using 1
Akzo Nobel, The Global Coatings Report,
environment friendly anti-fouling systems, we award our EP(A) 2006, page 40
notation to ships applied with biocide-free anti-fouling systems.
Various fouling species found on a test million tonnes per year
We also publish a comprehensive list of recognised panel without anti-fouling coating after
a 12-month exposure.
anti-fouling coating products on ClassDirect Live, providing
information on paint manufacturers, anti-fouling products
and the biocides used.
For more information please visit:
www.lr.org/ep and www.cdlive.lr.org
What is Lloyd’s Register doing? 34/35
Get in touch
We are continuously monitoring, researching and influencing developments in relation
to the environmental opportunities and challenges facing the marine industry.
We can help you to:
– understand emerging and existing
– comply with environmental
requirements, whether regional or
– demonstrate your environmental
credentials to stakeholders.
Europe, Middle East and Africa Asia Americas
UK and Ireland Korea USA
London Busan Houston
Mark Darley T +82 (0)51 640 5086 Dan Holmes Printed on Soporset Premium Offset from the
Robert Horne Group. The virgin wood fibre is
T +44 (0)20 7423 2319 E email@example.com T +1 (1) 281 675 3183
sourced from Spain and Chile and produced
E firstname.lastname@example.org E email@example.com at a mill in Scotland that has been awarded
PR China and SAR the ISO14001 certificate for environmental
management. The pulp is bleached using an
Greece, East Mediterranean Hong Kong Miami elemental chlorine-free (ECF) process. Soporset
and Adriatic T +852 2287 9363 John Hicks is an FSC product group from well-managed
Piraeus E firstname.lastname@example.org T +1 (1)954 236 8366 forests and other controlled sources.
Anastasia Kouvertari E email@example.com Services are provided by members of the
T +30 210 4580800 Shanghai Lloyd’s Register Group. For further details
please see our website: www.lr.org/entities
E firstname.lastname@example.org T +86 (0)21 5158 1000 Canada
E email@example.com Toronto
Nordic countries Marcel LaRoche
Copenhagen South Asia T +1 (1)819 595 3526 Ext 30
Valdemar Ehlers Singapore E firstname.lastname@example.org
T +45 32 96 18 00 T +65 6278 9444
E email@example.com E firstname.lastname@example.org South America
Rio de Janeiro
Middle East and Africa Japan Alexandre de Carvalho
Dubai Yokohama T + 55 21 3523 0018
Mike Holliday T +81 (0)45 682 5255 E email@example.com
T +971 (0)4 701 4190/4100 E firstname.lastname@example.org
T +31(0)10-414 50 88
Central European Area
T +49 (0)40 328107 0