The low sulfur rules for ships are here in the US already. The Coast Guard and the EPA have started enforcing the “North American Emission Control Area” regulation since August 1st, which roughly extends 200 nautical miles off the coastlines of US and Canada. It requires ships to burn fuel of 1% sulfur or less within this area until 2015, after which it must be 0.1% sulfur or less. The CG boards the ships, writes the ticket, and the EPA then chooses to enforce the violation - maybe with a fine, which as many may know, under the Clean Air Act, each day the ship is in violation is a separate and distinct violation.
This is a dramatic change in sulfur percentage from what was allowed just a short time ago. On January 2010 the world-wide standard went from 4.5% sulfur to 3.5% sulfur. That change along with the price of crude sent bunker (ship’s fuel) prices skyrocketing. It is tough for ship owners and managers to operate at even the break-even point, and there are more environmental and labor-related laws coming just around the corner.
Low sulfur fuels are also a significant technical challenge with safety concerns: A large 2-stroke diesel engine like the ones commonly used as propulsion engines on ships is designed to burn fuel of a high viscosity with a high BTU content. The engine’s fuel injection equipment is engineered to atomize this heavy fuel in a very fine spray so it ignites and burns quickly and completely. Most of the low-sulfur fuels that are available are of far lower viscosity with a lower BTU rating. The fuel injection equipment does not atomize the thinner fuel as well and what was a fine spray turns into a squirt instead. This “squirt” of fuel does not ignite as readily nor does it burn completely and since it has a lower BTU content it produces less power as well.
There is a safety issue too since the thinner fuel doesn’t ignite as well, at slow speed maneuvering it is not uncommon for the “fire to go out” and the main engine to stop, especially when maneuvering and the engine is repeatedly started first one way then the other to change propeller rotation. Many of these propulsion engines run as slow as 25 RPM at this maneuvering speed.
Shipping is a wonderful business and of course vital to the world’s economy. It is too bad that they present such a large target for regulators to regulate against.
I sold bunkers on the Great Lakes for 16 years. The Great Lakes are due for switchover in 2015, or so I’m told.
I understand that the old steam turbines have been exempted from having to abandon 10 API N6, tfn.
The V-16 Pielsticks can switch to N2 fuel from IFO 280/320 and usually start and end the season on the lighter fuel. Most of these vessels preferred 11.7 API and 151 SSF @ 122 visc. Pielstick operators, including Interlake Steamship now worry about the lack of sulfur (lubricant) causing damage to these big motors.
The former Bethlehem Steel 1,000 footers were built with EMD engines and have always operated on N2. Ditto the 1,000 footer Columbia Star, now operated by American Steamship.
Inland Steel’s ore carrier Ryerson ran a full season on my 0 to -4 API slurry oil and proved the higher BTU fuel got better milage. The USCG got wind of this and banned anything heavier than 10 API, based on the theory that all the 10 API would float is spilled and the heavier fuels would sink.
Heh !