The Biofuel Detectives - The Proof is in the Testing

Sustainability is fast becoming a common term within today’s society, certainly when linked to global decarbonisation. The world’s population has become increasingly more aware of the human carbon-footprint and the need to reduce green-house gas emissions.

As an industry, world shipping is not exempt and levels of environmental legislation and directives being placed upon this sector are rapidly multiplying in order to achieve net-zero-carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution. Due to this increasing drive to reduce shipping’s global emissions, the move away from the use of traditional fossil fuels is gathering momentum and heading towards using alternative low-to-zero carbon fuels.

One such fuel type is biofuel and in particular FAME-based biofuel. Whether it be 100% FAME, or blends of FAME with traditional marine fossil fuels, FAME, or Fatty Acid Methyl Esters, to give the full name, provides an immediate option to reduce shipping’s CO2 emissions.

However, how can it be proven that the bio-component of the biofuel, is truly sustainable?

A newly released paper detailing ground-breaking, innovative research and development through a collaboration between the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) and the world’s leading Maritime Decarbonisation Testing and Advisory Services company, VPS, provides the solution.

The paper, entitled “Rapid Forensic Analysis of FAME-based Biofuels” is now available on the GCMD’s website: https://gcformd.org/our-publications/

The paper highlights how VPS’ extensive experience in marine fuel analysis and considerable expertise in the use of the high-end forensic analytical technique, gas chromatography (GC), can be utilised to identify the true source of the bio-component (the oil). This newly developed, unique proprietary test method from VPS, can be applied to all FAME-based biofuels, both 100% (B100) and blends, eg B30. This identification helps to determine whether or not, the FAME is produced from a sustainable source. It should be noted that not all FAME-based Biofuels have the same properties and since suppliers do not indicate the source oil, testing is so important to understand these properties. This is becoming increasingly important as the availability of FAME is driving suppliers to source FAME-based biofuels from an increasingly wide variety of exotic source oils.

VPS are now in a position to offer this unique and vital service to its customers, as a further means to support shipowners and operators in their drive to be compliant with both global and regional environmental legislation and ensure traceable sustainability of their operations.

The GCMD-VPS collaboration is proving to be a partnership which is delivering key solutions to the maritime sector, as shipping moves to becoming a truly sustainable industry.

VPS’ recent work on biofuels is now discussed in an article published in the current Dec/Jan edition of the Bunkerspot magazine, which can be accessed at: www.bunkerspot.com/magazines  entitled, “Learning Curve”.

Contact

For more information on maritime decarbonisation services please contact: Steve Bee at steve.bee@vpsveritas.com 

VPS is a world-leading, innovative service provider with a proven, trusted reputation of working to the highest accredited standards.  Sustainability is at the heart of everything we do.  As the world changes, we work relentlessly to ensure your business remains on the right side of that change.  Our value-added testing and advisory services actively support and protect our customers, people, their assets and the environment.

To further our commitment to excellence and advance our client-oriented goals, we are pleased to announce the appointment of Steve Laino to the role of Managing Director - Americas. In this role, Steve will apply his experience and knowledge to deliver complete value-chain solutions for fuel, lubricants and decarbonization in this important region. Steve joins us having held c-suite and leadership roles as a ship owner, broker, entrepreneur and advisor across multiple sectors and markets in the global supply chain.  Most recently, Steve has applied his subject matter expertise and in-depth understanding of the emerging emissions and alternative fuels sectors in his role as Global Head of Environmental Solutions with Poten & Partners/BGC. He has a strong background in shipping, having graduated from the US Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point, sailed as an officer in the US Merchant Marine and served as Lieutenant Commander in the US Naval Reserve.

Dr. Malcolm Cooper, VPS CEO, stated: “The maritime industry is changing fast with ambitious emissions targets and decarbonisation requirements driving the introduction of new technologies and fuels into the market. In this dynamic landscape, we are very pleased to have Steve on board to lead delivery of all VPS services to customers in the Americas and help them optimise their operations by understanding which new fuels to use and how to adapt to these sustainable business drivers and meet new regulations.”

Steve Laino stated:  “Industries around the world are witnessing a paradigm shift in the energy products that power them and the environmental regulations that govern their stakeholders’ compliance.  An increased need for transparency and traceability of energy sources and production methods will grow to be a primary driver of successful business strategies.  Testing, verification, certification, data-supported analysis and the ability to easily access and disseminate critical information from these sources are quickly becoming required tools of the trade.

For decades, VPS has reliably provided and evolved their services to the maritime, power generation and wind sectors.  In response to the evolution of energy products and the impact on businesses in and adjacent to the supply chain, VPS has invested in new digital platforms, testing capabilities and advisory capacity to meet the challenges faced by its customers.  

I am very pleased to join VPS to lead and grow their business in the Americas.  I look forward to working closely with our team to gather and provide valuable decision-making information to our clients, yielding the flexibility and foresight needed to navigate the new commercial, operational and technical challenges before us.”

Published in the Dec/Jan edition of Bunkerspot.

By Steve Bee, VPS Group Commercial Director.

Introduction

Its very apparent, global shipping’s drive to decarbonise is well underway. The ship-building profile is changing dramatically, highlighted by the 2023 order book showing 539 new builds capable of running on low-to-zero carbon fuels, being ordered. Looking at Jan-Sept 2024, 49% of the gross tonnage on order were for vessels configured to be alternative fuels ready, with this specific order book growing by 24% year on year. Its obvious that shipping is keeping its options very much open and looking for as much flexibility as possible, when it comes to the fuel choices for it’s ships.

The industry currently bunkers 230 Million mt of fuel per year. Burning this fuel equates to emissions of 716M mt of CO2-equivalent, as the majority of the fuel burnt continues to be traditional fossil fuels. This is supported by studying VPS fuel sample receipt for 2023 which was, 54% VLSFO, 30% HSFO, 14% MGO and 1% each for ULSFO and Biofuels.

However, the list of environmental legislation and directives to reduce emissions from shipping is ever-increasing in order to reduce SOx, NOx, Particulate Matter, CO2, Methane and other Green House Gases.  It is this regulatory demand which is driving the developments of numerous alternative low-to-zero carbon fuels for marine use.

But it is biofuels, which currently offer an attractive and immediate path to CO2 reduction. As a “drop-in” fuel option, using existing delivery, storage, fuel-transfer and engine operation processes, biofuels provide a decarbonisation solution, with minimal change.

VPS has been and continues to be, at the forefront of fuels research & development and continuing our innovative development of test methods for such fuels. We are working on numerous biofuels projects with the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD), sea trials with ship owners and operators, plus working with both fuel suppliers and additive manufacturers to assist in their product developments.

Biofuels

So what’s the biofuels story today? We are seeing an exponential increase in demand based upon the number of biofuel samples we are receiving in our laboratories, linked to the actual metric tonnes of biofuel being delivered per stem. Between 2021 to 2023 biofuels samples received by VPS increased from 70,000mt to 558,000 mt delivered. This year biofuel samples received by VPS will surpass 700,000 mt of biofuels delivered.

Singapore exceeded 2023’s delivered quantity at the half-year point of 2024 and Asia Pacific more than trebled biofuel bunkerings vs last year, as we go into the final quarter of 2024.

Europe is on track to do 40% more than last year if delivery rates continue as they have been.

2024 has seen lower percentage bio-components, ie B10-B30 increase in demand, whilst a significant reduction in higher bio blends, ie B100.

This is likely to be price-driven, as the amount bio content of the fuel is at its premium versus traditional fuels. B20s running around 17% more and B30s running at 23% more than conventional fuels.

For FAME-based biofuels, there are six key quality considerations to take into account.

Firstly, Oxidation Stability, as FAME can oxidise and destabilise very quickly. As FAME destabilises, it becomes considerably darker in appearance, more viscous and much more acidic. VPS utilise three tests to establish a fuel’s level of stability: The Rancimat test, which is a deliberate aging test, where we look to implement a “traffic-light” assessment of Green for a > 8 hours result, Amber for a 5-8 hour result and Red for a<5 hour result. We can then use the Iodine Value test to measure the degree of unsaturation and potential reactivity of the biofuel and thirdly, the Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid content determination via GC, to measure Linoleic Acid and Linolenic Acid levels.

FAME has poor cold-flow properties and so we use the traditional tests of cloud point, cold-filter plugging point and pour point to determine these. Except when the blend is with a dark fuel, then we use the proprietary VPS Wax Appearance Temperature Test.

FAME can be very corrosive, so we test for Total Acid Number, but also undertake Copper and Steel corrosion testing as FAME can be corrosive towards certain surfaces.

As FAME loves water, this can create a breeding environment for bugs and so Bacteria/Yeast/Fungi testing is a key test to monitor the level of microbial activity.

Knowing the calorific value is essential and with fossil fuels this can be determined by a calculation within ISO8217. However, due to the higher oxygen content of FAME, this calculation is inaccurate for biofuels where the FAME content is greater than 10%. and therefore, the laboratory test ASTM D240 must be used to determine the energy content.

Many test to determine the renewable content of biofuel have poor repeatability and reproducibility. To overcome this, VPS have modified EN14078 to produce a much more accurate determination of renewable content, which is and will be, so key in ensuring correct levels of carbon taxation is paid by vessels.

VPS & The GCMD

To really push forward the understanding of biofuels for maritime applications, the work between VPS and the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation, is proving to be an innovative partnership. Already completed is the following project:

“Tracking the Propensity of Biofuels Degradation Across the Maritime Supply Chain” Published June-24. This project looked into understanding the propensity of degradation of FAME and tracing FAME quality in GCMD’s end-to-end supply chains. It also looked to understand the previous and now current ISO specifications for FAME quality requirements, whilst also focusing on additional FAME tests methods needed such as Peroxide Value & Iodine Value for Auto-oxidation, Methanol Content & Free Fatty Acids for Hydrolytic Oxidation, and Microbial Count Test for Microbial growth.

One key question going forward is, “Is my biofuel truly sustainable”. FAME can include a varying mix of the different methyl esters, depending upon the feedstock source, for example using Palm Oil, or Sunflower Oil, or beef tallow, will see different FAME mixes to each other. FAME compounds are typically in the range of C14 – C20 with the naming convention detailed in the graphic below:

VPS has refined EN14103 (Determination of Ester Content of Fame) to enable the identification and measurement of individual  FAME components in neat FAME and in FAME blended residuals and distillates, to create a FAME fingerprint library, to help identify the source/feedstock. This is unique and innovative laboratory R&D undertaken by VPS and will be covered in an upcoming paper from the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation, (GCMD), as part of a second joint project on biofuels. (Paper imminent)

An earlier VPS/GCMD project on supply chain quality control also looked into the use of a Fuel Marker/Tracer Project, where the biofuel quality is tracked throughout the supply chain utilising different types of tracer technology.

Then finally, Project Lotus which is a six-month ongoing project to trial the continuous use of a biofuels blend, comprising 24% FAME and 76% VLSFO, onboard a short-sea vehicle carrier calling at multiple ports. This will monitor the longer-term impact of continuous use of biofuels on vessel operations, covering:

Fuel quality of the biofuel blend which will be systematically tracked and monitored throughout the supply chain, from bunkering to onboard consumption under operating conditions. 

Fuel delivery systems via physical inspection of the fuel delivery system and purifiers will be conducted to monitor for potential seal leakages, corrosion, clogging etc.

Engine performance and working with engine OEMs, performing detailed inspections on engine components before and after switching to biofuels, along with a lubricating oil analysis to assess its efficacy in protecting the engine’s moving parts from wear and tear.

Case Study

A recent case study provides proof of why it is so important to know your biofuel’s components and bio-source. The case highlights a Ship Owner who had two vessels bunkering what they were told was a B100 biofuel in the port of Flushing in early 2024. The first Vessel experienced significant difficulties with blocked filters, delayed ignition and abnormal exhaust temperatures. As a result, the 2^nd vessel sent samples following the 1^st vessel’s issues. VPS found via GCMS-Acid Extraction Analysis, the B100 wasn’t 100% FAME but was actually: 40% FAME, 10% FAME bottoms and 50% Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL). All of which were bio-components but not FAME only. GCMS showed >2,000ppm of phenols in the form of Cardanol, which is the main component in CNSL.

Bio-Alternatives

Whilst FAME is the most common bio-component used within marine biofuels, HVO and CNSL are also considered as bio-options.

We know FAME is highly unsaturated causing high instability. It has lower energy content (37MJ/Kg), poor cold-flow properties, increasing acid number upon oxidation and prone to microbial growth.

Whereas Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (HVO) is produced by hydrogenation making it more stable than FAME, with a higher energy content (44 MJ/Kg), better cold-flow properties, zero sulphur content, lower corrosivity, with little chance of microbial activity. The negatives to HVO, are the higher cost and lower levels of availability.

Then CNSL, which has good oxidation stability but as its phenolic, it is highly reactive and corrosive, but with medium energy content, good cold-flow properties and no microbial activity.

ISO8217:2024

The latest ISO8217:2024 revision, published in June 2024, now accounts for the presence of FAME, HVO, GTL, BTL, within the marine fuel quality standard. However, it doesn’t cover bio-materials such as CNSL, or TPO, to give two examples.

Table 1 for distillates and bio-distillate blends cover FAME up to 100%, ie B100, but doesn’t include the test for microbial growth.

Table 3 for Bio-residual blends, covers TAN, FAME content, Energy Content and Total Chlorides, but doesn’t cover, Cold-Flow properties in terms of WAT, Stability in terms of EN15751, chemical screening or microbial activity.

So, whilst VPS sees ISO8217:2024 as a major step forward as a standard covering the changing fuel mix, its not a comprehensive test slate. To provide further peace-of-mind to customers using biofuels, VPS have introduced a range of wider test parameters under our APS-Bio range of test bundles, covering FAME, HVO, CNSL, when blended with MGO, VLSFO or HSFO fuels, or 100% FAME or HVO.

As declared during SIBCON Conference in Singapore in October 2024, the existing Biofuel Standard WA2:2020 will be upgraded & launched in 2025. This new Singapore Biofuel Standard will align with the ISO 8217:2024 & also look at additional quality criteria of noteworthy importance.

Summary

As decarbonisation and legislation drivies the development of low-to-zero carbon fuels, demand for Biofuels is growing exponentially, especially B10-B30 blends in Europe and Singapore, as they provide an excellent way to achieve immediate reductions of emissions. However, to gain a much fuller understanding of biofuels as a marine fuel, numerous projects between VPS and the GCMD are providing greater insights into these fuels.

In addition, ISO8217:2024 now recognises biofuels containing FAME, HVO, GTL, BTL, but this revision is still not a comprehensive test slate, which has led to VPS developing the APS-Bio packages to provide greater peace of mind for our customers whose interest and commitment to biofuels is increasing.

All of this is evidence that the global shipping industry is well on its way and intent on delivering upon its decarbonisation goals, but with many challenges still to overcome.

For more information please contact Steve Bee at: steve.bee@vpsveritas.com

Published in IMarEST Magazine.
Source: imarest.org – How to Engineer and Manage Green Shipping Fuels. Available at: 
https://www.imarest.org/resource/mp-how-to-engineer-and-manage-green-shipping-fuels.html.

By Stanley George, VPS Group Technical and Science Manager, VPS.

Effective management strategies and insights for evolving fuel use.
Back in 2020, the IMO 2020 regulations, which reduced the global upper limit on the sulphur content of ships' fuel oil from 3.5% to 0.50%, posed significant challenges for the marine industry.

Beyond compliance, ship operators faced difficulties stemming from very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO) blends. Key issues included poor cold-flow properties, short shelf life, sludge formation, stability concerns, and, most critically, liner scuffing in large two-stroke engines.

Liner scuffing, a significant contributor to main engine damage, was initially thought to be unrelated to fuel quality, engine maintenance, or fuel compatibility. However, further investigations identified interactions between VLSFO blends and cylinder oils as the root cause.

Cylinder oil plays a vital role in maintaining engine health through:

• Lubrication: creating an oil film to minimise friction and wear between cylinder liners and piston rings.
• Deposit removal: detergent properties clean combustion deposits from critical engine components.
• Acid neutralisation: additives in the cylinder oil neutralise acidic byproducts of fuel combustion.

With the introduction of VLSFO, oil majors and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) recommended a shift from high Base Number (BN) cylinder oils (70/100 BN) to lower BN oils (40 BN). This change reduced calcium-based additives, which are crucial for neutralisation and detergency, leading to increased deposit formation and, in some cases, resulting in liner scuffing.

Addressing liner scuffing
By mid-2020, OEMs introduced Category II (CAT II) cylinder oils designed to enhance cleaning and deposit control. Alongside improved cylinder lubrication practices, close monitoring of liner wear helped mitigate scuffing issues. Some operators successfully adopted blend-on-board techniques, enabling customisation of cylinder oil properties such as neutralisation and detergency. This flexibility significantly reduced engine issues, demonstrating the importance of tailored cylinder lubrication strategies.

VLSFO also exhibited poor cold-flow properties, leading to wax precipitation and reduced stability in colder climates. These challenges emphasised the importance of proper fuel storage, handling, and management practices to maintain fuel integrity and engine reliability.

The evolving landscape of marine fuels, driven by regulatory and environmental pressures, demands better understanding and management of both traditional fossil fuels and emerging alternatives like biofuels. International standard ISO8217:2024 is seen as a major step forward in terms of setting specifications for marine fuel quality.

Biofuel alternatives
With the industry looking to decarbonise, and a view to introducing low- to zero-carbon fuels, biofuels such as methanol and various fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) blends currently account for approximately 1% of the fuel mix. The more traditional fossil fuels are continuing to satisfy the day-to-day demand in terms of fuels supplied to vessels at this time.

Among these, cashew nutshell liquid (CNSL) and FAME have been explored as drop-in fuel options alongside several other alternatives. CNSL is a renewable resource with potential as a ready drop-in fuel. Its key phenolic compounds include:

• Anacardic Acid (60–75%): a major contributor to CNSL's high acidity. Thermal decarboxylation converts this to cardanol, reducing acidity and enhancing stability.
• Cardanol (5–15%): a stable phenolic compound derived from anacardic acid with improved combustion and lubricity properties.
• Cardol (15–20%): A dihydroxybenzene derivative with surfactant-like behaviour.

While CNSL improves lubricity and energy content, its limitations include high acidity, poor combustion properties, and corrosive tendencies.

In 2022, CNSL-blended fuels caused operational challenges, particularly in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) region. Reported issues included:

• Accelerated wear of fuel pump components.
• Cracks and scratches in fuel systems.
• Poor engine performance and power loss.

These issues were primarily attributed to CNSL's high acidity leading to corrosion of fuel systems and polymerisation tendencies, which in turn led to sludge formation. With regards to combustion characteristics, CNSL exhibited late ignition and extended period of combustion leading to after burning, high exhaust temperatures, carbon deposits in the exhaust system and less power developed. Even at low concentrations, CNSL requires careful management to avoid significant impacts on engine components.

Thermal decarboxylation – converting anacardic acid into cardanol, reducing acidity and increasing stability – and distillation – separating cardanol from other components to create a product better suited for fuel blending – can be applied to enhance CNSL characteristics.

While these treatments are known to improve CNSL's usability, further research is necessary to fully understand its long-term effects on engine performance and reliability.

FAME is the most widely used biofuel in marine applications. Although relatively new to the shipping industry, its extensive use in road transportation provides valuable insights.

Meanwhile, between 2023 and 2024, the use of used cooking oil methyl ester (UCOME) increased significantly.

Many operators tested B100 blends to prepare for regulatory requirements, including the GHG Strategy [greenhouse gas], EEDI [Energy Efficiency Design Index], CII [Carbon Intensity Indicator], and EEXI [Energy Efficiency existing ship Index]. In 2024, at Veritas Petroleum Services we noticed an uptake of B30 blends, a rise considered consistent with MARPOL Annex VI, Regulation 18.3.2, which mandates verification of NOx impacts for blends exceeding 30%.

The impending implementation of FuelEU Maritime is expected to further boost the adoption of biofuel blends.

Operational considerations for FAME blends
There are some important operational considerations to consider for FAME blends. First, it has a tendency to absorb water, potentially leading to microbial growth. Proper storage and a first-in, first-out approach are critical to address this.

Second, at higher concentrations (B100, for example), there could be material compatibility issues. Third, FAME's solvency can dissolve deposits in fuel systems, potentially clogging filters. Lastly, due to its limited stability, FAME should be consumed promptly.

However, despite these considerations, when managed correctly, FAME blends can be used effectively alongside conventional fuels without significant operational issues.

The evolution of marine fuels, from VLSFO to alternative options like CNSL and FAME, underscores the need for comprehensive fuel and lubrication management strategies.

Addressing challenges such as liner scuffing, cold-flow properties, and compatibility is critical to maintaining engine reliability and operational efficiency. With increasing regulatory demands, the marine industry must continue to innovate and adapt to ensure a sustainable and efficient future.

Contact
For more information please contact: 
Stanley George at stanley.george@vpsveritas.com

VPS Power at The Distributed Energy Show 2025

Join VPS Power at The Distributed Energy Show, part of Energy Technology Live, on 12th & 13th March 2025 at NEC, Birmingham, UK.  

With over 40 years of expertise, VPS Power is a trusted leader in Transformer Oil Testing and Advisory Services, helping businesses enhance reliability, optimize efficiency, and support the transition to Net Zero.  

Visit us at Stand 723 to connect with our experts, gain industry insights, explore the latest technical developments, and take advantage of exclusive giveaways.  

👉 For more information, contact us at power@vpsveritas.com

🔗 Register here: https://eventdata.uk/Forms/Default.aspx?FormRef=ETL35Visitor&TrackingCode=ExhibitorMarketingPackSocials

World Leading Maritime Decarbonisation Testing & Advisory Services company VPS, is pleased to announce the appointment of Frans van Helden as the company’s CFO. Frans will be responsible for overseeing the company’s financial strategy and operations, ensuring robust financial health and supporting VPS mission to lead the maritime industry towards a sustainable future.

Frans began his career at General Electric (GE Capital) as a Finance Manager. He then advanced to ABN AMRO, where he served as CFO Japan and Executive Director of Structured Products. More recently, Frans has held key financial leadership roles as Finance Director at TIP Group and CFO at Cube Cold, both private equity portfolio companies. With his extensive experience in financial management and a proven track record of driving growth, Frans is well-equipped to contribute to VPS continued success and innovation in maritime decarbonisation.

Dr Malcolm Cooper, VPS CEO stated: “We are delighted to have Frans on board as our new CFO to lead our finance team and operate as an integral part of the Group Leadership Team. He brings with him a wealth of finance management and business experience which will be extremely helpful in driving growth and the broader development our company.”

Frans van Helden stated: In my role, I will be focused on ensuring financial stability, promoting growth, and identifying new opportunities to enhance our business. I am truly honoured and excited to join VPS as the new Chief Financial Officer. I look forward to help drive our company forward to new heights of success. 

By Steve Bee, VPS Group Marketing & Strategic Projects Director
 

Introduction
2024 saw the continuing evolution and widening of available maritime fuel types and grades, as the global shipping industry continues to gather decarbonisation momentum to reduce its emissions to meet current and future legislation targets. Existing CII and EEXI requirements, plus EU ETS legislation, saw increasing demand for additional testing, lower-carbon fuels, data and digitalisation solutions across the shipping sectors.

As the leading maritime decarbonisation testing and advisory services provider, VPS continued to be at the forefront of marine fuels and lubricants analysis, utilising our experience, expertise and innovative approach, to support the drive for a more sustainable shipping fleet.  

Throughout the year, VPS witnessed further fuel quality issues with VLSFOs in terms of, sulphur compliance, cold-flow properties, water and cat-fines. In addition, MGO suffered from cold-flow, flash point and FAME off-specifications.

Biofuels usage saw a continuing increase in demand from the market, leading to increasing queries regarding their fuel management and their “fit-for-purpose” as a drop-in marine fuel. This in turn called upon VPS to provide answers and solutions to customers, utilising our extensive knowledge and understanding of biofuels and their associated test parameters.

The launch of the new revision of the international marine fuel quality standard ISO8217:2024 was very much welcomed by the industry. This new revision saw the specification tables increase from two to four, with the inclusion of a <0.50% Sulphur specification and also biofuels in the form of FAME, HVO, GTL and/or, BTL.

2024 witnessed very strong newbuild contracting (2,765 ships of 124.2m GT), the highest in tonnage terms since 2007 (173.4m GT). With 820 of these vessels being “alternative fuel capable”, showing the fuelling transition is still very much in focus.

The Marine Fuel Mix
Across 2024, the fuel mix with respect to samples received for testing in VPS laboratories, equated to more than 65 million MT, which averages at 5.4 million MT of marine fuels per month. VLSFO was the most popular marine fuel with 52% of the fuels used, followed by 32% HSFO, 14% MGO, 1% ULSFO and 1% Biofuels. Regarding biofuels usage, the samples tested by VPS equated to an increase from 558,000 MT in 2023 to 800,000MT in 2024.

VPS Bunker Alerts
Bunker Alerts highlight short term quality fuel quality issues identified by VPS, for a specific test parameter of a specific fuel grade/type in a specific port. The service provides valuable information to customers, to assist in avoiding potentially problematic fuel types in a highlighted port or region, to further protect the customer’s asset and crew.

In 2024, VPS issued 27 Bunker Alerts, one less than in 2023. The 2024 Bunker Alerts included the major fuel grades, i.e. VLSFO, HSFO and MGO, 8 different test parameters and 13 ports.

46% of the 2024 Bunker Alerts were for VLSFO fuels, followed by 32% for HSFO fuels and 21% for MGO. The most common problematic parameter was Sodium (9), accounting for 33% of the Bunker Alerts, followed by Flash Point (8) accounting for 30% of the Bunker Alerts.

Singapore (30%) and ARA (26%) were the regions/ports most frequently requiring a Bunker Alert to be issued. But as these are the two busiest bunkering regions, it is not too surprising.
 

VLSFO Fuel Quality
As the most used marine fuel type, VLSFO accounts for more than half of the fuels tested by VPS. In terms of quality, VLSFO had an off-specification rate of 5.4% in 2024. Of the 5.4% VLSFO off-specifications, Europe provided the highest level of off-specification VLSFOs in both 2024 (11.9%) and 2023 (7.9%). North America provided the next highest level of off-specification VLSFO with 7% of fuels tested exhibiting at least one off-specification parameter in 2024 and 4.4% in 2023. South America had the third highest VLSFO off-specification rate with 5.9% off-specs versus 3.8% in 2023.

Sulphur is the most common off-specification parameter of VLSFOs, accounting for 44% of VLSFO off-specs in 2024 and 28% in 2023. When it comes to looking at all VLSFOs tested, 0.5% had a sulphur content >0.53%, whilst 1.9% of samples tested were between 0.50%-0.53% sulphur and the remaining 97.6% had a sulphur content of <0.50%.

Pour Point was also a common off-specification parameter for VLSFOs with 13% of VLSFOs off-specs relating to this parameter, a decrease against the 16% level witnessed in 2023.

The importance of the additional cold-flow test of Wax Appearance Temperature (WAT) and Wax Disappearance Temperature (WDT), was further highlighted in 2024 with 57% of VLSFOs exhibiting WAT of 31-40ºC and 11% having WAT between 41-50ºC. 54% of VLSFO samples had a WDT of 41-50ºC, with 20% having a WDT of >50ºC. VLSFOs cold-flow properties are a definite concern with wax precipitating from the fuel at temperatures way in excess of 10ºC above the pour point, potentially causing numerous operational problems such as filter and pipework blockages.

2024 saw a very similar distribution of cat-fines results across all VLSFOs tested compared to 2023, with only 0.6% of samples showing cat-fine levels of greater than 60ppm and hence off-specification. 19% of all VLSFOs showed a cat-fine level greater than 40ppm. Frequent checking of purifier efficiency via VPS’ Fuel System Checks (FSC) service is a highly recommended proactive safeguard in respect to increased cat-fines within VLSFOs.

HSFO Fuel Quality
HSFO represents almost 32% of all bunker samples received by VPS for testing, indicating a relatively high level of scrubber usage onboard vessels today. 10.4% of HSFOs tested in 2024 were off-specification for at least one test parameter. In terms of regional HSFO off-specifications, South America accounted for 29% of off-specs, compared to 30.5% in 2023. Second highest off-spec region was Europe, with 21% in 2024 compared to 21.4% in 2023 and North America was third with 11.5% of HSFO off-specs in 2023, compared to 9.5% in 2023.

As usual, viscosity and density were the two most common HSFO off-spec parameters in 2024, with 54% of the off-spec attributed to viscosity and 21% to density, compared to 43% and 33% respectively in 2023. Water was the third most frequent HSFO off-specification parameter in 2024, with 13% off-spec level compared to 10.5% in 2023. 

Whilst cat-fines accounted for 3% of HSFO off-specs in 2024, this was lower than the 2023 level of 4%. Again, like VLSFOs it highlights the importance of Fuel System Checks (FSC) to protect the engine from potential damage from this corrosive contaminant, by improving purifier efficiency. 20% of HSFOs had a cat-fine level of >40ppm in 2024.
 

MGO Fuel Quality
MGO accounts for 14% of all samples received by VPS for testing. Many ship owners and operators choose not to test MGO, believing this fuel type is problem-free. However, this could not be further from the truth. In 2024, 7.9% of all MGO samples tested were off-specification for at least one test parameter. Singapore accounted for 14.2% of all MGO off-specifications, which was a decrease on the 15.9% Singapore experienced in 2023. Europe was the next highest region in terms of MGO off-specs with 10.3%, followed by Africa showing 6% of all MGO off-specifications.

Pour Point was the most common MGO off-specification parameter in 2024, with 47% of MGO off-specs attributed to Pour Point compared to 39% in 2023. FAME contamination was the second most common MGO off-specification parameter accounting for 25% of all MGO off-specs. As FAME is a common component within automotive, aviation fuels and now some marine fuels, it is not surprising we are seeing such levels of off-specification.

Flash Point was the third most common MGO off-specification parameter, with 14% of MGO off-specs attributed to Flash Point. Flash Point, accounted for 21% of the Bunker Alerts in 2024, with three out of eight Flash Point Bunker Alerts being for MGO fuels.

Biofuels
As global shipping looks towards low-to-zero carbon fuels to answer many emissions reduction challenges, biofuels offer an immediate “drop-in” solution. As such VPS tested the equivalent of approximately 800,000 MT of biofuels in 2024 compared to 550,000 MT in 2023.

Europe, (mainly ARA-region) provided the highest volume of biofuels over 400K MT (ca. 50%) and Singapore second (ca. 38%), providing just over 300K MT. Singapore tripled its biofuel bunkerings over a 12-month period. Whilst Asia Pacific grew 5-fold in 12 months.

The most common biofuel blend was B30 (11-30% bio), which accounted for 51% of biofuel samples tested by VPS an increase from 34% in 2023. Yet, there was a significant move away from B100 in 2024 compared to 2023, 8% compared to 23% respectively. This may be due to fuel cost and/or availability.

The majority of biofuels contained Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) as the bio-component, although VPS did test others containing HVO, HEFA, Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) and Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO).

Where FAME is the bio-component within marine biofuels, the key considerations are:

• Energy Content, 
• Renewable Content
• Fuel Stability, 
• Cold-Flow Properties
• Corrosivity, 
• Microbial Growth

It is fully expected that the growth in biofuels usage for marine applications will continue to increase across 2025 and the VPS Additional Protection Service (APS) when using biofuels, will only increase in importance as the industry looks for more information regarding the fuel management of biofuels.
 

Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GCMS) Services
With both VLSFO and HSFO we continued to see cases of vessel damages due to chemical contamination during 2024. The recommended first step in identifying potentially problematic chemicals is to use the VPS GCMS-Head Space Chemical Screening service, as a pre-burn, damage prevention service.

In 2024, 23% of marine fuel samples received by VPS undertook this analysis, with 8.2% of samples tested, giving rise to a “Caution” result, indicating the presence of at least one chemical contaminant.

Following a “Caution” result, VPS provide numerous GCMS forensic methodologies to accurately determine and quantify the contaminants identified. These range from:

• GCMS-Head Space-Extended: For more accurate determination of volatile chemicals
• GCMS-Vacuum Distillation: For the determination of volatile and semi-volatile chemicals
• GCMS-Acid Extraction: For the determination of acidic-based chemicals such as acids, phenols, alcohols.
• GCMS-Direct Injection: For the determination of semi-volatile and non-volatile chemicals.

At the end of the year, VPS developed a further unique screening service, GCMS-HS Advanced, which can detect and identify, volatile, semi-volatile and non-volatile chemicals, in one analysis, providing a more comprehensive pre-burn screening service.
 

Operational Issues Reported in 2024
During the course of 2024, various vessels reported operational issues arising from the consumption of certain bunker fuels, where more than 50 vessels reported fuel-related problems mainly affecting either their Main engines, Auxiliary engines, or both, with at least eight cases resulting in de-bunkering of the fuel.

Out of the  50 reported cases, 20 incidents involved main engine-related issues, 8 incidents involved generator engine-related issues and 6 vessels experienced issues with both main and auxiliary engines.

The most common main engine-related issues were, Fuel Pump Failures (60%) caused by excessive wear, leading to the inability to maintain the required fuel oil pressure.

Followed by Filter Blockages and Sludging (40%), which resulted in heavy sludge accumulation at purifiers and blockages to fuel filters.

A significant cause of purifier and filter failures was the use of bunker fuels with, High Total Sediment Potential (TSP ≥0.06%) accompanied by high catfines content (>40 ppm).

These fuels caused severe sludge accumulation in purifiers, reducing de-sludging intervals.

Auto-backwash filters experienced blockages, triggering high differential pressure alarms and frequent backwash cycles.

Vessels with poorly maintained purifiers struggled to remove catfines to acceptable levels, increasing the risk of abrasive damage to engine components.

Additionally, several vessels reported issues with fuels exhibiting poor cold-flow properties, particularly those with high Wax Appearance Temperature (WAT) and Wax Disappearance Temperature (WDT), which contributed to fuel line blockages.

More than 14% of the reported operational issues were attributed to chemical contamination, identified through various VPS GCMS techniques. A notable concern was the presence of Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) in bunker fuels, where at least 18 vessels reported severe operational issues linked to CNSL contamination. The “new” GCMS-HS Advanced test method, which can detect and identify, volatile, semi-volatile and non-volatile chemicals, in one analysis, will certainly be an extremely valuable tool in providing a more comprehensive pre-burn screening service.

The most commonly affected systems were generator engines, where fuel pumps experienced severe wear and corrosion, resulting in engine failures and loss of power supply and consequent loss of propulsion.

In cases of severe operational impact, CNSL levels in tested fuels exceeded 1%, highlighting the corrosive and poor combustion nature of this contaminant.

These reported issues reinforce the importance of robust fuel quality monitoring and regular fuel system maintenance to safeguard vessel operations.

The above statistics are based solely on cases where ship operators reported their issues to VPS and may not represent all incidents globally.

ISO8217:2024
A major development during 2024 was the release of the new revision of the marine fuel quality standard ISO8217. This, the seventh revision of the standard was released as: 

1.    There has been no revised version since the start of 0.50% sulphur regulation, IMO 2020 and the introduction of VLSFO fuels.
2.    The existing version (8217:2017) did not cater for the use of biofuels.
3.    This latest version now caters for VLSFO fuels and biofuel blends.
 

The key changes from the previous revision are:
In ISO8217:2024 there are now 4 tables (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 & Table 4) unlike the previous version where there were only two tables.

Table 1: Distillate and Bio-distillate Marine Fuels, including ULSFO-Distillate type, FAME and HVO/GTL/BTL up to 100 %. (DMX,DMA, DFA, DMZ, DFZ, DMB, DFB)

Table 2 Residual Marine Fuels with S≤ 0.50%: This is to cater for fuels that are currently supplied and used in the marine industry including VLSFO and ULSFO.                                                                                     (RMA20-0.5, RMA20-0.1, RME180-0.5, RME180-0.1, RMG380-0.5, RMG380-0.1, RMK500-0.5, RMK500-0.1)

Table 3 - Bio-Residual Marine Fuels, includes all residual fuels ULSFO, VLSFO and HSFO containing FAME.  (RF20, RF80, RF180, RF380, RF500)

Table 4 – Residual fuels for Sulphur > 0.50%: includes fuels for use with approved abatement technologies. (RME180H, RMG180H, RMG380H, RMK500H, RMK700H)

All four tables now include a minimum viscosity limit, as well as a maximum limit. Plus all four tables include Clauses 1 to 10 as “General Requirements”.

In terms of biofuels, Table 1 accepts FAME, HVO, GTL and BTL as bio-components.

VPS fully support the publication and introduction of ISO8217:2024 as a major improvement to the international marine fuel standard for current modern-day fuels. VPS also recognise there is only so much time available to produce this highly anticipated and much needed revision. Throughout the ISO8217 development work relating to the preparation of this revision of the standard, VPS has represented Ship Operator views across numerous Working Group meetings, by our most senior technical and strategic management. Preparation of the standard must, by necessity, take on board divergent views and as such during its preparation, not all of the issues and recommendations raised by VPS and other committee members, made it into the final version. 

As a result, we still expect ship owners and operators to require additional tests, beyond the scope of ISO8217:2024 testing, to ensure an even greater level of protection and safety to their vessels.

How soon will this revision be taken up by the industry? If past performance is any indication, where the industry has a slow conversion rate to the newer revisions, it may take some time. Today, many vessels are purchasing fuel against many of the older revisions. VPS still see over 12% of samples received for testing against the 2005 revision, whilst 67% of samples received are to be tested against 2010/12 revisions:

Methanol
Methanol bunkers and bunkering facilities continue to grow with 13 ports now offering methanol. But this methanol is predominantly grey, and Tank-to-Wake emissions from grey methanol are similar to conventional fossil fuels. The maritime sector must look to use the sustainable “green” methanol options of e-methanol, bio-methanol, or blue methanol:

IRENA forecast e-methanol will reach a production level of 250M mt and bio-methanol will reach 135M mt by 2050.

Currently we see 39 methanol-powered ships on our sees, but more than 260 methanol-powered vessels are on order.

As with all fuels, there are numerous pro’s and con’s to using methanol as a marine fuel: Methanol fuel handling and management is certainly easier than that for LNG, with retrofit costs being less expensive and easier. Plus, green methanol sources offer almost near-zero GHG emissions.

In terms of ECA compliance Methanol conforms to SOx, NOx and PM content. It is biodegradable, miscible with water and a liquid at atmospheric pressure, all of which are positive factors in terms of fuel management and handling.

However, methanol has half the energy of maritime’s current fossil fuels and a Flash Point of only 12ºC. In addition, current availability of green methanol, is still an issue, but as demand grows, methanol should become more cost competitive, with increasing number of ports providing methanol.

In October 2024, it was announced at SIBCON-24, that Singapore will release a new technical reference standard for Methanol. This will cover fuel transfer, quality and quantity measurements as well operational and safety instructions as well as crew training. VPS has been closely involved in the development of this new Methanol Standard by being part of the Working Group.

The announcement from Singapore was followed by a further notification from the International Standards Organisation (ISO) in November 2024. The ISO announcement highlighted the release of the publication of the first edition of their international standard for methanol as marine fuel, ISO 6583:2024.  This standard sets the requirements and limits for three methanol grades for marine: MMA, MMB and MMC. It uses the IMPCA specifications as a starting point, with some properties less critical for marine and other fuel related aspects not covered. Grade MMC allows for wider tolerances in certain characteristics compared to MMB, while MMA includes additional requirements for lubricity and cleanliness. The new Singapore Methanol Standard will make reference to the ISO 6583 for quality requirements under its custody transfer section.
 

Summary
With over 50 reported cases of major operational issues, covering main and auxiliary engine cases plus, fuel delivery system related problems, due to fuel stability, sludging, cat-fines, cold flow properties and chemical contamination, 2024 once again highlighted the importance of bunker fuel quality testing, as a proactive means to protect vessels, their crew and the environment. With additional tests, currently not included within ISO8217, providing further vital information in achieving heightened levels of protection.

Biofuels usage continued to increase in demand and importance, as ship owners and operators look to achieve improvements through CII, EEXI, as well as looking to counter the financial impact of the EU ETS scheme.

The revision of ISO8217 released on 30th May 2024, was a welcomed improvement on previous revisions, but still not a fully comprehensive solution in vessel, crew and environmental protection. Therefore, additional tests continue to hold an important role in fuel management.

Methanol demand and usage will also grow, with a rapidly growing order book for methanol-powered vessels. Yet, methanol also comes with a host of fuel management challenges, with testing playing a major role in ensuring quality and fit-for-purpose considerations.

So, 2025, suggests another year of widening marine fuel types and grades coming to market, coupled with their growing fuel management considerations.

Contact

For further support to your fuel management issues, please contact marketing@vpsveritas.com  

By Emilian Buksak, VPS Decarbonisation Advisor

As an industry the world’s shipping fleet consumes over 230 million metric tons of fuel per year, which in turn produces 716 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions. However, shipping is in the midst of a major transition to reduce its emissions and become a far more sustainable industry.

There are many options and opportunities to achieve this, including the development and configuration of ships engines, plus consideration of numerous low-to-zero carbon fuels. According to Clarksons Research, nearly 30% of all vessels on order are designed to use alternative fuels, with another 14% carrying “alternative-fuel ready” notations—clear evidence that greener shipping solutions are on the rise. Regarding marine fuels, we see an increase in the uptake of sustainable biofuels and Renewable Liquid & Gaseous Fuels of Non-biological Origin (RFNBO, e.g., methanol) but this is still limited. Therefore, LNG has become a leading transition fuel for the maritime sector.

Since 2021, the number of LNG-fuelled vessels has tripled, now surpassing 1,200 ships according to the DNV Alternative Fuels Insight (AFI) platform. This fleet includes about 452 container ships, 242 tankers, 208 car carriers, 73 bulk carriers, and 49 cruise vessels, underscoring LNG’s accelerating adoption as a transitional fuel. All those, in addition to 751 LNG carriers.

But why use LNG as a marine fuel? Well, LNG is primarily methane (85-95%) with a high energy content of 55.5MJ/Kg and offers around 30% lower CO₂ emissions (TTW) than traditional bunker fuel. However, a major negative impact to using LNG is that methane has a global warming potential (GWP) 29.8 times higher than CO₂ over 100 years—and more than 80 times higher over 20 years. This makes reducing any methane emissions across the entire LNG lifecycle critical.

When used as the fuel in a ship’s engine, a certain percentage of the methane present remains unburnt and can escape to atmosphere. This is known as “methane-slip”. Our data shows that double-digit slip (in g /kWh) can and does occur—often due to engine malfunctions or low-load operation. Beyond combustion, fugitive emissions (leakage) and emergency releases also add to the total methane footprint.

Efforts to mitigate methane slip vary widely—from proactive collaborations with engine manufacturers that achieve 50–70% reductions, to a “do nothing” approach relying solely on EU MRV default slip factors. Under these regulations, default slip values range from 3.1% for dual-fuel medium-speed engines to 0.2% for dual-fuel slow-speed engines. Notably, four-stroke LNG engines make up nearly 30% of all LNG-capable vessels.

While the industry considers future fuels such as, biofuels, renewable bio-methane and e-methanol, these introductions alone will not resolve methane slip in existing methane-fuelled operations. Consequently, equipment manufacturers, shipowners, operators, and regulators are focusing on practical, near-term measures to reduce onboard methane slip at the vessel level—an essential step toward lowering the climate impact of LNG-fuelled shipping.

Across international shipping, there are still no dedicated regulations specifically targeting methane slip. Within the EU’s Fit for 55 package we have the FuelEU Maritime, which includes well-to-wake (WtW) methane slip in its compliance framework. This requires operators to account for the CO₂-equivalent impact of methane across the entire fuel life cycle. We also have the Emissions Trading System (ETS), which already mandates tank-to-wake (TtW) methane slip reporting in CO₂-equivalent terms. Starting in 2026, methane emissions will directly influence ETS allowance requirements, linking methane slip more tightly to trading costs.

Meanwhile, the Global Methane Pledge calls for rapid methane reductions to keep the 1.5°C climate target within reach. Furthermore, the IMO’s 2024 Guidelines on Life Cycle GHG Intensity of Marine Fuels may soon drive stricter measures relating to methane slip. Taken together, these developments signal a future with tighter regulations, stronger enforcement of methane accounting in CO₂-equivalence terms, and a faster pace of innovation to reduce methane slip in shipping.

So, how can methane slip be reduced? There are four key areas starting with:

1.    Engine Design Improvements
•    Reduce Crevice Volumes: 
o    Redesign piston crowns, cylinder heads, and valve seats to minimize gaps.
o    Use advanced manufacturing tolerances and materials for tighter seals.
o    Exhaust Gas Reduction: Moderates combustion temperatures, improving overall efficiency and reducing unburned fuel.
o    Lambda Control: Real-time monitoring of oxygen levels for precise air-fuel ratio control, preventing incomplete combustion.

•    Transition to Diesel-Cycle Gas Engines with High-Pressure Gas Injection:
o    Direct High-Pressure Injection: Adopt high-pressure gas injection (HPGI) systems that inject LNG directly into the combustion chamber at high pressures and near the end of the compression stroke.
o    Upgrade engine components to support higher compression ratios and improved ignition control, optimized for HPGI.

•    Optimize Low-Pressure Dual-Fuel Engines (Otto-Cycle)    
o    Use updated software and hardware to fine-tune gas admission timing and pilot-fuel injection (if applicable).
o    Align ignition timing with real-time load conditions to improve combustion completeness.
o    Adapt piston and cylinder designs specifically for low-pressure gas engines.
o    Incorporate design features—like shaped combustion chambers—to minimize fuel trapping.
o    Employ sensors and electronic controls to continuously monitor combustion quality.
o    Adjust the air-fuel ratio and pilot-fuel quantity in real time to maintain efficient ignition and reduce slip.

2. After-Treatment Solutions
•    Install Methane Oxidation Catalysts:
o    Incorporate catalysts into the exhaust system of newbuild ships.
o    Ensure catalysts are maintained and replaced as needed to sustain up to 80% reduction in methane slip.
o    Monitor exhaust temperatures and adjust as necessary to keep catalysts within optimal operating ranges.

3. Operational Adjustments
•    Avoid Prolonged Low-Load Gas Operation:
o    Plan voyages and engine use to maintain higher loads when running on LNG.
o    Use operational strategies such as scheduling heavier loads or adjusting speeds to minimize low-load scenarios.

•    Switch Between Gas and Fuel Oil at Low Loads:
o    Utilize the dual-fuel capability to switch to fuel oil when LNG combustion efficiency drops at low loads.
o    Establish clear operational thresholds for switching based on load conditions and engine performance data.
o    Note that dual-fuel engines often run with a higher pilot fuel percentage to prevent maintenance issues with fuel injectors.

•    Ensure Proper Maintenance and Engine Optimization:
o    Implement routine inspections and cleaning of fuel injectors, valves, and sensors.
o    Regularly calibrate and tune engine settings such as injection timing and air-fuel ratios for optimal combustion.
o    Train crew in best practices for engine management and maintenance procedures.

4. Hybrid or Battery Integration
•    Integrate Hybrid Systems or Batteries:
o    Install batteries or hybrid power systems to assist during periods of low power demand.
o    Use energy storage to maintain engine operation at higher, more efficient loads around 95%.
o    Design the ship's power management system for seamless interaction between engine and battery, allowing for consistent high-load operation.
o    Plan system integration to account for space, weight, and cost considerations while optimizing fuel and emission performance.

Many shipowners/operators use calculated emission factors for their emissions reporting. However, these calculations are very often inaccurate and unreliable. This fact can be overcome by utilising real-time measurement and monitoring of methane-slip, which from a regulatory perspective and more importantly for the well-being and sustainability of our planet, is now of significant importance.

To this end, VPS have a proven, innovative measurement solution, using our Emsys-Continuous Emissions Monitoring System. Operating a unique cascade-laser technology, for full stack emissions monitoring, Emsys has the ability to measure and control methane slip (g/kWh) as a function of engine load and other operating factors—while correlating that data with SO₂, CO₂, CO, and NOx flow rates.

VPS data, taken from over 200 vessels currently using Emsys, confirms that double-digit methane slip isn’t rare and is often tied to engine misfunction, or sustained low-load operation. Additionally, other methane sources (operational leaks, emergency releases) also contribute to the emissions. It’s worth noting, the VPS emsys solution is the only class approved technology which provides full-range (up to 20,000ppm) answers around methane-slip.

There are numerous methods to assess the Ship-Level Methane Slip including:

•    Onboard measurement (based on continuous exhaust gas measurement)
•    NOx Technical Code (E2/D2/E3 test cycle)
•    Actual operation profiles (calculating energy-based averages)
•    FuelEU default values

Summary
If you’re already using—or considering—LNG as a fuel, tackling methane slip should be your top priority. This is crucial not only for environmental stewardship but also to meet tightening regulatory requirements. By applying operational best practices and adopting next-generation technologies—such as advanced engines, methane catalysts, and other innovative solutions—shipowners can significantly reduce methane emissions today. The key first step is obtaining a clear, data-driven view of your vessel’s actual methane slip, using VPS Emsys. With that insight, you will be well-equipped to make informed decisions that benefit both the environment and your bottom line.

For more information regarding continuous-emissions monitoring and VPS Emsys, please contact marketing@vpsveritas.com

 

Our Business Manager for VPS Power, James Robinson, recently visited the UK Power Networks training site in Sundridge to share best practices for sampling transformer oil and introduce our new range of sampling equipment.

Accurate test results and reports depend heavily on the quality of the sample drawn and the information provided on the label. As highlighted by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC):

•    IEC 60475:2022 - Method of sampling insulating liquids.
•    IEC 60422:2013 - Mineral Oils in electrical equipment - Supervision and maintenance guidance.

“It is essential that every effort be made to ensure that samples are representative of insulating oil in equipment. Experience indicates that oil is sometimes rejected unjustifiably because inadequate care has been taken whilst sampling. Careless sampling procedures or contamination in the sample container will lead to erroneous conclusions concerning quality and incur a waste of time, effort, and expense involved in obtaining, transporting, and testing the sample.

Sampling should be performed by an experienced person, who has received adequate training in accordance with IEC 60475.

It is important to bear in mind that receiving a qualitative and a representative sample is crucial for obtaining a reliable assessment of the electrical equipment. Even the most sophisticated analytical and diagnosis methods cannot overcome faulty samples.”

At VPS Power, we offer bespoke sampling training courses tailored to your business needs, ensuring your team learns the techniques of sampling in accordance with IEC 60475. Additionally, we provide a technical interpretation course to help your team better understand lab testing and reports.

For more information, please contact us at: power@vpsveritas.com
 

 

 

 

 

Introduction
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) are synthetic chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons known for their excellent electrical and thermal properties. These characteristics, along with their chemical stability, made them popular in various commercial applications in the UK, including use as an insulating fluid in capacitors and transformers from the 1950s to the early 1980s However, due to their resistance to biodegradation and their toxicity, and carcinogenicity, PCBs  have raised significant environmental and health concerns. Consequently, their use has been restricted since the early 1970s and banned in electrical equipment by an international agreement in 1986. Unfortunately, common handling facilities have led to widespread contamination of mineral-insulating oil. Oil-filled electrical equipment covers, but is not limited to, transformers, bushings, switchgear, tap changers, and capacitors.

Chemical Structure of PCB
Aroclor, a PCB mixture produced from approximately 1930 to 1979, is one of the most well-known trade names for PCB mixtures. For instance, Aroclor 1254 indicates that the mixture contains about 54% chlorine by weight. The main polychlorinated biphenyl aroclors found in electrical equipment are:

PCBs  are tested by laboratories using a technique called GC-ECD using test method IEC 61619.

International & UK PCB Regulation
PCBs are banned internationally under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP), a treaty signed in 2001 and effective since May 2004. To comply with the provisions in Part II, Annex A of the Stockholm Convention, the European Commission published the Persistent Organic Pollutants Regulation (EC 850/2004), with a recast regulation 2019/1021 in 2019. UK Government Guidance, aligned with the Stockholm Convention, states:

“Member states shall identify and remove from use equipment (e.g., transformers, capacitors, or other receptacles containing liquid stocks) containing more than 0.005% PCBs and volumes greater than 0.5dm³, as soon as possible but no later than 31st December 2025.”

You can continue to use oil filled electrical equipment until 31 December 2025 if you can reasonably assume two things about its fluid:

•    It contains more than 0.005% but no more than 0.05% by weight of PCBs.
•    It has a total volume of more than 0.05dm³ (0.05 litres).

After 31 December 2025, you must decontaminate and dispose of assets as soon as possible. However, you can keep an asset until the end of its useful life if you reasonably assume (and justify if needed) that its fluids either:

•    Contain 0.005% by weight, or less, of PCBs.
•    Contain a total volume of 0.05dm³ or less of PCBs.

After this, you must decontaminate or dispose of any PCBs as soon as possible.

When will PCB be present?
To comply with international and UK regulations, oil-filled assets manufactured before 1 January 1987 (or with an unknown year of manufacture) should be assumed to be possibly contaminated unless proven otherwise. Even if the PCB-contaminated oil has been replaced, some PCB  may still be present. In the UK, PCB-contaminated mineral oil is more common than pure PCB oil-filled assets. When PCB oil was used, it was often on sites where both mineral and PCB-filled assets were used, similar to the current use of mineral and ester fluids together. During maintenance, the same oil drums and equipment were sometimes used for emptying and refilling assets, leading to accidental contamination. 

Urgent Call to Action
The deadline for compliance is fast approaching. With the 31st of December  2025 deadline looming, it is crucial to act now to ensure your oil filled assets meet regulatory requirements. Failure to comply can result in significant environmental and health risks, as well as potential legal and financial consequences.

How can VPS Power help?
VPS Power tests PCBs using internationally recognized methods and the latest advanced laboratory equipment. Our certified laboratories can support your testing requirements. Contact us today at: power@vpsveritas.com

VPS is pleased to share news of the latest progress in their partnership with Metcore International Pte Ltd. In October 2024, VPS and Metcore International Pte Ltd, announced their new collaboration which promised to integrate the strengths of each organisation in the physical bunker surveying and advanced assessment of Mass Flow Meter systems.

Now, VPS and Metcore, are launching a new and innovative two-day training course for bunker quantity surveyors. This course is unique in offering both a theoretical classroom element, plus practical onboard training.

The first course is scheduled for the first week of March in conjunction with barge operator, Victrol, who kindly allow access to one of their barges for the practical MFM session.

For more information on how VPS can assist with your current and future bunker quantity survey requirements please contact marketing@vpsveritas.com