Trending Now

Iran Tensions’ Global Trade Impact Revealed by Seized Ship…

New Articles

SCRUB 2020 AWAY: HOW THE INDUSTRY IS HOLDING UP AFTER ONE YEAR OF IMO 2020

IMO 2020
Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily, Ocean Carriers

SCRUB 2020 AWAY: HOW THE INDUSTRY IS HOLDING UP AFTER ONE YEAR OF IMO 2020

Leave a comment

The shipping industry has experienced one heck of year since IMO 2020 took effect. Looking back, it is reasonable to state that ocean shippers were focused solely on ensuring compliance was achieved to meet the new standards in combating the emissions footprint. Outlined in our article from last year, the issue of cleaning bunker fuels for the first time paired with the contractual challenges presented by the regulation posed new sets of challenges to be met–and quickly.

Fast-forward to mid-2020, and shippers found themselves in a completely overturned economic situation due to the pandemic. Capacity restraints, shutdowns and cost fluctuations were beyond what any industry could have predicted for 2020. When the impact of the pandemic was truly felt for shippers in mid-March, IMO 2020 compliance quickly became a backburner concern, due in part to proactive preparations in meeting regulations and identifying how the industry would overcome the new disruption. This “new normal” forced changes in forecasting and management on a new level. 

Global Trade Magazine talked with Carmen Gerace, BDP International’s chief transportation officer, about the state of the ocean shipping sector and how IMO 2020 in conjunction with the pandemic shifted operations. BDP International is one of the world’s leading, privately held freight logistics and transportation management firms.

“Most of our clients, at this stage, have really done a superb job at meeting compliance standards for IMO 2020 and reducing the carbon footprint,” Gerace says. “Interestingly enough, IMO 2020 got pushed back to mid-March at the onset of the pandemic with everything shutting down. Our clients had a year to prepare for IMO 2020 and they prepared well and were ready to go. Places like Freight 4 did not contribute to the current chaos of the ocean situation we have today. Industry players were prepared and ready, then everything else hit, and it went from there. That’s where we sit today.” 

Aside from COVID-19, reducing emissions has been a success for most of the industry, according to Gerace. Despite setbacks and delays, shippers were responsive to the call of IMO 2020, contributing to the overall reduction in emissions output and preparing vessels accordingly. 

“The risk of non-compliance simply could not be afforded by ocean line providers,” Gerace says. “New builds, scrubbers, retrofitting and the undertaking that they had to put forth to achieve this had to be pushed back; however, it has been a success thus far. Additionally, the threat of ships being restricted to berthing into ports pushed compliance efforts even more. Ocean carriers simply could not afford that risk.”

For 2021, the industry will have COVID disruptions to manage. From ensuring the safety of employees to accurate forecasting, it is critical for ocean liners to predict market fluctuations to keep costs and operations at optimal levels. With April just a couple of months away, shippers will have new rates to consider, as the expiration for current rates is on the horizon with the potential spike in air freight to transport the COVID vaccine. How these fluctuations are handled is a matter of timely forecasting and proactive measures now to ensure success for the next year and beyond. 

“COVID recovery remains the largest challenge for shippers currently,” Gerace says. “This, paired with the potential increased concentration of the air freight markets due to the demand in transporting the vaccine, will undoubtedly present problems. As we anticipate an influx in vaccine transportation demand, it is important to remember that air-cargo capacity has its limitations, and this could create an attractive opportunity for ocean shipping. 

“The downside to this is increasing capacity on the ocean side, becoming more backed up than it already is. Once that occurs, costs are at the top of mind. Costs are up roughly 170 percent compared to where things were this time last year. This will not go down within the first four months of 2021 and quite frankly, it will never go back to where it was. It is going to come down again at some point, but the question is, when? Some predict May, some predict June.” 

Gerace notes that the industry relies heavily on the transpacific eastbound market, and all those rates expire by the end of April. 

“It is critical for the industry to get freight ready for 2021 and the beginning of 2022,” he says. “Cargo carriers, BCOs, etc. must work on their budgets and operations anticipating this. The question is, how much have they taken into play that the first four months of 2021 could very well be as bad as all of 2020 from the cost perspective?”

At this point, maintaining compliance efforts and efficiencies are on the backburner for industry players. What is more of a concern comes in the form of accurate predictions, cost management and proactive preparations based on these forecasts–predicting market challenges related to COVID, and how that will trickle down to shippers’ bottom lines. BDP takes these factors into account for their clients, encouraging forecasting to ensure the timely allocation of resources, space and equipment, which Gerace characterizes as critical in these times. The more a customer can forecast out, he says, the better off BDP can align with partners to quickly and effectively reserve resources needed for success. 

“BDP has different options for customers from LCL cargo to sea-air, air freight, chartering and more,” he explains. “We look at anything else our customers’ ask us to do. Operations come at a cost and sometimes sticker shock is a challenge, which we understand. Our goal is to continue to provide weekly options and provide information on port capacity, which ports are running on time, where there is an equipment surplus, and where deficits are a concern, so customers can plan how long of a delay to expect. This all goes back to forecasting. Forecasting is key for everybody, especially in the current market. The further out the shipper can forecast, the better. This is critical because space and rates are at premiums and will remain this way in the future. Everybody is backed up.”

The industry has survived one of the most intense years for disruption. With compliance a non-issue, shippers will be tested on a new level in preparing for the future. As we enter 2021, partner relationships will be critical in maintaining to ensure the best options for continued operations are available. The hope from the COVID vaccine will present its own set of challenges, but with the right partner they can be managed. 

______________________________________________________________

As BDP International’s chief transportation officer, Carmen Gerace oversees all aspects of global transportation, including the implementation of new transport solutions and product offerings while also developing future transport strategy. Throughout his 25-year+ career in the industry, he has held varying managerial and executive positions at BDP. He is based in Philadelphia and can be reached at carmen.gerace@bdpint.com. 

ocean
Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily, Ocean Carriers, Ocean Ports

An Ocean of Potential in the Blue Economy

Leave a comment

The Blue Economy

The ocean has always been an essential part of life on this blue planet. Oceans cover over 70 percent of the Earth’s surface and contain 97 percent of the world’s water. We rely on its resources to sustain and improve our lives.

The World Bank created a definition for this “blue economy” that encompasses “sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods and jobs, and ocean ecosystem health.”

Economic activities associated with the ocean include traditional sectors such as commercial fishing, coastal tourism and maritime transport to support global commerce. Increasingly, the ocean has been tapped for energy sources and generation of off-shore renewable energies like wind and tidal energy. Marine life is explored for applications to pharmaceuticals, desalination offers an opportunity to meet demand for freshwater, and the ocean can be used for carbon sequestration to mitigate climate impacts.

World Bank Definition of Blue Economy

Vital to Livelihoods and Growth

In one form or another, trade in ocean resources contributes between $3-6 trillion to global GDP, supporting the livelihoods of over 3 billion people on the planet.

Recognizing the importance of measuring the economic impact of the ocean, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) partnered with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) in 2019 to develop prototype statistics to measure the ocean’s contribution to the U.S. economy. From aquaculture to shipbuilding, offshore mining and power generation, marine-related activities contributed some $373 billion to U.S. GDP in 2018.

Tourism and recreation generated the most, bringing in just shy of $143 billion in wages, profits, and tax revenue for coastal communities in the U.S. in 2018. The new data also showed that between 2014 and 2018, the American blue economy grew faster than the overall U.S. economy.

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

U.S. Ocean Economy

value added by activity in 2018 (millions of dollars)

Tourism and recreation – 38%

National defense and public administration – 33%

Living marine resources – 3%

Marine transportation – 1%

Offshore minerals and utilities – 15%

Deeper Dive into the Ocean Economy

Fisheries and Aquaculture

The ocean delivers a vital and primary source of protein in the diets of over 3 billion people. Marine fisheries employ over 200 million people either directly or indirectly. Expanded global availability of refrigerated storage and transportation has extended access to all kinds of fresh fish.

Overfishing, exacerbated by heavy government subsidies, has become a key concern, putting nearly 90 percent of the world’s fish stocks are at risk. Both the UN and the WTO have made removing these subsidies a priority to help protect vulnerable coastal communities who rely on fish for their own consumption and the local economy.

One-half of all fish we eat is farmed rather than captured. Aquaculture is the fastest growing food sector in the world. China produces a huge amount of the world’s farmed fish and is the top producer by value of carp, tilapia, catfish, shrimp, oysters and many other types. Norway leads in salmon, trout and smelt with Chile a close second.

Tourism

Tourism has long been vital to many coastal economies. Overall, tourism employs 1 out of every 11 people around the world. It is fast becoming one of the world’s biggest industries, making up 10 percent of global GDP. International tourism is an invisible export. Visitors spend money on transportation, housing and entertainment using income earned in their home country.

From scuba diving and surfing to cruises and all-inclusive beach resorts, coastal tourism comes in many flavors. It is particularly important for less-developed nations, as it creates jobs, promotes economic growth, and brings in money that is spent in local businesses like restaurants, shops, and tour services.

Tourism is the economic lifeblood of many Least Developed Countries and small island developing states such as those in the Caribbean and southeast Asia that collectively host 41 million visitors visit every year. These states are focused on delivering services to bring in more tourists while preserving the natural beauty and resources that attract visitors to their islands.

Shipping

Over 80 percent of goods traded internationally such as raw materials, food, consumer goods, and energy products were transported by sea in 2015. Despite reaching a record high of 11 billion tonnes shipped that year, world maritime trade growth decelerated to 2.7 percent in 2018, below the historical average of 3.0, reflecting a range of risks that intensified at the time including global trade tensions, protectionism, and the ‘Brexit’ decision.

Issues surrounding maritime transport are often intertwined with other global economic, environmental and political trends. Security conflicts occur over country ownership of key shipping routes and global discussions are active over the environmental impacts of fuel-guzzling container ships.

The world’s ports can often act as a weather vane for the economy as a whole. Dockworkers feel the effects of tariffs, disasters, and other trade policy changes before farmers, truckers, distributors and retailers do. Effects of the recent U.S.-China trade war and of the COVID-19 pandemic were experienced by dockers who saw the vast reductions in imports before the economic effects rippled throughout the economy.

As supply chains continue to shift and we watch for reshoring, the maritime transport sector may start to look different over the next few years, but will undoubtedly remain an essential part of the global economy.

Stats how we rely on the ocean

Preserving Our Oceans

Sustainability is a key aspect of the blue economy. Although there is an emphasis on environmental stewardship and protection in all parts of the, nowhere is this more apparent than when it comes to our oceans, a finite and critical resource.

Overfishing or pollution could deplete fish stocks and cause a severe food crisis. Environmental degradation caused by the tourism industry could ruin the economies of coastal communities. Waste and pollution from shipping could cause accumulated damage to our air and water.

According to Conservation International eight million metric tonnes of plastic is dumped into the ocean every year. At this rate, by 2050, plastic would outweigh fish in the ocean. Other concerns cited include the runoff of harmful nutrients from agriculture into the ocean, warming temperatures that are bleaching and destroying coral reefs, and even noise pollution from shipping that is killing creatures such as jellyfish.

International governmental cooperation and advances in technology can combat these problems. Conservation and sustainable use form one of the five pillars used by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) as part of their Ocean’s Economy and Trade Strategy project. This effort aims to mitigate damage while maintaining the important economic benefits of the blue economy that supports billions of people.

It seems no aspect of economic life has been spared disruption from the COVID-19 pandemic, including many parts of the blue economy and related livelihoods. UNCTAD released a report to chart the waters of re-opening the blue economy to become more resilient post-pandemic. It proposes enhanced coordination and communication between fisheries and distributors to cut down on food waste, exercising restraint in sanitary protectionism, and closely monitoring shipping to prevent bottlenecks and delays. UNCTAD also suggests removing fishing subsidies to tackle wasteful overfishing; developing a “2.0 approach” to coastal tourism that showcases local sustainability efforts; and digitizing maritime trade procedures to achieve efficiencies and reduce CO2 emissions.

Untapped Potential

There is still a lot we don’t know about the world’s oceans, so embracing science and discovery will play an important role as we continue to draw on its precious resources and develop new markets. Untapped economic potential includes the capture of carbon, supporting the existence of a rich oceanic biodiversity, waste disposal, and the protection of coasts.

The blue economy is as diverse as its land-based counterpart – perhaps even more so. Sustainability will continue to be extremely important both for its own sake and for the preservation of the resources we rely on every day. With careful stewardship, the blue economy can continue to support billions of people and enrich all of our lives.

______________________________________________________________

Alice Calder received her MA in Applied Economics at GMU. Originally from the UK, where she received her BA in Philosophy and Political Economy from the University of Exeter, living and working internationally sparked her interest in trade issues as well as the intersection of economics and culture.

This article originally appeared on TradeVistas.org. Republished with permission.

IMO 2020
Archives, Global Shippers 101, Global Trade Daily

IMO 2020 Fuels the Sustainable Transition of the Shipping Sector

Leave a comment

The deadline for the much-anticipated IMO 2020 regulation has arrived and with it comes a new set of challenges, potential solutions and newfound awareness of the impact this will have on all players within the shipping sector—from shippers to fuel suppliers. Reports of vessels found to be noncompliant have already shown up in news headlines while fuel alternatives, such as fuel blends, continue to present new degrees of barriers to overcome.

There’s no doubt that the end-goal for IMO 2020 is ultimately beneficial, but attaining its goal of reduced emissions globally will undoubtedly continue to present new varieties of disruptions that industry players and lawmakers around the world must strategically think through. David McCullough, a partner in the Energy & Infrastructure practice group at the New York office of Eversheds Sutherland, discussed with Global Trade the ways the industry is handling compliance so far.

“For shippers, it’s a contractual and compliance issue,” McCullough explains, “meaning reviewing their contractual agreements to charter the vessels to determine what liability is being shifted to them and their contracts to purchase bunker fuel, all while trying to find the appropriate balance of where liability should fall in the event of noncompliance.

“The second aspect is to review their compliance procedures, namely reviewing sampling and testing procedures recommended by the IMO and IMO 2020 itself,” McCullough continued. “It’s also a document retention aspect because under certain charter party agreements, they can be liable for noncompliance in the bunker delivery notes or for general noncompliance.”

McCullough noted that “For the first time ever, bunker fuel tanks are needing to be cleaned and that is largely on the owner and operator of the vessel. The individual shipper may need to coordinate with them to ensure that has happened. Being proactive can mean looking at their vessel owner’s implementation plan and ensuring these have been implemented without issue. The vast majority of companies will comply, but there’s likely a very discreet universe of companies out there that may not comply with the IMO 2020 requirements or have taken minimal steps at this point. Analysts often say these companies represent between 10-20 percent of voyages in the first year of IMO 2020.”

Beyond the issue of noncompliance remains unanswered questions to existing and potential disruptions with the regulation, from contracts and jurisdictions right down to fuel components and the controversial provisions found in the Fuel Oil Non-Availability Report (FONAR). How these issues will be handled in unique and changing circumstances remains unknown and it’s uncertain how the answers will come about and what their impact will be on industry players.

“The FONAR legal standard states that the vessel needs to make best efforts to find compliant fuel but need not deviate from its voyage plan in doing so,” McCullough clarifies. “This is a real open question, specifically for port states, in how liberal they will be with these provisions. We don’t have a definition over this standard yet. Does not deviating from your voyage plan mean shippers don’t have to look for a different berth at the same terminal or a different dock or anchoring point? What about a different terminal within the same port? What about a different port that is nearby?

“Industry players also aren’t sure if they will need to look at the availability of compliant fuel oil or if there’s a need to look at the availability of distillate fuel because presumably, in many ports, there will be ultra-low-Sulphur distillate or low Sulphur distillate fuel available. There is the question if companies will have to be required to put No. 2 ULSD into the bunker fuel tank at an extreme premium or not. This is unlikely, but those questions and how individual countries implement those standards are real implementation questions. If they’re overly lenient in issuing FONARs, it could undercut the market for low-Sulphur fuel.”

McCullough goes on to explain additional associated risks can result in a noncompliant blend, vessel engine performance issues or the fuel and distillates separating, creating added issues in compliance. There’s also the concern of the distillate fuel cleaning the bunker fuel tanks and knocking loose the residue not previously able to be cleaned, according to the law partner.

“Compatibility of fuel blends could remain a challenge for some time—only time will tell if this is a real concern,” McCullough says. “The industry has a new product that is coming on the market meeting the IMO 2020 standard using blends of fuel oil and distillate of varying degrees. This results in different characteristics and components and it’s unknown how a blend created in one jurisdiction reacts with a blend from another. This is still an open question and something that is of significant concern.

“We might start seeing a rebalance in the marketplace as far as contractual provisions go as time goes by, with some counterparties requiring that the new fuels will be compatible with the fuel existing in the tank, or bunker fuel suppliers stating that their fuel is compatible with certain type of blends.” He adds it will be the marketplace that determines that issue.

These unresolved challenges and works in progress arrive as compliance efforts directly impact market investments, specifically in the United States and Singapore. Global companies and competitors that get away with noncompliance from a regulatory or a contractual standpoint ultimately undercut compliant company business models. Because these regions are heavily invested in regulations such as IMO 2020, there lies an expectation for enforcement. Whether these challenges are addressed now or later will be seen in the weeks to come as more shippers are faced with tough decisions if they want to continue operations.

_______________________________________________________________

David McCullough is a partner in the Energy & Infrastructure practice group at the New York office of Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP.

He adds to the above:  “Certain countries–such as the United States and Singapore—are well-positioned to comply with the standards in terms of availability of low-Sulphur fuel and active companies in those jurisdictions that have made significant investments in those jurisdictions have really wanted to see robust compliance and enforcement due to the local interests that have made such investments and their concern that noncompliance just undercuts their investments. There’s a number of companies with very significant financial incentives to ensure robust compliance with the standard and as a result, because you have two countries (U.S. and Singapore) with high interest and investment in seeing this law enforced, the industry will very quickly see the rates of compliance increase significantly.”

ships
Archives, Global Trade Daily, Ocean Carriers

Big Ships that are Coming or Already Here Present New Challenges

Leave a comment

The new year presents both opportunities and challenges for players within the supply chain to increase productivity through maximizing resources or get left behind as competitors take over. There are layers of factors for global shippers to consider in determining the best approach in remaining both competitive, efficient, and to be honest, relevant. Major factors in consideration include IMO 2020, traffic increases and vessel sizing.

Looking at some statistics reveals an interesting picture of exactly what’s going on and what shippers can prepare for based on last year’s trends. According to the 2019 North American Ports Outlook report by Cushman & Wakefield, the intermodal traffic rates saw an increase by 5.5 percent, while 90 percent of internationally shipped dry, non-bulk manufactured goods are containerized. Oh yeah, automobile imports are on the rise also.

Data make clear that big ships can not only create competitive advantages but also recreate what modern competition looks like. Cushman & Wakefield’s report shows that 79 percent of the international containership supply is dominated by the 2M Alliance (Maersk and MSC), the Ocean Alliance (CMA CGM, COSCO and Evergreen) and THE Alliance (ONE, Hapag Lloyd and Yang Ming). Not only do these alliances carry a massive amount of clout among competitors globally, but they also boast massive container vessels.

COSCO Shipping Universe, for example, sits right at 21,237 TEU capacity at 400 meters x 58.6 meters. This massive vessel holds the title as the largest cargo ship in China and the fourth largest in the world. Additionally, this vessel comes with an added bonus to further charge its performance through the support of ABB Turbocharges that enable the vessel to travel at 22 nautical miles per hour.

“The ABB turbochargers on COSCO Shipping Universe will support maximum performance and fuel efficiency, in addition to contributing to COSCO Shipping Lines pursuing green shipping practices for long-term success,” stated Oliver Riemenschneider, managing director, ABB Turbocharging in a press release announcing the vessel’s delivery in June of 2018. “We foresee the ABB turbochargers on the forthcoming mega container ships in the Universe series will contribute similar viable operational gains.”

As the vessels get bigger and better, industry players can rightfully anticipate this as a major trend to keep an eye out for in 2020. Although increasing ship sizes supporting more capacity with fewer miles in between is a win-win, shippers must consider how this impacts the ports and their size capabilities and most importantly, their access to such ports. The North American Ports Outlook report states that orders for new vessels are being placed exceeding 22,000 TEUs and that East Coast ports are beginning to see more large ships. Furthermore, the Neopanamax Locks confirmed that as of just recently, it can handle over 14,000 TEU ships, but not by much. That’s not going to cut it for the big ships predicted in the near future.

MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co. announced a successful Asia-to-Europe voyage for the MSC Gülsün ship. The 23,756 TEU vessel holds the title as the world’s largest container ship and adds a new level of quality with its advanced engineering focused on energy efficiency and reduced fuel consumption overall. The Gülsün is one of more than 10 ships to be added to MSC’s advanced fleet between 2019-2020, and it doesn’t stop there. The IMO-2020 ready vessel boasts a hybrid Exhaust Gas Cleaning System (UN IMO-approved, of course) paired with a low-Sulphur fuel and/or LNG adaptation option. Not only is this ship more than prepared for revolutionizing the approach to IMO standards, but it’s also making a big dent in operational efficiencies.

Evergreen also made news last year by confirming new vessels with up to 23,000 TEU capacity are being added to its fleet. Information released from numerous sources confirmed that five or more vessels with such TEU capacity were approved for order. These mega-ships will be built at South Korea’s Samsung Heavy Industries shipyard and China State Shipbuilding Corp.with a price tag of roughly $1.6 billion. The order was placed back in September and current service estimation sits between 12-18 months, according to various reports.

Go ahead and add Germany’s Hapag-Lloyd to the list of super vessels to come. The Wall Street Journal reported that up to six ships with TEU capacity well over 20,000 were confirmed. Hapag Lloyd already boasts six vessels within the A 18 class with more than 19,000 TEU capacity. Overall, Hapag Lloyd boasts a total fleet TEU capacity of 1.7 million… and counting.

Even with these new massive ships on the horizon, it is hard to compare to the OOCL Hong Kong, the first of six in the G-class with a whopping 21,413 TEU capacity. One such ship went down in history as the world’s first to ever break the 21,000 TEU-capacity marks. Within months of this announcement, the OOCL Scandinavia, the OOCL Germany and the OOCL United Kingdom–all with 21,4313 TEU capacity—were also announced and christened.

“While our industry seems to have the knack to ‘outdo’ one another in building larger containerships relatively quickly these days, this project is nonetheless an important moment for us,” stated OOCL Chairman C.C. Tung in the announcement. “Faced with increasing competition and un-ending pressure on costs, we need to take the bold step in operating larger size ships of quality and high efficiency in order to stay relevant and compete effectively as a major container shipping company.”

Tung concluded, after the OOCL Scandinavia reveal, “This achievement is about working to bring people and companies of different professions and nationalities together to reach new heights, innovate, solve complicated engineering problems, and along the way, why not break a world record, too.”

Although the OOCL Hong Kong has yet to be replaced, competitors are pushing the limits of capacity to break new records the shipping sector has yet to encounter. Maximizing the capacity limits the industry is currently used to paired with the IMO 2020 regulations and changes will undoubtedly filter the industry leaders. The real question remains: Who will set the bar even higher than what it is now and how will they do it?

IMO 2020
Archives, Global Shippers 101, Global Trade Daily

Happy New Year: IMO 2020 is Here

Leave a comment

A new year is right around the corner, which means IMO 2020 is finally here. Effective January 1, 2020, Annex VI of MARPOL, which is the international treaty governing pollution on the high seas, will mandate a significant decrease in sulfur emissions from vessels—reducing the current permitted level of 35,000 ppm to 5,000 ppm. Compliance with this new standard will primarily be achieved through the burning of low-sulfur fuel, although compliance choices include other methods like the use of scrubbers and liquid natural gas (“LNG”) as fuel. Under this regime, the primary responsible party in the freight market will be the vessel owner or operator. 

It is estimated that 10-20 percent of vessels after January 1, 2020, simply will not comply with the new IMO 2020 sulfur standard. Furthermore, because there is no industry standard specification for bunker fuel, there is an increased risk of fuel quality issues that lead to suboptimal performance and engine damage, which may give rise to inadvertent non-compliance. As a result, the industry should expect significant enforcement efforts of this new standard. 

The IMO does not have a global enforcement body. Instead, IMO member states pass laws implementing the provisions of Annex VI, which are enforced by bodies analogous to the US Coast Guard and US Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”). In particular, port states can enforce compliance within their coastal waters while flag states may enforce the standard on vessels flagged in their countries. Both port states and flag states have the authority to arrest vessels, and issue fines, penalties and prison sentences. 

Historically, the United States has been a lead enforcer of MARPOL, and the industry should expect robust enforcement in the United States regardless of whether the non-compliance occurs in US or non-US waters. It is likely that US authorities will seek to enforce IMO 2020 through whether the vessel is maintaining true and accurate records, specifically its bunker delivery notes (“BDNs”) and fuel changeover logbook. Any listing of noncompliant fuel or false or inaccurate statements in those records could result in the US Coast Guard detaining the vessel and prosecuting the vessel owner, operator, bunker fuel supplier or other responsible party. Although the likelihood of direct non-compliance in US waters is low, even indirect non-compliance can still be enforced if the vessel’s records are false or inaccurate. 

Prior enforcement of IMO treaties—which includes multimillion-dollar fines and criminal penalties for captains and vessels—further demonstrates the likelihood of a robust US response to non-compliance. Similarly, whistleblower provisions will likely also bolster US enforcement of IMO 2020. Under US law, whistleblowers who report non-compliance can receive up to 50% of the monetary penalties levied against the owner, operator or vessel. With penalties in these cases exceeding tens of millions of dollars, the whistleblower provisions provide crew with a significant incentive to report non-compliance to US authorities. 

While direct liability of the owner and operator of the vessel is a primary concern, there are also varieties of implications non-compliance may have on other parties involved in the freight industry. For example, the detention of vessels and its owners or operators for non-compliance can also lead to delays in the shipment of goods and present significant obstacles and other logistical issues in getting a vessel released from US authorities. Moreover, the reputational harm that comes with non-compliance may also have a lasting effect on a shipper’s business. 

With IMO 2020 just around the corner, it is essential that all parties seek to implement robust compliance plans and due diligence of their counterparties—including charterparties, fellow shippers, vessel owners and operator and bunker fuel sale counterparties.

____________________________________________________________

David McCullough is a partner in the Energy & Infrastructure practice group at the New York office of Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP. Nicholas Hillman, with Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP in Washington DC, is not yet admitted to practice.

ocean
Archives, Global Trade Daily, Ocean Carriers

A Tough Year on the Water Hasn’t Dampened Innovation for these Ocean Carriers

Leave a comment

To say that 2019 has been challenging for ocean carriers would be an understatement. The year began with the National Retail Federation forecasting a decline in year-over-year growth, echoing World Bank chatter of a slowing global economy.

And don’t forget the tariff wars between the U.S. and China (heck, the U.S. and just about anyone). Managing capacity on ships has also been an issue, and then there is the potential biggest bogeyman of all: the International Maritime Organization’s low-sulfur fuel mandate taking effect Jan. 1, 2020.

Sure, we could dwell on the gloom and doom, but that would not be very Global Trade magazine of us, now would it? We here in our silky ivory tower like to spotlight the positive, which we reveal with these ocean shippers we love.

MSC

Mediterranean Shipping Co. this year watched the world’s largest container ship, the MSC Gülsün, complete its maiden voyage from northern China to Europe. With a width of 197 feet and a length of 1,312 feet (!), the Gülsün was built by Samsung Heavy Industries at the Geoje shipyard in South Korea. It can carry up to 23,756 TEUs shipping containers on one haul. That capacity can include 2,000 refrigerated containers for shipping food, beverages, pharmaceuticals or any other chilled and frozen cargoes. That’s a lot of snow cones!

MOL

Mitsui O.S.K. Lines sees MSC Gülsün and raises you the MOL Triumph, which achieved a new world load record this year. Departing Singapore for Northern Europe on THE Alliance’s FE2 service with a cargo of 19,190 TEU. That surpassed the previous load record achieved in August 2018, when Mumbai Maersk sailed from Tanjung Pelepas to Rotterdam with 19,038 TEU onboard. Yes, you are correct, that’s a pretty slim margin of victory, and analysts suspect the MOL Triumph record won’t last long given the 23,000 TEU ships being introduced.

HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE 

Speaking of THE Alliance, current members Hapag-Lloyd, ONE and Yang Ming will be joined in April 2020 by Hyundai Merchant Marine (HMM). The South Korean carrier recently signed an agreement to join THE Alliance and then passed the pen to the founding members, who extended the duration of their collaboration until 2030. “HMM is a great fit for THE Alliance as it will provide a number of new and modern vessels, which will help us to deliver better quality and be more efficient,” said Rolf Habben Jansen, Hapag-Lloyd’s chief executive. 

HAPAG-LLOYD

Oh, speaking of the fifth-largest container shipping company in the world, Hapag-Lloyd is piloting an online insurance product as part of a digital offering to try to overcome the widespread practice of shippers relying on the limited cover provided under the terms of carriers’ bills of lading. While Hapag-Lloyd says it takes the utmost care in transporting cargo, company officials acknowledge things can and have gone wrong. Thus, the introduction of Quick Cargo Insurance, which is underwritten by industrial insurer Chubb in Germany and is limited to containerized exports from that country, France and the Netherlands. However, the carrier says it plans to expand the offer.  

MAERSK

To navigate new environmental regulations, A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S is considering going old school. We mean really old school by using a modern version of the old-fashioned sail to help power its ships. Currently being tested on one of Maersk’s giant tankers, the sails look less like the flapping silk you know from Johnny Depp movies and Jerry Seinfeld’s puffy shirt and more like huge marble columns. But they are nothing to laugh at as two 10-story-tall cylinders can harness enough wind to replace 20 percent of the ship’s fossil fuels, according to their maker, Norsepower Oy Ltd. 

MOL, THE SEQUEL

While we’re getting all green up in here, it’s worth also pointing out that Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd. This year joined three other Japanese companies— Asahi Tanker Co., Exeno Yamamizu Corp., and Mitsubishi Corp.—in teaming up to build the world’s first zero-emission tanker by mid-2021. Their joint venture e5 Lab Inc. will power the vessel with large-capacity batteries and operate in Tokyo Bay, according to a statement the foursome released on Aug. 6. Thanks to the onslaught of legislation to improve environmental performance, other companies are also looking to battery power. Norway’s Kongsberg Gruppen is developing an electric container vessel, and Rolls-Royce Holdings last year that started offering battery-powered ship engines.

AMAZON

No, this is not a leftover strand from a different story in this magazine about moving packages on the ground. “Quietly and below the radar,” USA Today recently reported, “Amazon has been ramping up its ocean shipping service, sending close to 4.7 million cartons of consumers goods from China to the United States over the past year, records show.” While other ocean carrier leaders prepare for the bald head of Jeff Bezos, his move really should be no surprise given Amazon’s attempt to control as much of its transportation network as possible. (See my September-October issue story “Air War: Fast, Free Shipping has UPS, FedEx and Amazon Scrambling in the Air”). Of Amazon now floating into the sea, Steve Ferreira, CEO of Ocean Audit, a company that utilizes data and machine learning to find ocean freight refunds for the Fortune 500, told USA Today: “This makes them the only e-commerce company that is able to do the whole transaction from end-to-end. Amazon now has a closed ecosystem.” 

IMO 2020
Archives, Global Logistics, Global Trade Daily

IMO 2020: Understanding the Impact of Cutting Sulphur Oxide Emissions

Leave a comment

As global shippers prepare for the busy season approaching, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has a new international regulation scheduled to begin the first of January. IMO 2020 is a regulation designed to reduce Sulphur oxide emissions from ships, which will reduce the harmful impact of the shipping industry’s byproduct fuel emissions. Lower sulfur emissions will improve air quality in port cities as well as lessen ocean acidification. With roughly four months remaining before the regulation is implemented, trans-ocean logistics companies are urging vessel owners to plan accordingly so they are not fined for surpassing the Sulphur limit specifications. 

The IMO 2020 regulation applies to all ships on international and domestic voyages. New IMO compliant fuels are being created, but due to limited supply and high demand, the price of the new fuel is expected to fluctuate. These additional costs can create a trickle-down effect, which has the potential to affect both vessel owners and shippers. Shippers will most likely find the cost of ocean transportation increasing as the marine sector must utilize these more costly fuels.

RTM Lines a respected trans-ocean transportation company providing, knowledgeable, cost-effective and professional expertise in the ocean transportation industry is committed to assisting our clients to navigate these changes. The new IMO 2020 regulation will affect the entire industry including a variety of vessel operators by reducing acceptable fuel sulfur content from 3.5% to 0.5%.  “Even the smallest amount of Sulphur will subject vessels to a fine or the ship will be pulled out of trade,” said Richard Tiebel, Head of Operations at RTM Lines. “The more proactive vessel owners are about reducing the amount of Sulphur there is in the fuel, the fewer problems they will have to deal with when the IMO 2020 regulations are in effect.” 

“Fuel treatment remains the most effective way to address compliance. However, fuel treatment is in short supply, so we will likely see higher costs for this service, ultimately coming out of the consumer’s pocket. Another solution is flushing of the tanks; this is costly in more ways than one as it has the potential to put a vessel out of commission for a significant amount of time. When weighing their options, shippers should consider capacity, as non-compliant vessels will be pulled out of service or denied entry at certain ports.” Tiebel said. 

Freight costs are already showing signs of an unpredictable landscape. Tiebel shared that, “A $20 difference between IFO 380 bunker and marine gas oil, adds an additional $2.50 per freight ton to breakbulk shipments on a booking note basis. Current and future bunker prices will be based on web-based bunker platform reports which will be provided along with the freight invoice.” In other words, shippers are starting to see an added invoice to charges previously quoted simply due to fuel changes. Furthermore, these charges are covered with right to adjust at time of quotation, time of loading, and at time of discharge.” 

Although the IMO 2020 regulation, has the potential to be more expensive, it can drastically reduce pollution in the environment. The move beyond traditional shipping fuels will transform the ocean shipping industry. These changes in the industry, though challenging, can make a significantly reduction in emissions and create a positive impact on the environment.

“I believe once IMO 2020 is implemented, it’s going to help the environment tremendously. Compliance will be a big step in bringing our industry up to date in protecting the marine environment we utilize. It is the key ingredient not only in ocean transport but in our lives and those of our families.” Tiebel concludes. 

Archives, Global Shippers 101, Global Trade Daily

How Clean Shipping Fuels Support Trillion-Dollar Investments

Leave a comment

Implementing the use of clean fuels such as green ammonia creates the potential of trillion-dollar investment opportunities, specifically in developing countries, according to a report released by Ricardo Energy and Environment, commissioned by EDF. Identified by Sailing on Solar, the “green” alternative serves as an emissions-free substitute when used by shippers that produce it at-scale with untapped renewable energy resources. This approach ultimately eliminates fossil-fuel usage while offering a clean solution to modified shipping engines and hydrogen fuel cells.

“Emissions-free shipping can be the engine that drives green development across the world,” Aoife O’Leary, senior legal manager at Environmental Defense Fund Europe, said. “The abundance and falling costs of untapped renewable resources like solar and wind energy in developing countries make the production of maritime fuels that emit no greenhouse gases a big potential investment opportunity where such production is undertaken by additional renewable capacity. And shippers can look forward to future running on the air, water, wind and sunlight that go into manufacturing new fuels like green ammonia.”

Additional findings from the research addressed the need for an established supply chain of green ammonia for the maritime sector, specifically calling out countries with renewable energy resources as a primary resource. While the IMO considers new policies to support the goal of cutting emissions in half, trillions of dollars in new investments are on the horizon if renewable energy alternatives are strategically implemented to alleviate financial strain for the production of sustainable alternative fuels.

“Countries must get serious about exploring international policies that can provide the incentive for alternative fuels like green ammonia and other sustainable shipping fuels to be adopted,” said O’Leary. “First movers will be able to benefit from investment in their economies towards additional renewable capacity whilst also gaining a competitive advantage as the shipping industry transitions to clean fuel. All that is needed to ensure this vision becomes reality is a sensible policy, including robust environmental safeguards, to allow the investment to flow.”

 

 

Archives, Global Trade Daily, News

IMO’s 2020 Global Sulphur Cap: Industry Leaders Urge Proactive Preparations

Leave a comment

As we approach the second month of 2019, global maritime industry experts continue to stress the importance of proactive preparations for the IMO’s 2020 global 0.5% fuel sulphur content
cap regulation effective January 1, 2020.

More recently, the CEO Aderco – a global leader in maritime fuel treatment solutions, urged others in the industry to carefully consider how much time is realistically left to thoroughly prepare. With less than a year left until the regulation is implemented, proactive preparations can eliminate avoidable fines and disrupted operations.

“The IMO sulphur cap starts on January 1 2020, but in reality the planning for compliance is just over a month away. By this March ship owners, ship managers and operators need to be lining up their treatments in preparation for the end of 2019 when they will be bunkering the new fuels.”

“Despite the recent highly publicized bans on open-loop scrubbers, fuel treatment remains the most cost-effective and simplest way to address compliance, as well as providing an extra bonus of helping to protect your marine diesel engines. In this vital run-up to the cap, flushing and cleaning of tanks prior to bunkering new fuel is the most imperative of the tasks needed to be tackled. Even the slightest amount of high-sulphur fuel remaining in the tank will mean non-compliance. Using fuel treatment from our recommended date of June this year should provide the necessary flushing and cleaning ready for the new fuel.”

“We have been advising our customers that compliance with the cap starts in the fuel tank and that now is the time to really start preparing for IMO 2020. With our fuel treatment solution, ship owners, ship managers and operators can rely on this proven method without having to worry about costly dry-docking or any off-hire. Our concern is that there will be some ships reaching the end of 2019 without being ready for the new fuels. The simplest and most cost-effective method is a fuel treatment.”

“With a strong focus likely to be on the shipping world and policing by Port State Control in the early part of 2020 for anyone not adhering to the new rules, the chances are that some will find themselves on the end of hefty fines and detentions for non-compliance. When all it takes is the addition of a fuel treatment it seems a small price to pay for peace of mind and operational efficiency.”

Source: Aderco