Erik.Ranheimintertanko.comManager Research and ProjectsMain issues facing t... - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Slide1 l.jpg
1 / 46

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: Pets / Animals

The International Association of Independent Tanker Owners. For Safe Transport, Cleaner ... Vicuna 23,197 2004, 2

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

Erik.Ranheimintertanko.comManager Research and ProjectsMain ...

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Slide1 l.jpg

Manager Research and Projects

Main issues facing the tanker industry

China Logistics 19 October 2005

Slide2 l.jpg



Meeting place


The International Association of Independent Tanker Owners

For Safe Transport, Cleaner Seas and Free Competition

Slide3 l.jpg

  • Representation

  • IMO, International Chamber of Shipping

  • UNCTAD, Oil Companies International Marine Forum

  • IACS, International Assoc. of Classification Societies

  • OECD/IEA of P&I Clubs

  • Brussels.

  • Washington

  • ……..

Slide4 l.jpg

255 Members

2,380 tankers

192 million dwt

40 countries

70% of independent fleet

280 Associate Members


Slide5 l.jpg

Safety performance

Current maritime regulatory environment

Players in the tanker industry

Challenges ahead

  • Main issues facing the global tanker industry

Slide6 l.jpg

  • Environmental concerns

  • Zero tolerance

Slide7 l.jpg

  • Tanker incidents down

Slide8 l.jpg

  • Reported tanker incidents 1978 - 2005

Slide9 l.jpg

  • Reported tanker incidents 9 ms 2005 - total 104

Hull&Machinery (18 engine, 2 hull)

Slide10 l.jpg

  • Tanker pollution down

Slide11 l.jpg

  • Accidental pollution from tankers oil spilt per tonne mile 1990 - 2005

Slide12 l.jpg

Accidental oil spills from tankersMajor structural accidents - 000 tonnes


Slide13 l.jpg

  • Tanker accidental oil spills

  • down 80%

ts spilt

‘000 bn tonne-miles

99.9999% of the oil

arrived safely

Source: ITOPF

Slide14 l.jpg

Oil pollution into the sea

Maritime sources

Source: GESAMP

Slide15 l.jpg

  • Total losses down

Slide16 l.jpg

  • Tanker total losses by size


60% below 60,000dwt

1988 – 1996: 29 CTLs 1996 – 2005: 14 CTLs

Source: Clarkson Shipyard Monitor/INTERTANKO

Slide17 l.jpg

  • Tanker and bulker total losses


Source: Clarkson Shipyard Monitor/INTERTANKO

Slide18 l.jpg

  • Explosions

Slide19 l.jpg


Seatiger, 123,6921979, 2 fatalities

Atlantic Empress292,6661979, 29 “

Energy Determination321,1861979 , 1 “

Albahaa B239,4101980, 6 “

Mycene238,8891980, 6 “

  • Large tankers explosion before IGS requirements 1983/1985

Slide20 l.jpg


Bow Mariner 22,5872004, 21 fatalities

Vicuna 23,1972004, 2 “

NCC Mekka 6,4992004 , 2 “

Panam Serana 6,4992004 , 2 “

Sun Venus 4,3562004, 2 “

Sunnny Jewel 4,3862004, 3 “

Isola Azura 9,3832005, 2 “

  • Recent tankers explosion

Slide21 l.jpg

  • Tanker Explosion 2001-2005






Source: Informa/INTERTANKO

Slide22 l.jpg

  • Average age down

Slide23 l.jpg

  • Tanker incidents and age development



Slide24 l.jpg

  • Tanker pollution and age development


000 ts


Slide25 l.jpg

  • Tanker fleet double-hull development


Source: Fearnleys/INTERTANKO

Slide26 l.jpg

In shipping high standards reflect the quality of the owner not the regulatory regime

Erik Murdoch

Director of Risk Management, The Standard P&I Club

Slide27 l.jpg

  • Regulatory Environment

Slide28 l.jpg

Leading members of our community, politicians, regulators and charterers alike, appear to be digesting the fact that mere legislative or penalising measures are already reaching their limitations as a driver for further improvement. Many have even started to express their concerns that all such externally imposed controlling devises are becoming counterproductive or even harmful.

Emmanuel Vordonis, Executive Director Thenamaris Ships Management,

Member of INTERTANKO’s Executive Committee

Poseidon challenge

Slide29 l.jpg

  • Regulation vs self regulation

Slide30 l.jpg

  • Regulating safety

Self regulation

Compliance culture


Check list mentality stops initiative


Lack of global standards

Right balance provide the best safety culture


Lack of motivation and flexibility

Procedures purely to meet reg. req.

Unsafe - Chaos

Formal regulations and controls


Chain of responsibility l.jpg

Governments Law, Courts, Insurers

Chain of Responsibility













Forthe system to work, liability has to be shared

Slide32 l.jpg

  • Challenges

Slide33 l.jpg

Supremacy of IMO & International Maritime Law versus regional and local legislation

Liability - moves to open up CLC/Fund Convention

Annex VI implementation

Criminalising accidental pollution - Penal sanctions adopted by EU

Common Structural Rules & Goal Based Standards

Ship Recycling

Ballast water management

Security - (ISPS costs to be reflected in Worldscale)

Phase out

  • Challenges to the industry

Marpol annex vi air emissions how to ensure compliance l.jpg

Allships of 400GT and above

Entered into force May 19th, 2005

Existing ships no later than 1st scheduled drydocking or no later that May 2008

New ships 19 May 2005

Areas to be considered:

SOx/fuel quality

NOx – spare parts and repairs

VOC – vapour return lines & new technologies

Incinerators (type approved )

Bunkering procedures:

Bunker Delivery Note


Ship’s Note to Flag States – reports on non-compliance

Fuel switch for use of LSF in SECAs

MARPOL Annex VI Air emissions - how to ensure compliance

Ratification l.jpg

Ratified by 22 Governments that have a combined tonnage over 50% of World tonnage:

Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Japan, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Norway, Panama, St. Kitts and Nevis, Samoa, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, Vanuatu.

Not ratified by for example:

China, SKorea, France, Netherlands, Middle East Countries, US

Bunkering in a “non party” port followed by a call in a “party” port Potential source of trouble out of ship’s control


Slide36 l.jpg

  • Criminalisation

  • Traditionallyaccidents have been regarded as quite distinct from deliberate acts

  • Attitudeshave changed(scapegoat mentality) ref. Captain Mangouras, ERIKA, The Karachi Eight TASMAN SPIRIT

  • EUDirective on Ship-Source Pollution (despite wide industry coalition) Canadian Bill C-15 US approach (whistle blowing, enormous fines and rewards

Slide37 l.jpg

  • IACS Common Rules for Tankers as from April 2006

  • INTERTANKOinitiative started more than five years ago

  • Objectives were to:

    • eliminate class competition on scantlings

    • embrace the intentions of goal-based standards

    • meet the requirements of industry and the shipyards

  • will apply for double hull tankers of 150 m and above.

  • Ships should be designed with a fatigue life of 25 years based on N Atlantic winter conditions, with corrosion additions also based on 25 years, at least equivalent to or even in excess of all current Class regulations.

  • Slide38 l.jpg

    • Ship Recycling

    Industry Code of Practice (1999)

    ILO & Basel Guidelines

    • Shipping Industry Feedback

    • Workable

    • Practical

    • Objectives Met

    IMO Guidelines (2003)

    Consideration of Mandatory Elements

    • Market Forces

    • Shipping Industry

    • Green Recycling

    International Ship Recycling Convention

    Slide39 l.jpg

    • Ballast Water Management:

    • Meeting the Treatment Standard – Treatment Technology

    • Meeting the Treatment Standard

      • Ballast Water Exchange and/or Treatment Technology

    Ships Constructed before 2009 with BW capacity 1500-5000, treatment technology in use after 2014

    Ships Constructed before 2009 with BW capacity less than 1500 and greater than 5000, treatment technology in use after 2016

    Phase in for Treatment System Installation (B-3)

    Ships Constructed on or after 2009 with BW capacity less than 5000, treatment technology in use from 2009

    Ships Constructed after 2009 but before 2012 with BW capacity greater than 5000, treatment technology in use after 2016

    Ships Constructed at 2012 or after with BW capacity greater than 5000, treatment technology in use after 2012

    Slide40 l.jpg

    • Ballast Water Management:

    • Meeting the Treatment Standard – Treatment Technology

    • Case Studies

    • 40,000dwt Product Tanker to be delivered July 2007

    • Ballast water capacity greater than 5000m3 so will be able to conduct ballast water exchange until 2016, when it will then have to have been retrofitted with a ballast water treatment system.

    • B)8,000dwt Chemical Tanker to be delivered July 2007

    • Ballast capacity of less than 5000m3 but greater than 1500m3, will have to be retrofitted with a ballast water treatment system by 2014.

    • Existing VLCC – delivered 2003

    • Ballast water exchange until 2016, retrofitted after 2016. BUT, if prototype system installed and test programme approved by IMO, 5 year exemption given, upgrade system in 2021.

    Slide41 l.jpg

    In the aftermath of Exxon Valdez, 0n 18 August 1990, the US President signed into law the US Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90). This was the first regulation which has mandated double hull design for tankers with a building contract after 30 June 1990 and with a delivery after 31 Dec. 1992

    First IMO phase out initiated by the US OPA 90 - ratified by IMO March1992 - enforced as from July 1993

    Accelerated IMO phase out initiated by Europe as a result of the ERIKA accident outside France - ratified by IMO April 2000 - enforced as from September 2001

    Further acceleration of IMO phase out initiated by Europe as a result of the PRESTIGE accident outside Spain - ratified by IMO December 2003, enforced as from April 2005 - enforced by Europe as from October 2003

    The European Union’s Regulation (1726/2003) on single hull tankers took effect on 21st October 2003

    Both ERIKA and PRESTIGE carried Heavy Fuel Oils that can pollute up to ten times more than crude oil.  IMO therefore adopted a new regulation – Regulation 13H of Annex I of MARPOL 73/78 – banning the carriage of heavy grade oil as cargo in single hull oil tankers as from 5 April 2005.

    • Phase out history

    Slide42 l.jpg


    Category 1 - non PL/SBT (pre-MARPOL) tankers out by 2005

    Category 2/3 out by 2010 or 2015 subject to administrations

    Double bottom or side tankers until 25 years


    Heavy grades of oil in double hull tankers

    Provisions for some heavy crude oils, double bottom/side tankers and domestic trade

    OPA90 schedule/size limit different

    Conversion to PL/SBT - DH

    AnnexII revision not phase out, but will shut SH tankers out of vegoil+ trades as from 2007

    • Phase out Regulations

    Slide43 l.jpg

    Special provisions

    13 G (5) - double bottom/sides - CAS requirement

    13 G (7) - SH trading beyond 2010/25 years

    13 G (8) (b) – entry into ports or offshore terminals (provisions (5), (7)

    13 H (5) - double bottom/sides - trading beyond 2010/25 years

    13 H (6) (a) - crude oil having a density at 15ºC higher than 900 kg/m3 but lower than 945 kg/m3

    13H (6) (b) - 600 tons dwt and above but less than 5,000 tons dwt - SH until 25 years

    13 H (7) - exclusively within an area under its jurisdiction,

    13 H (8) (b) – entry into ports or offshore terminals (provisions (5), (6)

    • Phase out

    Slide44 l.jpg

    Implementation policies


    Slide45 l.jpg

    • Conclusion

    • Strongindustry performance, but no complacency

    • Zero tolerance to oil pollution

    • FormalRegulations must provide room for flexibility and new initiatives

    • Most pending regulations are common industry regulations

    • Industry challenge to ensure global standards and regulations

    • Cooperation with all the members in the maritime responsibility chain will provide the best results

    Slide46 l.jpg

    Strong responsible, sustainable and respected industry able to influence its own destiny

    • INTERTANKO’s aim

  • Login