Interferry says meeting low-sulfur deadline is "mission impossible"

I find this interesting in contrast with the study done by the Glosten Associates on the conversion of Washington State Ferries to LNG Propulsion. (Refer to our  21 November Blog Post.) I guess that the contrast comes from the economic hardships facing Europe versus our own here in the United States. I think this deadline hits them economically where we were three or four years ago. It will be interesting to see how they emerge from it.

From MarineLog News Article.
28 November 2011

The international trade association for the ferry industry, Interferry, claims that ferry operators in northern Europe face a "near-impossible" choice in trying to meet the 2015 deadline for ultra-low sulfur emissions from bunker fuel. It also says that the low-sulfur legislation will " percentprompt an environmentally damaging modal shift from short-sea to overland transport and pose severe financial implications for the overall European economy.

Under pending IMO and soon to be agreed European Union (EU) environmental requirements, vessels operating in the Baltic, North Sea and Channel Emission Control Areas (ECAs) will have to comply with a 0.1 percent limit on fuel sulfur content.

Interferry says that meeting the 2015 deadline is "mission impossible" because of "unsustainable cost increases."

The association argues that, despite the ferry industry's efforts to develop alternative technologies and feasible alternative fuels, abatement technologies and financial support will not be available or sufficient enough to avoid a modal shift from sea to road.

A "toolbox" of technical and financial solutions proposed by the European Commission (EC) suggests the use of clean LNG fuel or, for vessels that continue to run on heavy fuel oil, the use of scrubbers - exhaust gas cleaning systems. It also points operators towards EU funding initiatives and state aid.

Interferry says that these are not realistic options because:

• It is widely recognised in Europe that LNG is only an option for new vessels due to the prohibitive cost of converting existing vessels, and in any case the LNG fuel supply infrastructure is inadequate
• Scrubber technology is not a "miracle cure." Ferry operators have contributed financially and operationally to developing the technology and Interferry says it is a solution that seems to be able to remove sulfur particles from the exhaust gases on some ships. However, a new Interferry feasibility study covering 108 vessels from six leading operators reveals that scrubbers would not be technically or financially viable for 60 percent of the existing fleet. Furthermore, trial installations among association members have shown that it will not be possible to have scrubbers in operation in time for 2015 for the other 40 percent
• EU funding is virtually non-applicable as it applies largely to newbuilds and new routes – a low priority among operators who have invested heavily in new tonnage in recent years, and who now face a desperate economic climate that also reduces the likelihood of state aid

"There is no financial support for existing ferries, while LNG and scrubbers are not feasible," says Johan Roos, the association's executive director of EU and IMO affairs. "In effect, the toolbox is completely empty.

"Our only option is to use marine gas oil – technically straightforward but very costly and potentially counter-productive in environmental terms. Operators have warned that they will not be able to pass on the 70 percent or more fuel cost increase to customers with a choice of transport modes, which will inevitably push up to 50 percent of cargo off short-sea ships and back on to the road network."

Mr. Roos added that, apart from cost, availability is also an issue with MGO, stressing: "At the very least, the IMO must bring forward its availability review from 2018, as mandated in MARPOL Annex VI, to 2012 or 2013. It's also clear that the ongoing revision of the EU Directive must put provisions in place as to what should happen if low-sulfur fuel is simply not available to operators in 2015."

Interferry conducted the scrubber feasibility study among six Interferry members operating in the north European ECAs - Brittany Ferries, DFDS, Grimaldi Group, P&O Ferries, Stena Line and TT-Line.

The conclusion that more than half their existing ships could not be fitted with scrubbers was based on five critical parameters:
Vessel age and the consequent commercial viability of making a massive technical investment

• Stability reserves taking into account the weight of scrubber units and how high up the stack they would be fitted
• Deadweight reserves and the resulting impact on cargo capacity
• Casing – because many ferries have very limited void in the ideal stack casing location and would therefore need special scrubber casing that reduces cargo capacity
• Whether or not Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) technology was already fitted to reduce NOx emissions – if so, retrofitting wet exhaust scrubbers would be more challenging as these cool gases to below 100 degrees C compared with temperatures above 400 degrees C required by SCR

The detailed results are being offered to the European Maritime Safety Agency for independent audit and will also be made available to relevant authorities.

The EC toolbox was discussed in Helsinki on November 18 when senior personnel from Interferry members joined Mr. Roos at a special seminar organized by the Finnish Ministry of Transport & Communications and the Finnish Transport Safety Agency. Invited delegates also came from national authorities, shipowners' associations and equipment manufacturers.

Mr. Roos reports that at the meeting, where an EC representative and various national administrators also participated, it became obvious that current funding support programs are only allowed for new ships or new routes and are not available to address the "real problem"of safeguarding existing fleets and the routes they already service – offloading millions of trucks from the European road network every year.

November 28, 2011

Hornbeck Offshore orders 16 new OSVs from VT Halter, Eastern

From a Hornbeck Offshore Press Release
27 November 2011

COVINGTON, La., Nov. 17, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Hornbeck Offshore Services, Inc. (NYSE: HOS) announced today the execution of definitive contracts for the construction of sixteen high-specification offshore supply vessels ("OSV"), in connection with its latest newbuild construction program announced on November 7, 2011. This is the Company's eighth newbuild vessel program since its inception in 1997, and its fifth newbuild program involving state-of-the-art, technologically advanced new generation OSVs.
The Company has separately contracted with VT Halter Marine, Inc. of Pascagoula, Mississippi and with Eastern Shipbuilding Group, Inc. of Panama City, Florida for the construction at each yard of eight 300 class vessels with options to build additional such vessels should future market conditions warrant. The Company's first decision with respect to the exercise of options will need to be made in September 2012. Delivery dates for option vessels will be approximately 26 months following the option exercise. The aggregate cost of the first sixteen vessels under this program is expected to be approximately $720 million, excluding construction period interest. Construction costs will be funded with cash on-hand (including the net proceeds of the Company's recently completed equity offering), projected free cash flow from operations and, if necessary, available capacity under the Company's currently undrawn and recently expanded $300 million revolving credit facility.
VT Halter Marine will construct eight vessels based on the Super 320 design that it developed for Hornbeck Offshore. These DP2 OSVs are designed to have 6,200 long tons of deadweight capacity, approximately 20,900 bbls of liquid mud carrying capability, 11,863 sq. ft. of deck area and a fire-fighting class notation. The Super 320 design is based on a larger version of the HOS Coral, an existing 290 class DP-2 OSV which the Company has successfully operated since her delivery in early 2009. The Super 320 design has been developed with particular attention to the most stringent regulations for environmental stewardship, including a double-hull that eliminates any fuel storage adjacent to the sideshell, and propulsion machinery that meets the requirements of EPA Tier 3 for stack emissions.
The eight OSVs to be constructed by Eastern Shipbuilding Group will be DP-2 classed and consist of four vessels based on the STX Marine SV 300 design and four vessels based on the STX Marine SV 310 design. Features of the STX design include over 20,000 bbls of liquid mud carrying capacity and a fire-fighting class notation. In addition, the SV 300 design calls for 5,500 long tons of deadweight capacity and 10,976 sq. ft. of deck space, while the SV 310 design calls for 6,144 long tons of deadweight capacity and 11,536 sq. ft. of deck space. The STX designs meet the same environmental standards mentioned above for the Super 320 design and will also carry the ENVIRO class notation by the American Bureau of Shipping.
Based on the schedule of projected vessel in-service dates below, the Company expects to own and operate 56 and 67 new generation OSVs as of December 31, 2013 and 2014, respectively. These vessel additions result in a projected average new generation OSV fleet complement of 52.2 and 62.8 vessels for the fiscal years 2013 and 2014, respectively. Inclusive of the vessel deliveries referred to below, the aggregate cost of the Company's fifth OSV newbuild program is expected to be approximately $720 million, of which $44 million, $227 million, $348 million and $101 million is expected to be incurred in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively. The first sixteen OSVs under this newbuild program are expected to be placed in service in accordance with the schedule shown in the table below:

	2Q2013E	3Q2013	4Q2013	1Q2014	2Q2014	3Q2014	4Q2014
Estimated In-Service Dates:
300 design	1	1	1	1	-	-	-
310 design	-	-	-	1	1	1	1
320 design	-	-	2	2	3	1	-
	1	1	3	4	4	2	1

All of the above capital costs, anticipated periods of their incurrence and delivery date estimates for the contracted newbuild program are based on the latest available information and are subject to change. All of the figures set forth above represent expected cash outlays and do not include the allocation of construction period interest.
Hornbeck Offshore Services, Inc. is a leading provider of technologically advanced, new generation offshore supply vessels primarily in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and Latin America, and is a leading short-haul transporter of petroleum products through its coastwise fleet of ocean-going tugs and tank barges primarily in the northeastern U.S. and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Hornbeck Offshore currently owns a fleet of 80 vessels primarily serving the energy industry.

Unions Condemn Maritime Administration Report

From Seafarers International Union Website:
11/7/2011

Statement by American Maritime Officers; International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots; Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association; and Seafarers International Union

On Maritime Administration Report Comparing U.S. and Foreign-Flag Operating Costs

November 7, 2011

Maritime Administration Disregards Shipboard Labor, Releases Flawed Report

The U.S. Maritime Administration recently released a highly contentious study of American-flag shipping without any input whatsoever from maritime labor. This inexplicable decision guaranteed that the report would not contain the information that Congress and the Administration would need to develop and implement meaningful maritime policy that strengthens, not weakens, the U.S.-flag merchant marine, provides jobs for American, not foreign, maritime workers, and bolsters, not diminishes, the economic, military and homeland security of the United States. The administrator who approved the report, David Matsuda, should be held accountable.

The Maritime Administration, more than a year ago, was tasked by Congress with identifying ways to boost American-flag shipping. Instead, the agency accepted a report based on incomplete information whose main conclusion – that in the deep-sea commercial sector, it often costs more to use U.S.-flag ships – isn’t news to anyone. The fact that MarAd chose to exclude a significant segment of the maritime industry from this process, and accepted a report that includes possible cost-cutting suggestions that are completely contrary to the overall best interests of the United States, represents a gigantic failure in Matsuda’s leadership and a missed opportunity on the part of the Maritime Administration.

How could the Maritime Administration sign off on a report that suggests consideration of weakening or eliminating the Jones Act, one of the bedrocks of our national and economic security? How could the agency not refuse the mere notion of turning America into a second register? (It should be noted that the carriers interviewed for the study soundly rejected lowering U.S.-citizen crewing requirements as well as the second-register idea.)

We make no apologies whatsoever for the fact that our members make a living wage and receive health care and pension benefits. American mariners are second-to-none worldwide when it comes to being properly trained for their profession. Yet MarAd’s report points to these factors as some of the reasons why it costs more, on average, to ship American. MarAd should be ashamed of itself for entertaining a study that suggests that beating down American mariners to the level of Third-World labor and lowering their standard of living are good for our industry and good for our country. The findings of this report are an insult to the brave men and women who comprise the U.S. Merchant Marine, including those who sail in harm’s way to deliver vital materiel to our armed forces.

We stand ready to work with Congress and the Administration to make our industry stronger, larger and more competitive. The Maritime Administration had the opportunity to start this process in an all-inclusive, productive way. It is not only unfortunate but a clear dereliction of duty that they chose not to and instead spent time, energy and resources on a report that serves no useful, constructive purpose.

Port of Seattle Turns Up 10 Explosive Containers

Kizzi Nkwocha | Mon, 7 Nov 2011

US Coast Guard admits it has no plans yet for dealing with containers

IFW-Net

 

At least ten more potentially explosive containers have been found at the Port of Seattle with a question mark still hanging over the fate of the growing collection of containers.

Earlier this year maritime authorities reported that three reefer containers exploded or caused a fire, resulting in two fatalities in Vietnam and one in Brazil.

The explosions were believed to be the result of contaminated gas added to the boxes’ refrigeration units during servicing in Vietnam.

According to local reports, a growing stack of 80 refrigerated containers at the Port of Seattle have been sitting by itself, isolated from the rest of the port for safety reasons.

The US Coast Guard said it is working with the terminal operators to keep the 80 containers away from everyone, but admits there is no specific plan yet for dealing with them.

Rudy Finne of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, said: "I personally think it’s ludicrous to have possible bombs at every corner here and have everybody seem not that concerned about it."

The Pacific Maritime Association, which represents the various terminal operators, said it is looking for a solution to checking each container to see if it poses any risk. These at-risk containers are being turned away from terminal operators, and as a result, they remain out in the public.

Meantime, the union is worried about containers that left Vietnam and may have passed through local ports before the security alert was put in place.

The three reefers that exploded were operated by Maersk Line, but since the danger was reported all carriers are scrambling to find any reefers that have been repaired in Vietnam since February.

Maersk has removed all its 844 reefer containers that have been repaired in Vietnam.

Port of Oakland Operations Halted by Longshoremen.

This video from KGO-TV in Oakland is pretty amazing, especially considering the Occupy Oakland Movement (A part of the Occupy Wall Street Movement) is planning a "blockade" in the city. I can only imagine the traffic headaches this will create. As Mr Roman mentions, this affects ports up and down the West Coast. So if you're on the West Coast near a major port, this could be coming soon!

By Tomas Roman

OAKLAND, Calif. (KGO) -- Dock workers at the Port of Oakland refused to unload ships that are loaded with what they call explosive contents. At least two terminals at the port were closed Monday night because of the threat. It is an extra challenge for the port already preparing a possible blockade by Occupy Oakland on Wednesday and the backup is extensive.

The longshoreman are refusing to move any containers at certain terminals because they say refrigerated containers that were improperly serviced in Vietnam have already exploded in Vietnam, China, and Brazil. Some of those containers have been found in Oakland and other West Coast ports.
Photos were taken in Vietnam of one of the five refrigerated containers that exploded at a port there last Friday. Three dock workers were killed and 16 were injured. An Oakland longshoreman got hold of the photos, but fears losing his job if he speaks on camera. He learned that some of the same types of containers had arrived here in Oakland Monday morning.

The longshoreman said, "At 8 o'clock this morning we got the word that the containers that were over at SSA were actually some of the containers that were on the list that weren't supposed to get here."

There was a list of refrigerated containers that had been serviced in Vietnam with an unstable form of freon according to the longshoreman's union. They say that's why they exploded.
"They have apparently taken at least three lives and may have injured many more people," said ILWU spokesperson Craig Merrilees.
They were supposed to be taken out before coming to the U.S. The ILWU says they were not and thousands of them are either in ports or out on the water.
"There are potentially thousands of containers being shipped around the world, some that have ended up on docks here in Oakland, they're potentially lethal," said Merrilees.
There are also reports of refrigerated containers exploding in China and Brazil since Thursday. Hundreds of longshoremen on Monday refused to unload any ships or move any containers until those improperly serviced in Vietnam are removed.
"I think we know that at least two terminals, both the SSA and TraPac terminal have been shut down," said Merrilees.
The longshoreman who wanted to remain anonymous said, "Until we get it resolved were not going to work."
If the longshoremen don't work, neither do the truckers. With the terminals closed dozens of trucks line the roads of the port unable to load or unload.
A trucker ABC7 spoke to also wanted anonymity. He said, "I was supposed to turn in my empty containers in and then take loads out and I couldn't do anything." When asked how long he had been there stuck in line, he said, "All day."
So far the U.S. Coast Guard has isolated at least 13 of these problem containers, but they're looking at the same issue in Tacoma, Washington, Portland, Oregon, and in Long Beach.
The Pacific Maritime Association, the longshoreman's union and the shippers are all trying to get together to work this issue out and get the cargo moving.

(Copyright ©2011 KGO-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)