Fri 24 Oct 2014 12:44

NGO calls for transparency on 2015 bunker surcharges


Secretary-General says information on additional costs is needed now as shippers set their freight budgets for 2015.



The Global Shippers' Forum (GSF) - a UK-based non-governmental organization (NGO) and trade association for shippers engaged in international trade moving goods by all modes of transport - is calling for more information regarding "the impact of low sulphur fuel" ahead of the implementation of new Emission Control Area (ECA) regulations on January 1, 2015.

From January, new legal requirements will come into force in North Europe (including the Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel) and North America (200 nautical miles from American and Canadian shores), which will lower the maximum allowed sulphur content levels in fuel to 0.1%, from the current 1%, for ships operating in ECAs.

Chris Welsh [pictured], Secretary-General of the GSF, said: "With one or two notable exceptions, few shipping lines have yet provided information to their customers on their low sulphur fuel strategies and the extra cost to be passed on to shippers via increased rates or bunker surcharges. With shippers under pressure to finalise freight budgets for 2015, this information is urgently required by customers."

"The GSF recognises that implementation of the new low sulphur fuel limits represents a challenge to the shipping industry. There is a range of options open to carriers: use of marine gas oil which meets the 0.15 sulphur content, use of alternative fuels such as LNG and methanol, and the use of abatement technology such as scrubbers to dilute exhaust gas sulphur emissions to the 0.1% limit," the GSF said.

Welsh added: "The fact that there is a range of options for managing the new low sulphur limits means that the impact on costs will be very different from one shipping line to another. For example, fuel costs for new-built vessels capable of using alternative fuels will be substantially different to a carrier using abatement equipment or higher grade marine gas oil."

The GSF says that as the low sulphur requirements are limited to specific geographical areas, and as there are various options for managing the new sulphur requirements, shippers will require greater transparency from carriers in order to substantiate extra freight charges and bunker surcharges levied by shipping lines to recover additional costs.

The GSF has developed a series of questions for shippers to use in their negotiations with carriers based on the approach by individual carriers in meeting the 0.1% lower sulphur limit. For example, for those applying retrofit scrubber technologies, if additional freight charges or surcharges are levied, shippers are instructed to ask how much of the cost (running costs and capital costs) are being passed on, and if capital costs are being applied upfront in the form of tariff increases or surcharges, at what point will the extra charges be withdrawn once capital costs have been recouped?

Welsh concluded: "It is extremely important that individual carriers are open and transparent with their customers about the additional costs incurred resulting from the new sulphur limits, and they fully justify the additional freight charges and surcharges being levied. Broad industry surcharge guidelines set by some carrier groups are wholly inappropriate to recover additional low sulphur fuel costs because of the significant differences in energy efficiency of vessels, management of fuel and the different options available to carriers in implementing the new low sulphur limits. It's clear, however, that information on additional costs is needed now rather than later as shippers set their freight budgets for 2015."

Chart showing percentage of off-spec and on-spec samples by fuel type, according to VPS. Is your vessel fully protected from the dangers of poor-quality fuel? | Steve Bee, VPS  

Commercial Director highlights issues linked to purchasing fuel and testing quality against old marine fuel standards.

Ships at the Tecon container terminal at the Port of Suape, Brazil. GDE Marine targets Suape LSMGO by year-end  

Expansion plan revealed following '100% incident-free' first month of VLSFO deliveries.

Hercules Tanker Management and Hyundai Mipo Dockyard sign bunker vessel agreement Peninsula CEO seals deal to build LNG bunker vessel  

Agreement signed through shipping company Hercules Tanker Management.

Illustration of Kotug tugboat and the logos of Auramarine and Sanmar Shipyards. Auramarine supply system chosen for landmark methanol-fuelled tugs  

Vessels to enter into service in mid-2025.

A Maersk vessel, pictured from above. Rise in bunker costs hurts Maersk profit  

Shipper blames reroutings via Cape of Good Hope and fuel price increase.

Claus Bulch Klausen, CEO of Dan-Bunkering. Dan-Bunkering posts profit rise in 2023-24  

EBT climbs to $46.8m, whilst revenue dips from previous year's all-time high.

Chart showing percentage of fuel samples by ISO 8217 version, according to VPS. ISO 8217:2024 'a major step forward' | Steve Bee, VPS  

Revision of international marine fuel standard has addressed a number of the requirements associated with newer fuels, says Group Commercial Director.

Carsten Ladekjær, CEO of Glander International Bunkering. EBT down 45.8% for Glander International Bunkering  

CFO lauds 'resilience' as firm highlights decarbonization achievements over past year.

Anders Grønborg, CEO of KPI OceanConnect. KPI OceanConnect posts 59% drop in pre-tax profit  

Diminished earnings and revenue as sales volume rises by 1m tonnes.

Verde Marine Homepage Delta Energy's ARA team shifts to newly launched Verde Marine  

Physical supplier offering delivery of marine gasoil in the ARA region.


↑  Back to Top