european commissions’ proposals on the safety of the seaborne oil trade (euro opa) -...
TRANSCRIPT
European Commissions’ Proposals on the Safety of the Seaborne Oil
Trade
(Euro OPA)
- implications/issues
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Response to ‘Erika’
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
European Concerns Post ‘Erika’
SSY
• “Public opinion is no longer prepared to tolerate such accidents”
• That vessels considered unsuitable for the US will switch to European trading (post OPA)
• “Manifestly sub-standard vessels should be banned”
• Single hull ships should be banned
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
EC Age Concerns Post ‘Erika’
SSY
• “Some ships pose a manifest risk to maritime safety because of their age, flag and history”
• “The Erika disaster demonstrates the risk presented by old ships”
• “There is a general correlation between age and accidents to ships”
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Tanker Total LossesJan 1992 - March 1999
25 yrs +32%
20-24 yrs45%
15-19 yrs17%
10-14 yrs3%
5-9 yrs3%
SSY
77 vessels
Source: European Commission
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market Handysizes Average Age by Main Discharge Area
17
20
12
14
10
15
20
9
13
8
0
5
10
15
20
25
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST JAPAN
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market Handymaxes Average Age by Main Discharge Area
14
18
9
1211
1415
9
12
8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST JAPAN
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market Panamaxes Average Age by Main Discharge Area
14
17
15
13
10
15
17
14
12
8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST JAPAN
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market Aframaxes Average Age by Main Discharge Area
13 13
11 11
6
11
14
11
8
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST JAPAN
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market Suezmaxes Average Age by Main Discharge Area
10
13
7
18
10
17
10
18
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Voyage Market VLCCs Average Age by Main Discharge Area
19
12 12
8
17
14 14
10
7
13
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
UKC MED USAC/USG FEAST JAPAN
Ave
rage
age
1999
2000
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Proposed European RegulationsImpact Upon Single Hull Vessels
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Vessel Category Maximum Age Maximum Date
Non-MARPOLBelow 30,000 dwt
25 years 1.1.2015
Non-MARPOL30,000 dwt +
23 years 1.6.2005
MARPOL30,000 dwt +
28 years 1.1.2010
Problem With Published Data - What is it showing?
Double Hull/Side: IMO/non-IMO?(2 metres)
SBT (PL): IMO/non-IMO?(30% of side/bottom)
Double Bottom: Ballast/Fuel Tank?
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Small TankersHull Configuration
No SBT62%
Non PL SBT10%
PL SBT11%
Dbl Hull17%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Small Tanker Fleet - year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-197
0
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 19 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Handy TankersHull Configuration
No SBT44%
Non PL SBT23%
PL SBT12%
Dbl Hull21%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Handy Tanker Fleet dwt- year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 19 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Handymax TankersHull Configuration
No SBT3%
Non PL SBT20%
PL SBT20%
Dbl Hull57%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Handymax Tanker Fleet- year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 10 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Panamax TankersHull Configuration
No SBT4%
Non PL SBT60%
PL SBT17%
Dbl Hull19%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Panamax Tanker Fleet - year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 17 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Aframax TankersHull Configuration
No SBT7%
Non PL SBT38%
PL SBT13%
Dbl Hull42%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Aframax Tanker Fleet- year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 12 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Suezmax TankersHull Configuration
No SBT17%
Non PL SBT31%
PL SBT9%
Dbl Hull43%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Suezmax Tanker Fleet- year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 13 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
VLCC TankersHull Configuration
No SBT20%
Non PL SBT51%
PL SBT2%
Dbl Hull27%
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
VLCC Tanker Fleet - year of build hull configuration (no of ships)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
-197
4
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
D Hull
PL SBT
Non PL SBT
No SBT
Average age = 13 years
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Proposed European RegulationsEstimated Vessel Replacements (no. of ships)
30
70
100
30
10
110
140
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
VLCC
Suezmax
Aframax
Panamax
Handymax
Handy
Small
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Proposed European RegulationsEstimated Vessel Replacements (% of fleet)
7
25
18
11
3
30
24
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
VLCC
Suezmax
Aframax
Panamax
Handymax
Handy
Small
SSY Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
European Criticisms of Practice
SSY
• “No significant difference between freight rates for young and old tankers”
• “Prices often dictated by cheapest oldest tonnage”
• “Difficult to make quality pay”
• “Low cost operators gaining market share at expense of long standing companies - entailing a risk for safety”
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
European Criticisms of Practice
SSY
• “Other players are implicated in the phenomenon of sub-standard shipping - in particular the cargo owners”
• “The fact that ships of appalling condition continue to to be employed for transportation of oil shows that charterers do not have sufficient disincentives to give up their intolerable practice of deliberately selecting low quality tonnage”
• “Shipowners of convenience only exist because there are charterers who care little about the quality of ships they charter”
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
European Message to Oil Co.s
SSY
• “...oil companies without waiting the adoption of the first package of directives should undertake by voluntary agreement to refrain in future from chartering tankers older than 15 years (unless appropriate inspections show them to be in a satisfactory condition) ...”
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
European Message to Class Soc.s
SSY
• Proliferation of class societies with varying standards
• “Not all IACS members meet the requisite high standards”
• EC concerned that performance of class soc “does not always meet the standards required”
• Increase tendency for “class hopping”
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Other Key European Messages
SSY
• Normal framework for international action on maritime safety under the IMO “falls short of what is needed to tackle the causes of such disasters effectively”
• Deplores widespread use of flags of convenience• Criticism of ‘Atomisation’ of ownership and
use of ‘brass plate’ companies• Difficult to identify financial interests and
decision makers responsible for operation of ships
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000
Likely Outcome
SSY
• Oil Co.s will tighten up their chartering policies• The demand for modern tonnage will be greater• If the European proposals succeed other
countries (e.g. Japan, Australia) may follow• The increase requirement for new tankers may
therefore be even higher• New ships continuing to get premiums over old • Owners finally being paid fairly for quality
Monte Carlo Tanker Event, 2000