“tanker seminar” madrid 19 may 2010 peter m swift, md intertanko
TRANSCRIPT
“TANKER SEMINAR”
Madrid19 May 2010
Peter M Swift,MD INTERTANKO
Tanker Seminar
• INTERTANKO• Tanker Shipping’s Record• Key issues• GHG Emission Reductions• Piracy• Other commercial/operational issues• Markets and more• Incident data
INTERTANKO Today
260 + members operating ca. 3,100 ships > 75% of the independent oil tanker fleet and > 85% of
the chemical carrier fleet
300 + associate members: in oil and chemical tanker related businesses
15 Committees – 5 Regional PanelsPrincipal Offices – London and Oslo
Representative Offices in US, Asia and BrusselsObserver Status at IMO, IOPC, OECD and UNCTAD
International Association of Independent Tanker Owners
INTERTANKO’s Strategic Objectives
To develop and promote best practices in all sectors of the tanker industry, with owners and operators setting the example.
To be a positive and proactive influence with key stakeholders, developing policies and positions, harmonising a united industry voice, and engaging with policy and decision makers.
To profile and promote the tanker industry, communicating its role, strategic importance and social value.
To provide key services to Members, with customised advice, assistance and access to information, and enabling contact and communication between Members and with other stakeholders.
Global dependence on oil tanker transportation
World Oil Consumption 3.8 billion ts
Transported by sea 2.4 billion ts
> 60% transported by sea
Tanker Incidents and accidental pollution
Number incidentsNumber incidents
Based on data from LMIU, ITOPF + othersBased on data from LMIU, ITOPF + others
0
210
420
630
840
1050
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
0
120
240
360
480
600
Misc/Unknown
Fire/Expl
Hull & Machinery
Grounded
Coll/Contact
Oil pollution
Accidental oil pollution from tankers
Based on ITOPF/FearnleysBased on ITOPF/Fearnleys
1000 ts spilt
0
700
1,400
2,100
2,800
3,500
1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s
0
21
42
63
84
105
1000 ts spilt
'000 bntonne-miles
- 63% -3% -83%
1000 bn tonne miles trade
Oil price and freight rate – real and nominal
USD per barrel
0
20
40
60
80
10019
7019
7119
7219
7319
7419
7519
7619
7719
7819
7919
8019
8119
8219
8319
8419
8519
8619
8719
8819
8919
9019
9119
9219
9319
9419
9519
9619
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
09
Nominal price Arab Light
Real price Arab Light
Nominal freight rate AG-West
Real freight rate AG-West
Deflated by the Consumer Price Index (USD)CPI* index 1982-84=100
Tanker Shipping’s GREEN Credentials
• This car, weighing one tonne, uses 1 litre of fuel to move 20 kms
• This oil tanker uses 1 litre of fuel to move one tonne of cargo 2,500 kms
– more than twice as far as 20 years ago
Investment in New Tonnage - Move to Double Hulls
• More than USD 500 billion invested since 2000 with the result that ~95% of tanker fleet* double hulled by end 2010* over 10,000 dwt
622
5159
67 68 73 78 84 91 9694
78
4941
33 32 27 22 16 9 4
0
20
40
60
80
100
1991
1997
End 0
2
End 0
3
End 0
4
End 0
5
End 0
6
End 0
7
End 0
8
End 0
9
End 1
0
SH/DB/DS
DH
% dwt share:
Average age of tanker fleet above 10,000 dwt
Based on LRFairplayBased on LRFairplay
6
8
10
12
14
1619
70
1973
1976
1979
1982
1985
1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
Average Age - Years
Tanker Industry is accustomed to being under the spotlight
Watched by:• Regulators• Politicians• Public
Licences to trade rigorously applied by:
• Flag states• Classification Societies• Insurers• Charterers
Monitored by:• Coastal and Port states
Key Issues for Tanker Owners Today
• Establishing and maintaining an international framework of consistent regulations and standards
• Delivering best environmental performance
• Ensuring availability of good people (and quality ships)
• Ensuring the welfare and well-being of ships’ crews
• Meeting the challenges of Piracy
Establishing an international framework of consistent regulations and standards
Shipowners supporting:
• International rather than unilateral legislation• Ratification of IMO (and ILO) Conventions• IMO Member State Audit scheme (Flag & Coastal
States) • Harmonisation and uniformity across Port State
Control regimes• Development and Application of Common Structural
Rules for Tankers• Classification societies’ procedural requirements,
unified requirements and unified interpretations• Greater uniformity in chartering practices and
standards
Delivering best environmental performance
• Air emissions
- Green House Gases
- Exhaust Gas emissions (Annex VI & its revisions)
- VOC emissions
• Spill Prevention and Response Planning• Ballast Water management • Biofouling• Antifouling systems• Ship Recycling• Port Reception Facilities (adequacy & affordability) • Waste management (onboard and ashore)• Radiated Noise pollution• Cetacean strikes
Ensuring availability of good people - recruitment, training and retention
Both a quantity and quality challenge !
Recruitment initiatives covering:
• Raising awareness of the industry:
- www.maritimefoundation.com and Careers outreach programme - www.shippingfacts.com - www.careers-at-sea.org and DVD: Careers in International Shipping - www.bimco.org/Corporate%20Area/Seascapes.aspx
• Attracting entrants to the Maritime Professions (IMO: “Go to Sea” and other industry campaigns)
Human Resources are respected as an asset, not treated as a cost !
The Maritime Industry Knowledge Centre
www.maritimeindustryfoundation.com
OBJECTIVES
To improve the image of shipping
To heighten awareness of international shipping
To attract young people both to the seafaring professions and to careers onshore
Ensuring availability of good people - recruitment, training and retention
Both a quantity and quality challenge !
Training and retention initiatives covering:
• Provision of Cadet berths and training facilities on ALL new ships and maximum utilisation of cadet berths on existing ships
• Revision of STCW Convention• Development of Tanker Officer Training Standards
(TOTS), covering proficiency and experience, as the industry standard
• Establishment of Seafarer Focus Groups to provide feedback of experiences
Ensuring welfare and well-being of ships’ crews
Initiatives covering: • Unjustified criminalisation• Support for IMO-ILO guidelines on Fair Treatment of
Seafarers (in event of Maritime Accident)
• Improved conditions for shore leave and access • Reduction in number of inspections• Less bureaucracy and associated paperwork• Guidelines for safe handling of cargoes and fuels,
tank cleaning and entry• Greater clarity in Operating Manuals• Guidelines on implementing ILO Convention on
“work and rest hours” • Higher standards of accommodation as industry
“norms” (including e.g. access to internet, etc.)
Other current commercial/operational issues
• Mercury in crudes
• Chinese Marine Pollution Regulations
• Sanctions on oil products to Iran
• Model clauses – Piracy, Vetting, Virtual arrival
• Facilitation payments
• “Smart vetting” – multiplicity of inspections
• Conditions of Class project
• Reaction in the USA to Deepwater Horizon spill
• Key Dates
• Outcome of COP15
• IMO (MEPC) Programme
• “Virtual Arrival”
• Industry study/TEEMP/Other
Low Sulphur Fuel Issues
Greenhouse Gas & Low Sulphur
Emissions
Shipping’s GHG Emissions
Selected Key Dates
12/2009 UNFCCC COP15 Meeting, Copenhagen3/2010 IMO MEPC 60
3-9/2010 Industry Study Group5-6/2010 UNFCCC, Bonn5 to 8 /2010 IMO MBM-Expert Group6-7/2010 IMO MEPC Intersessional
9-10/2010 IMO MEPC 6110-11/2010 UNFCCC COP16 Meeting, Cancun
7/2011 IMO MEPC 6212/2011 EU Deadline for IMO/International Agreement
IMO/MEPC Challenge remains !
IMO Principle:
“No More Favourable Treatment”
Versus
Kyoto Protocol principle:
“Common But Differentiated Responsibility”
COP15, Copenhagen 2009
What was the outcome ?
• NO targets• NO resolution of Kyoto/IMO Treaty conflict
• NO direct reference to international shipping in Copenhagen Accord
No change yet !
IMO Programme
To develop:
EEDI for new ships
SEEMP & EEOI for all ships
and, if possible/needed:
Market Based Measure (Instrument) for shipping
Intersessional Working Group
To improve the text for mandatory requirements of EEDI and SEEMP in terms of:
• coverage of ship types and ship sizes for the EEDI;• establishment of EEDI baseline(s); • frequency of reducing the mandatory value of EEDI
(reduction in 3 phases); • reduction rate from the baseline for the phases for the
EEDI;
To develop various guidelines:• on the method of calculation of EEDI;• for the calculation of baselines for attained EEDI;• to support the regulatory framework for verification of the
EEDI
MBM – Expert Group
Group of MBM schemes which would require all ships to pay a contribution:
1. International Fund for Greenhouse Gas emissions from ships – suggested by Denmark and supported and complemented by some other Administrations such as Cyprus, Marshall Islands and Nigeria.
2. Global Emission Trading System for International Shipping, as proposed by Norway, France and Germany; and a Global Emissions Trading System for GHG Emissions from International Shipping, as proposed by UK.
Group of MBM schemes which provide rewards to more energy efficient ships:
3. Leveraged Incentive Scheme based on the International GHG Fund - proposed by Japan.
4. Trading with Efficiency Credits based on Efficiency Standards for All Ships - proposed by the USA.
5. Vessel Efficiency System - proposed by the World Shipping Council.
Virtual Arrival OCIMF /INTERTANKO project
Virtual Arrival is all about managing time and managing speed.
It’s not about blanket speed reduction to match current market conditions.
Virtual arrival is about identifying delays at discharging ports, then managing the vessel’s arrival time at that port/terminal through well managed passage speed, resulting in reduced emissions but not reducing capacity.
Virtual Arrival - Summary
• Cooperation between Charterer (Terminal Operator) and Owner
• Speed is “optimised” when ship’s estimated arrival is before the terminal is ready
• Owners and Charterers agree a speed adjustment
• May use an independent 3rd party to calculate / audit adjustment
• Owners retain demurrage, while fuel savings and any carbon credits are split between parties
Next Steps:• OCIMF-INTERTANKO running joint workshops• Charter Parties being reviewed (INTERTANKO/BIMCO/BP/Chevron)
– indemnity and liability issues, including bills of lading• Individual oil majors and owners “trialling” system• Bulk carrier sector examining feasibility
GHG emissions - OTHER
TEEMP – Tanker Energy Efficiency Management Plan
Industry Study – RT, OCIMF, WSC:
Achievable targets ?
Cooperation with others – e.g. Carbon War Room ?
Industry Study Group:Possible Abatement Measures
• Gas fuelled engines• Electronic engine control• Waste heat recovery• Air cavity lubrication• Contra-rotating propeller• Fuels cells as auxiliary
engines• Frequency converters• Exhaust gas boilers on
auxiliary engines• Energy efficient light
systems• Wing generator• Wind power – kite• Wind power – fixed sails
or wings• Solar panels
• Solar panels• Trim/draft optimising• Weather routing• Voyage execution• Steam plant operational
improvements• Speed reduction due to port
efficiency• Propeller condition• Speed reduction due to fleet
increase• Hull condition• Propulsion efficiency devices• Cold ironing• Engine monitoring• Reduced auxiliary power
usage
Low Sulphur Fuel Issues
• EU Sulphur Directive- 0.1% at berth requirement- Revision timetable- Finnish concerns & Annex VI Revision
• CARB requirements – legal challenge
• North American ECA
Regulation without recognition of the impact on seafarers Greater consideration of the ramifications of new regulations and legislation at IMO and elsewhere/Somebody has to make it work - or carry the can if it doesn’t !
Meeting the challenges of Piracy
Gulf of Aden / Somali Basin Guidance:
• Register Company and Ship with MSCHOA
• Plan for Transit• Following Best Management
Practices (V2) • Report regularly to UKMTO Dubai (or
MARLO)
Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy in the Gulf of Aden
and off the Coast of Somalia
(Version 2 - August 2009)
I n an effort to counter piracy in the Gulf of Aden and off the Coast of Somalia, these best management practices are
supported by the following international industry representatives:-
1. I nternational Association of I ndependent Tanker Owners (INTERTANKO)
2. I nternational Chamber of Shipping (ICS) 3. Oil Companies I nternational Marine Forum (OCIMF) 4. Baltic and International Maritime Council (BIMCO) 5. Society of I nternational Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators (SIGTTO) 6. I nternational Association of Dry Cargo Ship Owners (I NTERCARGO) 7. I nternational Group of Protection and Indemnity Clubs (I GP&I ) 8. Cruise Lines I nternational Association (CLI A) 9. I nternational Union of Marine I nsurers (I UMI ) 10. J oint War Committee (J WC) & J oint Hull Committee (J HC) 11. I nternational Maritime Bureau (IMB) 12 I nternational Transport Workers Federation (I TF) These best management practices are also supported by:- 1) Maritime Security Centre Horn of Africa (MSCHOA) 2) UK Maritime Trade Organisation (UKMTO Dubai) 3) Maritime Liaison Office (MARLO)
A problem in many regions, including South China Sea, Somali Basin and Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Guinea and South America !
Piracy: Development update
• Industry involvement via UN Contact Group/SHADE/IMO-MSC • Encouraging continuing Naval support but also a new strategy
for Western Indian Ocean
• Issues on under active discussion:- push for prosecutions – gathering/providing evidence- impact of US “Ban” on Ransom Payments
- increasing calls for the Arming of Ships
• Industry developing: Best Management Practices – Version 3 Guidance to companies, masters & crews on: - “Capture to Release” - the care of seafarers & others who have been hijacked
• New focus on the Gulf of Guinea / Malacca Straits
Markets and More !Tanker Markets Today ?
• Demand down, but recovering ?• Supply up, and still growing ?• Rates down, and ?
Markets and more
• Demand : World oil trade
• Supply : Ships on Order & Fleet development
• Tanker market
• Shipbuilding capacity
World Oil Demand vs. GDP
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
61
98
1
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
% c
ha
ng
e (
ye
ar
on
ye
ar)
IMF GDP
Oil Demand
Source: Clarksons (September 2009)
Orderbook – All ships (>999GT)
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Orderbook Development (All ship types)
Orderbook by ship type(as % existing fleet)
Source: Clarksons (September 2009)
33
64
41
15
33
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Tanker Chemical Bulk carrier Container ship LPG carrier
per
cen
tag
e o
f cap
acity
Tanker Contracting 1996-2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
901
99
6
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
mil
lio
n d
ead
wei
gh
t
Handy
MR
Panamax
Aframax
Suezmax
VLCC
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Fleet Growth
-5
0
5
10
15
20
VLCC Smax Amax Pmax MR Handy
% c
ha
ng
e y
-o-y
2000-2009 2009 2010 2011
*Includes slippage, cancellation and removal ideas
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Tanker Fleet Development
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
dea
dw
eig
ht
(mill
ion
)
10-24 tanker
handy
MR
Panamax
Aframax
Suezmax
VLCC
Source: Clarksons (September 2009)
Newbuilding Tanker Prices
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
Ja
n-7
6
Ja
n-7
8
Ja
n-8
0
Ja
n-8
2
Ja
n-8
4
Ja
n-8
6
Ja
n-8
8
Ja
n-9
0
Ja
n-9
2
Ja
n-9
4
Ja
n-9
6
Ja
n-9
8
Ja
n-0
0
Ja
n-0
2
Ja
n-0
4
Ja
n-0
6
Ja
n-0
8
Ja
n-1
0
$ m
illi
on
VLCC Suezmax Aframax Panamax MR Product
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Tanker Age Profile
0
100
200
300
400
500
19
70
-19
74
19
75
-19
79
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
no
of
ve
ss
els
Handy
MR
Panamax
Aframax
Suezmax
VLCC
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Tanker Fleet Comparisons
12 6 5 9 6
19
3833
21
29
1320
6968 6973 75
58
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
VLCC Suezmax Aframax Panamax MR Handy
pe
rce
nta
ge
of
ex
isit
ing
fl
ee
t
non-double hull On Order Built since 2000
Source: Clarksons, April 2010
Where next for Single Hull Tankers ? Current trading status
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
VLCC Suezmax Aframax Panamax MR Handy TotalFleet
% o
f si
ng
le h
ull
flee
t
Storage%
Inactive%
DomesticTrading%
NormalTrading%
Source: Clarksons, April 2010 (datasource: Clarksons/LLI)
Where next for Single Hull Tankers ? Trading beyond 2010 ?
Australia NoChina NoEU NoMexico NoRomania NoS Korea No*Philippines No*UAE No*
(*No official note sent to IMO yet)
Bahamas Yes
Barbados Yes
Liberia Yes
Marshall Isl. Yes
Panama Flag Yes
Japan Yes
Singapore Yes
India Yes
Hong Kong Yes**
(** Max. 20 years old)
Flag/Port State positions re MARPOL 13G trading up to the age of 25 years
United States N/A (OPA90)
Tanker sales for demolitionand VLCC freight rate
Source: INTERTANKO
m dwt USD / day
* Until week ending 4 September** Sales for demolition until 4 September*** Clarkson Freight rate AG-Japan week ending 4 September
0
6
12
18
24
30
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09*0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000VLCCs sales for demolition
<200,000 dwt sales for demolition**
VLCC freight rate***
Source: Baltic Exchange/INTERTANKO
USD/dayUSD/day
Average tanker freight rates (based on Baltic Exchange rates)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 8m09
VLCC AG-Japan, 250,000 ts
Suezmax Wafr-US 130,000 ts
Aframax N Sea-UKCont, 80,000 ts
Product Caribs-US, 38,000 ts
Market Forecast !
or
Lower Freight Rates & Fleet surpluses
Implications ?
• Challenge to maintain quality and standards, - e.g. maintenance, training
• Challenge to meet the issues of the day – e.g. including environmental challenges
Potentially made even worse if new ships are of low standard ?
Shipbuilding capacity
• A future unknown factor !
Shipbuilding output and forecast
Source: Worldyards/INTERTANKO Aug 09
m cgtm cgt
2631 33
38
26
26
55
42
15
3 0
914% 26
38%
4876% 62
95%67
99%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Available capacity
Orderbook
Historical deliveries
Shipbuilding output potential
Source: Worldyards/INTERTANKO Aug 09
m cgtm cgt
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Availability small
Availability big
Orderbook small
Orderbook big
Deliveries small
Deliveries big
Worldwide estimates in m cgt - small and big ships (Aug 09)
Shipyard output potential - surplus
Implications ?
• Distressed sales / lower prices
• Quality and standards maintained or weakened
• Pressure on suppliers and sub-contractors
• Greater customer focus & customisation
• and any government interventions ?
Incident data
• Learning from feedback and analysis
• Sharing information
Tanker Incidents and accidental pollution
Number incidentsNumber incidents
Based on data from LMIU, ITOPF + othersBased on data from LMIU, ITOPF + others
0
210
420
630
840
1050
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
0
120
240
360
480
600
Misc/Unknown
Fire/Expl
Hull & Machinery
Grounded
Coll/Contact
Oil pollution
Sharing Information – Tanker incidents in 2009
Based on data from LMIU + othersBased on data from LMIU + others
Groundings 22%
Fire & explosions, 7%
Hull & Machinery
28% 82 incidents53 engine
related
Misc, 17%
Collision contact 26%
Collision/contact Grounding Fire/Explosion Hull & machinery Misc/unknown
Tanker hull & machinery incidents
Number of MACHINERY incidentsNumber of MACHINERY incidents
Based on data from LMIU, ITOPF + othersBased on data from LMIU, ITOPF + others
Year <10 years 10-24 years >25 years TotalAverage
age
2002 4 15 3 22 17.5
2003 3 8 3 14 18.4
2004 2 7 2 11 18.8
2005 9 20 5 34 17.6
2006 12 17 3 32 14.3
2007 20 25 3 48 13.2
2008 25 24 10 59 15.6
2009 18 22 13 53 16.7
Total 93 138 42 273 15.6
Muchas gracias / Thank you
For more information, please visit:www.intertanko.com
www.poseidonchallenge.comwww.shippingfacts.com
www.maritimefoundation.com
London, Oslo. Washington, Singapore and Brussels
Kyoto Protocol
• Established under UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and adopted in 1997
• Ratified by 181 countries – not the USA• Categorises Annex 1 (Developed) Countries and Non-
Annex 1 (Developing) Countries • Annex 1 Countries are committed to make GHG reductions
with set targets, but also flexible mechanisms • Runs through to 2012, with Conference of Parties (COP15)
to meet in Copenhagen in Dec 2009 to develop successor• Kyoto recognises “common but differentiated
responsibilities”, i.e. developed countries produce more GHGs and should be “responsible” for reductions
• Kyoto looks to IMO to address Shipping and ICAO to address Aviation, and as such these emissions are currently excluded from Kyoto targets
IMO Principles for MBMs
1. Effective in contributing to the reduction of total global GHG emissions
2. Binding & equally applicable to all flag States3. Cost-effective4. Able to limit or effectively minimize competitive
distortion5. Based on sustainable environmental development
without penalizing global trade and growth6. Based on a goal-based approach and not prescribe
specific methods7. Supportive of promoting and facilitating technical
innovation and R&D in the entire shipping sector8. Accommodating to leading technologies in the field of
energy efficiency 9. Practical, transparent, fraud free and easy to
administer
Industry Study
Virtual Arrival
- a way to reduce emissions
Background
• Potential emission reduction for existing shipping said to be up to 15% (at no cost?)• Fuel represents 60-80% of operation/running costs for owners • What drives/restricts emission reduction?• It is recognised that commercial and practical restrictions sometimes apply• Virtual Arrival is a project that involves several stakeholders• Virtual Arrival implies co-operation and removing commercial restrictions
Virtual Arrival- a way to reduce emissions
by taking advantage of known inefficiencies in the supply chain andreducing speed when the terminal is not ready to discharge the cargo In addition to directly reduced emissions, other benefits are:• Reduced congestion and emissions in the port area • Improved safety• Reduced use of fuels• Potentially increased use of weather routing Important pre-conditions:• The safety of the vessel remains paramount• The authority of the vessel’s Master remains unchanged• The basic terms of trade remain the same
What is needed to do to make Virtual Arrival work?
1. A known delay at the discharge port2. A mutual agreement between two (or more) parties to
adapt the ship’s arrival time to take advantage of the delay3. An agreed Charter Party clause that establishes the terms
for reducing the speed to adapt to the new arrival time4. An agreement on how to calculate and report the Virtual
Arrival and the performance of the vessel5. This may involve a Weather Analysis Provider (WAP)6. OCIMF/INTERTANKO and class are producing transparent
standards for verification of WAPs
But mainly it’s a win–win situation for all,based on trust and transparency
Squeeze on costs = Squeeze on Quality ?
• Challenge to maintain quality and standards, - e.g. maintenance, training
• Challenge to meet the issues of the day – e.g. including environmental challenges
Acting together- examples
• Pilotage in international straits as per IMO recommendations
• Development of a Marine Electronic Highway
• Establishment of a lifeboat user group with manufacturers to seek remedies for shortcomings
• Campaign to ensure availability of safety-related information on the characteristics of dangerous cargoes
• Development of Incident Information exchanges
• Development of guidelines on tanker maintenance and repair procedures