World Bunkering > News > Winter 2010 > Chairman's Introduction

Mike Ball

Conferences in our industry should not be judged on numbers alone. You can, for example, attract big numbers to a first-time conference but, if it is not any good, people will not come the next time. In September, IBIA attracted over 150 delegates to its annual conference in Connecticut, but IBIA has been doing that now for many years.

So we must be doing something right. It was great to see so many people in Stamford, and to observe how our members manage to combine work and pleasure so successfully during the course of our annual gatherings. I know of no other industry association which contrives to do this as well as IBIA does. What’s more, for the first time ever, the membership was invited to take an immediate and active role in determining the direction that IBIA will take, which is surely the mark of a truly representative body.

Even if you were not able to be in Stamford, you will have heard by now that IBIA’s members voted to maintain neutrality over the measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from shipping, which are currently being debated at the International Maritime Organization (IMO). But this was no fence-sitting exercise. IBIA’s philosophy has been to keep an open mind with regard to all credible proposals and, when in receipt of all available information, to make a decision which is in the best interests of all its members. The vote in Stamford was confirmation that this will continue to be our policy, because we believe it is the right thing to do. As a result, IBIA will continue to monitor the debate at IMO and in the wider shipping community.

The bunkering industry is fortunate in that IBIA represents its eyes and ears at all relevant IMO debates, and that gives us a big advantage over some other industry sectors which are not so fortunate. But it is important that the members let us know their views on those subjects which concern them. It is a two-way process, and relies for its success on input from both sides. For example, how many members have told us their thoughts on MEPC61/4/7, which has been submitted to IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) and which sets out the position of Norway and Intertanko on the issue of fuel-testing quality?

Norway and Intertanko have noted that an ISO standard for marine fuels is a commercial standard that is referred to and used as the guiding specification for marine fuel purchase contracts and that, in this regard, ISO 8217 has no mandatory character and there are therefore no control mechanisms for the quality of marine fuels delivered to ships. Briefly stated, their proposal is that ISO specifications should be legislative rather than commercial. IBIA, for its part, has intervened at IMO in response to MEPC 61/4/7, suggesting that the routine quality of fuel supplied is a commercial issue between buyer and seller, and that regulation should be targeted at the issues of sulphur emission, flashpoints, H2S and any deleterious materials as covered by Clause 5 of ISO 8217. It may be that IBIA will elect to submit a paper to the IMO Bulk Liquid and Gases subcommittee outlining its position on MEPC 61/4/7. It will be a stronger document if we are able to draw on comment and input from our members.

Different issues affect different sectors of our industry to different degrees. And while regional measures may reflect regional concerns, they are of global interest because of the highly international nature of our industry. Stamford was a good place to hear about such developments, and it was encouraging to hear, for example, that work continues apace in Singapore on establishing standards for flow meters. How refreshing it is to see Singapore’s commitment to funding the research into this initiative, and how encouraging to find a port authority willing to take such a proactive approach.

There is an old saying that, if things don’t change, they will stay as they are. But the latter is not an option for the bunkering industry. Change is coming, and forewarned is forearmed. Over the coming months we will have new Marpol VI legislation coming into force, alongside the new North American/Canadian ECAs. Owners will need to be looking at low-sulphur IFO sources and tank capacities, and suppliers will have to be working hard to find out where they can access fuel with 1.00% sulphur content.

IBIA can help, and is always interested in receiving information and feedback on these and other important issues. It is developing all the time as a truly representative body for the bunker industry, and continues to look at ways of developing its geographical outreach. For example, IBIA has plans to augment its presence in Asia, where the Singapore branch will start taking on full-time staff at the beginning of next year, and is also exploring the possibility of expanding activities into Hong Kong and other Asian ports. We heard, too, in Stamford that there is strong support for the establishment of a branch in the Americas, albeit in an as-yet unspecified location. So IBIA is getting bigger, as well as better. It must be, because the 2011 IBIA annual dinner will be moved to Grosvenor House, the biggest venue in London.

We have outgrown everywhere else.

Mike Ball