We have a 2007 built 20k dwt product tanker. We received an eexi rating of C from class. Comments as follows:
The CII is set on 11,7 , this is the required C-rating.
We have attached screenshots for the CII today. Due to the long anchor periods, we consume fuel but do not produce additional ton-miles. This is clearly visible in this “CII till today” screenshot. Especially if you look at the screenshot “sailed legs”. In order to reach our goal for this year we have extrapolated . See screenshot “CII till end 2023”. We have taken a max speed of 11 knots and at least 180 sailing days, for the remaining 8 months.
Would anyone have any advice as to how we can improve our rating? Someone suggested a super strip system would reduce cleaning turnaround time, and help increase the ton miles. Are there any low cost/high value suggestions anyone can recommend?
Hi i was working as a performance superintendent for a management company with regards to decarbonization and optimization.
We used to face the same dilemma for bulk vessels which had to wait for long days at anchor.
CII and EEXi is still a hot debate for such ships. IMO and class is aware of this. We must wait till they come up with a solution to help vessels like these.
If you go to your Class site they would have a page where you can select different options to see how it would effect CII. Play around with that.
Mostly vessels are de rating the engine , applying silicon paints and doing regular hull inspection and cleaning to bring down the CII.
Since you are regularly at anchor i would suggest a silicon paint/hull inspection cleaning though it wont bring down the cii by a lot.
Thanks for your input, and yes that’s my concern. Someone had suggested a super strip system, which apparently is not an expensive retrofit. And given our relatively short voyages we thought it could save time at anchorage. Needless to say, if all vessels need to reduce speed, this has got to have a good impact on the industry in the next couple years.
The offshoot, is they will build more vessels which in turn will result in more emissions (construction and vessels on the water).
They will buid new vessels with more capacity with smaller engines. I worked on 20k TEU ships they are so underpowered.
Since capacity it provides positive impact when multiplied by miles travelled.
Old ships are gonna go and will be replaced by ships with efficient engines like ME engines.
Speed is another thing that is gonna significantly reduce.
Not just from cii aspect from cost point of view too.
6k teu ship sipping 140t a day vs 20k teu sipping just 45t.
Voyage optimization, engine optimization are gew things to look for.
Best practice like optimization of AE is another thing, running 2 Ae at 40% vs one at 80%
Regarding the super stripping system, how are your ships equipped and how do you actually perform the tank cleaning now? What are the products you are dealing with?
For a product tanker with deepwell pumps and inerted tanks, this would indeed drastically reduce your cleaning turnaround time as you would save time on gasfreeing and re-inerting (no tank entries required). For most CPP cargoes, superstripping is acceptable in lieu of mopping. Purging may still be necessary after low flash cargoes. For DPP and most vegoils a superstripping system would not work.
Now that I think of it there was some mention of changing the electrical current of the vessel to a lower voltage which could reduce the auxiliary fuel burned daily. Does this ring a bell for anyone ?
Take a cargo to the other side of the world at ecospeed.
CII is a chartering issue, not a technical one, make the bastards earn their boozy lunches.