Well over 100 ships are understood to have been affected by contaminated fuels in a crisis that first hit Houston in March and has spread to Singapore and other parts of South East Asia.
Vessels bunkering in these regions have suffered mechanical issues ranging from simple clogged pipes and filters to full engine breakdown and power loss.
Technical analysis is trying to uncover whether the contaminated fuels came from the same source, either in the blending or refining processes.
Shipowners are being bombarded by conflicting advice on how to avoid the problems.
But a growing concern is whether the chaos that has emerged from the current batch of contaminated fuels is an indication of what could be in store for the shipping industry from 2020, when a global limit of 0.5% on the sulphur content of fuel will be enforced.
Pile of claims data
The marine insurance sector is sitting on a pile of claims data that clearly illustrates a link between increased fuel-related mechanical breakdown claims and the use of low-sulphur fuels since the emergence of regional emission control areas (ECAs).
The problems were first linked to operational failings in the fuel switching process when entering and leaving ECAs, but there is also strong evidence that there may well be issues with the fuel itself.
It has already been established that there are generally higher levels of catalytic fines in low-sulphur fuels compared to heavy fuel oil (HFO).
The blending process is also a time when impurities can contaminate fuels, and blended low-sulphur HFO products are expected to be one of the main compliance methods with the 2020 regulation.
The problem is this new generation of 0.5%-sulphur blended fuels will not come onto the market until just before the enforcement date and there will be no indication of its quality or compatibility with other fuels until owners start to use it.
Potential pitfall
Another potential pitfall will be with the fuel testing standard. The ISO 8217:2005 standard test was unable to detect the problems with the Houston and Singapore bunkers. The cause of the contamination was only uncovered after the breakdowns and through deep forensic testing.
The ISO standard is known not to be fail-safe and there have been previous instances of it not detecting impurities in fuel.
Many IMO member states are sceptical of the industry pushing the technical problems associated with 2020, believing shipowners simply want to buy more time
The International Organization for Standardization recently assured the IMO that its standards would be ready to be applied to the new generation of blended fuels to meet the 2020 requirements.
But if it cannot detect contamination of the fuels being sold in Houston and Singapore, can shipowners really rest assured that it will be sufficient to determine the quality of new products sold in 2020?
'Delaying tactic'
When these issues are raised at the IMO, regulators view it as an attempt by the shipping industry to delay implementation of the regulation.
Many member states are sceptical of the industry pushing the technical problems associated with 2020, believing shipowners simply want to buy more time before they have to comply.
But owners' concerns over fuel are genuine, and if the IMO does not come up with comprehensive technical guidance on how to comply with the new rules, there could be problems ahead.
What is being played out in Singapore and Houston demonstrates there are still fuel quality issues that have to be tackled today, never mind what is coming up in 2020.