Algeciras Fuel Review: Separate Product and Claim

Key takeaways

• Require a precise product description and accepted specification basis.
• Identify the scope of any origin, sustainability or emissions claim.
• Keep technical acceptance separate from reporting eligibility.
• Price the actual package of fuel, delivery and agreed evidence.

Local development is context, not product acceptance

APBA's green-strategy page describes alternative-fuel initiatives and an LNG supply technical instruction. APBA alternative-fuel programme

The existence of local development does not confirm the suitability or availability of a particular offered product. Current arrangements and applicable texts require review by the responsible teams.

For a current transaction, the product-and-claim review is not provided; obtain current verified information. Record the accepted fuel description, technical review status, claim evidence requested and any separate reporting assessment still outstanding.

Define the product before assessing its label

An enquiry should identify the vessel's approved fuel requirement and the supplier's proposed specification. If the response substitutes a broad alternative-fuel description, ask for the precise product being offered and the basis on which it will be documented.

For a proposed LNG purchase, the responsible team should define the required specification and quantity or energy basis appropriate to the transaction. Procurement should preserve those instructions rather than translating them into an unrelated conventional-fuel grade.

Do not compare nominal prices that use different billing units without an accepted conversion basis. A spreadsheet conversion cannot establish technical equivalence, and an assumed factor can conceal an important commercial difference.

Identify exactly what the environmental statement covers

Ask whether a claim concerns the physical supplied product, an associated certificate, a production pathway or another defined attribute. The answer should be explicit in the proposed commercial package.

The buyer also needs to know which delivery or quantity the evidence covers. A general supplier policy does not necessarily support the specific attribute being purchased for the vessel.

This is a scope check, not an assessment of whether the claim satisfies a regulatory scheme. Where the intended use involves emissions reporting, compliance or financial value, the appropriate reviewer should evaluate the actual evidence against the current applicable rules.

Keep acceptance decisions separate but connected

The technical team may accept a product for its intended use while the reporting team still needs evidence about an asserted attribute. Conversely, an attractive documented attribute does not establish that the vessel can accept the product.

The commercial approval should show both statuses. If a premium is justified by a claimed benefit, identify whether that benefit has been assessed or remains conditional.

Avoid reporting an unverified premium as an achieved compliance saving. The purchase can be described accurately as an accepted fuel transaction with an outstanding evidence or eligibility question until the relevant conclusion is available.

A product-and-claim review matrix

Fictional case: an accepted fuel has an unassessed claim

A fictional vessel considers an Algeciras LNG offer carrying an additional environmental description. The responsible technical team accepts the proposed product on its stated specification, but the buyer's sustainability reviewer has not yet assessed the supporting evidence.

The purchase comparison initially deducts an assumed reporting benefit from the supplier's price. That makes the offer appear more attractive even though the relevant benefit has not been established.

The desk restores the gross accepted purchase cost and shows the potential attribute value separately. It asks the supplier to define the evidence package and obtains the appropriate review before relying on a reporting outcome. Technical acceptance remains documented without being stretched into a different conclusion.

Decide what an incomplete evidence package changes

If the supplier cannot provide an agreed document, identify the specific promise and the decision that depends on it. The consequence may concern a contractual remedy, a reporting treatment or the buyer's willingness to pay a premium; those are distinct questions.

Do not assume that missing attribute evidence proves the physical fuel is unsuitable. Equally, successful physical delivery does not establish that every additional contractual promise has been fulfilled.

Check the current agreed text and obtain appropriate advice where rights or regulatory treatment are disputed. Keep the factual record precise enough to support that review.

Common mistakes

Avoid using a green label as a specification, converting billing units without an accepted basis and treating technical acceptance as reporting approval. Another error is subtracting an unassessed environmental benefit from the purchase price. Each claimed attribute needs a defined scope and an appropriately reviewed purpose.

Where Zeaclub fits

Zeaclub offers digitalised procedures across the voyage workflow.

Zeaclub provides 24/7 operating systems and worldwide coverage.

Explore Zeaclub

Learn about Zeaclub