The Safety Score
RightShip’s Safety Score
Be at the helm of maritime safety with comprehensive analysis, expert support and actionable advice
What is RightShip’s Safety Score
The use of algorithms to parse various and complex data sets into one single score has become common practice across many industries including finance, banking and insurance. The RightShip Safety Score incorporates various maritime data sets into one easy to understand score, which provides an indication of a vessel’s safety performance today.
It is calculated from a vessel’s five-year historical performance, with various risk factors considered at the vessel, DOC, Class and Flag level. The output is a score between one and five , where a vessel which has achieved a five out of five indicates best practice attention to safety.
The purpose of the Safety Score is to increase safety in the industry, by creating a level playing field for all vessels on the water, regardless of type, size or age. it allows industry participants to benchmark their safety procedures against the industry’s best performers.
With a new Safety Score comes a new look
With our new Safety Score comes the introduction of a new look. While the Safety Score remains a score out of five, the new visual depiction is one that demonstrates progress. We are committed to assisting vessel owners progress towards the highest possible Safety Score, and adhere to our mission of improving the safety standards of the maritime industry.
The Safety Score
Safety Score Objectives
Since 1991, RightShip has provided due diligence and risk management tools. As technology and marketplace requirements have evolved, so has our capability to measure, monitor and describe safety standards in the maritime industry.
The Safety Score is intended to help you gain an initial perspective on the operational performance of a potential vessel, and to encourage shipowners to invest in improved processed and technologies that make the entire supply chain safer.
Today the RightShip Safety Score has three main objectives which combine technology advancements and industry feedback:
- More transparent: The Safety Score has been designed to provide a clear and concise explanation of the elements that factor into the score, and how they contribute to the overall Score.;i>
- More explainable: The behaviour of the model has been carefully designed to make it simpler to identify the reason for changes in ratings with a clear & consistent link back to the subscore elements.
- More useable: The Safety Score has been designed with you mind. It provides a much clearer view of both the positive and negative performance of a vessel so that actionable steps can be taken to improve safety and to benchmark against other vessels in the World Fleet.
The Safety Score
Our Safety Score Data
RightShip’s Safety Score model is built on a foundation of cleaned and verified data, which comes from a variety of different sources. We have partnerships with other maritime analytics associations and government institutions. We gather information contributed by our customers, source our own first-hand data and utilise dedicated date stewardship roles with the goal of creating the most comprehensive and accurate data source possible.
As there is no one golden record of data in the maritime industry, RightShip is required to collect data from multiple sources, which can occasionally show conflicts. In order to combat this, RightShip data is cleansed through a mixture of automated processes and expert analysis, as we aim to provide the most refined accurate data as possible for the system.
The data which contributes to a vessel’s Safety Score is clearly made available on a vessel’s Activity timeline.
The Safety Score
Safety Score Methodology
The Safety Score is made up of six sub-scores and more than 20 safety considerations, providing indications of historical safety performance. Each has been chosen to encourage all participants in the supply chain to work towards the highest standard in maritime safety practises. After listening to the industry, we have removed size, age, type and builder. We are left with a model which is centred on what we believe are safety performance indicators that operators can affect.Safety considerations
- Vessel – incident number
- Vessel – incident recency
- Vessel – incident severity
- Vessel – incident responsiveness
- Vessel – detention number
- Vessel – detention recency
- Vessel – PSC number
- Vessel – PSC recency
- Vessel – PSC responsiveness
- Vessel’s Flag State – Count of negative indicators according to the International Chamber of Shipping’s Flag State Performance Table
- Vessel’s DOC holder – incident number
- Vessel’s DOC holder – incident recency
- Vessel’s DOC holder – incident severity
- Vessel’s DOC holder – PSC detention number
- Vessel’s DOC holder – PSC detention recency
- Vessel’s DOC holder – PSC number
- Vessel’s Classification Society – PSC detention number
- Vessel’s Classification Society – PSC number
- Geospatial – If vessel entered Paris, Abuja, or Riyadh MOU regions
- Movement Data – Primarily traded in the same country
- Movement Data – Low average daily movement
- Movement Data – None - If vessel has no movement data existing in the last 5 years
- Sanctions – Vessels or company’s flagged as being sanctioned by the following bodies: EU, OFAC, OFAC Watchlist, DFAT, UN
- Sanctioned by association – Vessels or companies with associations to a sanctioned country by checking their: DOC, Technical Manager, Beneficial Owner, Registered Owner, Commercial Operator, Vessel Operator & Flag
Each sub score focuses on various risk areas which are weighted and combined to create the overarching Safety Score in a “balanced scorecard” approach. Incidents and the performance of the DOC holder have the highest impact on the Safety Score, while the performance of flag and class has the lowest overall impact of the six sub-scores.
Highest Impact on the Safety Score
When calculating the Safety Score, we tally the total number of incidents a vessel has had over the past five years and make note of how recent those incidents were. An incident is defined as activities that occurred on the vessel that affected the condition of the ship or endangered the safety or environment for passengers and crew.
The type of incident can also indicate the level of safety practises on board a vessel. Therefore, to further classify the incident, the Safety Score also considers the severity of each incident based on the damage to the vessel and the environment, as well as its effect on crew welfare. Each incident is categorised and provides a different degree of impact on the vessel’s overall score.Categories
- Category A incident: Where there is a Loss of Life, Missing Persons, Pollution, Fire/Explosion or a Total Loss.
- Category B incident: Where there is structural damage that rendered the ship unseaworthy, such as underwater penetration of the hull, immobilisation of main engines or extensive damage covered by an IHS incident grading of Serious.
- Category C incident: Incidents not covered above where the IHS incident grading is Non-Serious.
- Category A & B manual incidents are included in the Safety Score calculation.
- Category C manual incidents are not included in the Safety Score calculation.
Finally, the Safety Score considers the operator and technical manager’s post-incident close out reports to encourage more effective analysis and corrective action taken by ship managers to reduce the risk of similar incidents occurring again. Open incidents which have occurred after the Safety Score is launched will have a higher impact on the Safety Score than incidents which have occurred before the launch of the Safety Score, which have been closed out. The model will not differentiate between open and closed incidents which occurred before the Safety Score goes live.
The vessel’s DOC Holder
RightShip develops an average score for a typical vessel’s safety performance under each DOC holder through four key risk areas: the number of detentions, PSC deficiencies* and incidents along with the severity of these incidents.
The DOC sub score focuses only on events that occurred when vessels were under the management of the current DOC holder. If a vessel had an incident before moving to a new DOC, that incident will not impact the DOC score.
The size of the DOCs fleet is factored into the Safety Score calculation to ensure small and large DOCs are handled fairly.
Medium Impact on the Safety Score
Vessel PSC deficiencies
The number and recency of a vessel’s deficiencies will have an effect on a vessel’s safety score.
However, the regional practices of Port State Control varies, which may result in a higher number of deficiencies reported on certain trade routes. The model mitigates the risk of vessels working on specific routes being penalised by comparing each PSC Inspection against the average for that location. You can read more about PSC Deficiencies below*.
RightShip’s Safety Score rewards technical managers and operators for providing clarity on how they have responded to deficiencies and their plans to address deficiencies raised during PSC inspections.
Instances in which vessels are detained by port state control in response to serious deficiencies will impact the Safety Score. The model will tally the total number of detentions over the past five years and how recent they were. A period without detentions will improve the score.
Lower Impact on the Safety Score
The vessel’s Flag State
RightShip uses the International Chamber of Shipping’s Flag State Performance Table to measure the safety practises of each flag state. The higher the number of negative indicators as provided by the ICS, the greater the impact on a vessel’s Safety Score.
The vessel’s Classification Society
Safety standards vary from Classification Society to Classification Society. We measure the safety standards of each class across both detentions and deficiencies to determine a vessel’s Safety Score.This provides an overall score for Classification Society’s historical performance divided by the fleet size to get an average per vessel in their fleet.
Similar to the DOC, the Class subscore focuses only on events that occurred to vessels when they were under the current Class. If a vessel had an a detention before moving to a new Class, that detention will not impact the score of the Class, and a detention on a vessel after it has passed to a new Class will not impact the previous Class.
Where a vessel is a member of multiple class associations, we will select one of the Classes for use in the Safety Score calculation.
The Safety Score includes PSC deficiencies when reviewing the operational performance of the vessel, DOC holder and Classification society. The number and type of PSC deficiencies can vary between port state authorities. To avoid penalising a vessel for frequently visiting specific ports, the model takes into account the average number and type of PSC deficiencies for each place of inspection.
If the port of inspection is unknown or there are less than 100 inspections in total for that port, the model considers the average number of PSC deficiencies for the country of inspection. If country of inspection is unknown or there are less than 100 inspections in total for that country, PSC deficiencies are relative to the port state authority of inspection.
The Safety Score
The specific safety events included in each vessel’s Safety Score
To drill down into the specific safety incidents and events which are included in the Safety Score, you can click on a vessel’s activity time line. Here you can see all the incidents, port state control inspections. Where possible, all deficiencies and detentions for each PSC inspection will be listed. You will also be able to see the severity grading of each incident.
The Safety Score
How RightShip’s new platform improves Safety Score benchmarks
The new RightShip platform provides a full break down of every vessel’s Safety Score and benchmarks a vessel’s score across the industry. This provides a transparent view of the model distribution and helps you understand where that particular vessel is placed in its peer group. This will help members create comparisons of similar performance and rank best practices.
Moreover, the distribution shows that very few vessels are able to achieve the highest Safety Score, and there is often room for improvement. We support the entire industry in their continued path towards outstanding operational standards.
For our due diligence customers, this means that vessels at the lower end of the distribution may be suitable for your risk requirements. However, we recommend that you vet each vessel to provide a recommendation based on your safety and sustainability profile.
The Safety Score
Vessels included in the Safety Score
Which vessels receive a Safety Score?
All cargo carrying commercial vessels (>1,000 DWT):
- Dry bulk vessels
- Tanker vessels (inc. Bunkering, FSO)
- Container Vessels
- LNG, LPG and Multigas vessels
- General cargo vessels (inc. Vehicle carriers)
Vessels not included in the Safety Score
- Small, light pleasure craft such as motorboats
- Tugs and bargers
- Ferries, RORO
- Vessels under Government Service or within the U.S Reserve Fleet
- Pleasure craft such as Cruise
- Offshore supper, construction and platform vessels
Safety Score age limits
Vessels types over a certain age do not receive a Safety Score.
LNG, CNG, CO2 & Combination Gas Tankers > 40 years
Dry Bulk (including Lakers), Container Ships, General Cargo, Ro-Ro > 35 years
Chemical Tankers, Product Tankers, LPG Tankers, Bunkering Vessels, Offshore vessels, Combination Carriers > 30 years
Indicative Scores are generally used for the following purposes:
- Give a caution that the vessels rating may need to be less relied upon due to a lack of data, such as trading behaviour not exposing her to normal levels of inspection/reporting. In these cases, there is potential for the Safety Score to be higher than it would be had the same vessel been more active or trading in an area with higher levels of inspection/reporting.
- Give a caution that there is outstanding information for the vessel that should be reviewed by a Vetting Superintendent as part of the due diligence vetting process.
- Notify Vessel Operators that there is outstanding or missing information for their vessel that could be limiting their ability to achieve their best Safety Score.
- Identify riskier vessels as identified by RightShip Management or those Companies associated with abandonment cases. This is to deliver on our commitment to Safety & Welfare.
Vessels with no Safety Score
Sometimes we are unable to provide a vessel with a Safety Score, in which case we will highlight this. There are many reasons we may be unable to provide a score. Other vessels which will not receive a Safety Score include:
- Sanctioned vessels will have no rating and users will be clearly informed of the sanctions. This is in order to meet regulatory requirements.
- Vessels no longer in service or still under construction.
- Vessels with no known DOC holder, Flag or Class
- Smaller vessels, less than 1,000 DWTs)
- Non-merchant vessels
- and any other vessels not currently supported under the Safety Score
RightShip collects sanctions information from a variety of sources. We identify any vessel or company with associations to a sanctioned country by checking their DOC, Technical Manager, Beneficial Owner, Registered Owner, Commercial Manager, Vessel Operator & Flag on a best endeavour’s basis.
We maintain lists of vessels and companies flagged as being sanctioned by the European Union (EU), Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC), Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and the United Nations (UN).
The Safety Score
Effects of Dry Bulk Inspections and Memberships on the Safety Score
RightShip Dry Bulk Inspections
RightShip’s independent Dry Bulk inspections program provides a validation of a vessel’s condition and management system. Vessels which achieve a positive inspections result receive a small positive adjustment to their Risk Rating, in order to inform the vetting and selection process of our due diligence customers.
After receiving feedback from all parts of the industry, we have spent the last two years reviewing our ability to act on our mission to improve safety across the maritime industry. Part of this review included our current inspections and Risk Rating approach. The outcome of this assessment will be to refocus RightShip’s services towards the new goal of providing a clear path to operational excellence and to promote those who invest in the highest standards across their fleet.
In order to achieve these goals, we will be separating the results of our Dry Bulk inspections program from our Risk Rating on 30th May 2020.
This will allow us to enhance and expand our inspections program as a service to support best practise in vessel operational performance. It will also provide additional tools for shipowners to market their proactive investments in high safety standards and the condition of their vessels.
This means that the outcome of a RightShip Dry Bulk Inspection conducted after 30th May will no longer provide a positive adjustment to their vessel’s RightShip Risk Rating. Any positive adjustments resulting from a RightShip inspection conducted before 30th May will remain in place until the Risk Rating is replaced by the new Safety Score in September 2020.
Once launched, the new RightShip Safety Score will be measuring all vessels in terms of their operational performance to the same standard. For example, an LNG vessel is scored on the same five out of five scale and sub-scores as a dry bulk vessel. This creates a level playing field for vessels to achieve the maximum Safety Score. Following our pursuit of fairness and to drive improvements in standards across the industry, the model will not take into account RightShip Dry Bulk Inspection results as not all vessels can have a RightShip inspection.
The effects of Memberships and Associations
The Safety Score is a new model and it does not function in the same way as the Risk Rating. The new model has been designed to be transparent and fair, focused on the historical performance of the vessel and DOC holder. This is why no factours outside of the managers operational perofrmance is considered. RightShip is not able to provide an endorsement of every maritime membership and the proposed benefits they may bring an owner's safety performance.
The Safety Score
Calibrating and testing the model
In our process, we have combined advanced analytics with our 20-year industry expertise, focusing on what will drive positive action in the industry. This means the RightShip Safety Score has been optimised through sophisticated use of data science and reviewed by RightShip’s subject matter experts.
The model consistently weighs more recent incidents, detentions, deficiencies as having a larger impact on the Safety Score, while measuring the action taken by the vessel owner/ operator in response to any incidents, detentions and deficiencies in closing out incidents on the RightShip platform.
The model design has been tested against its main objective to change behaviour in the industry towards operational excellence. The Safety Score is validated across various KPIs for each of the 6 sub scores and 5 objectives, such as transparency, fairness and accuracy.
Testing of the model occurs every day as new data is added into the system.
The Safety Score
The Safety Score data
Is Paris MoU data still excluded from RightShip Safety Score system?
We are using Paris MOU data in our safety score calculations, but may need to approach the owner for updated information during the vetting process.
Could you provide examples of data sources other PSC data?
RightShip’s Safety Score model is built on verified data, which comes from a variety of different sources.
We have partnerships with other maritime analytics associations and government institutions.
We also assess information provided by our customers; source our own first-hand data; and utilise data governance with the goal of creating the most comprehensive and accurate data set possible.
Where does RightShip get its incident data from, and what incidents are captured?
RightShip receives incident information from our data providers, the largest of which is IHS. Incidents are also entered by our vetting team based on media reports, PSC inspection results, Terminal Feedback, RightShip Inspections and proactive reporting.
What is the source of information for vessel incident, considering that incident records rely heavily on voluntary reporting by the vessel managers? Some transparent vessel managers could be penalised in comparison to managers who are not so transparent.
We receive the majority of our incident data from IHS. When receiving incident information that has been reported proactively, we take the approach that if it is not a Category A or B incident with higher severity, it is not included in the Safety Score. This is to encourage proactive reporting and avoid penalising manually created incidents. In the more severe cases we must still include the incident in the Safety Score but will credit the Managers for proactively reporting.
If a vessel is involved in an incident for which the operator / crew are not at fault (i.e. ship loader collapsing on vessel), does that impact the Safety Score in any way?
If the incident can be demonstrated and documented to not be the fault of the operator this will be reviewed and removed from the score.
If an operator does not voluntarily report an incident, how will RightShip obtain information regarding the incident?
We are building our vetting process and models to support transparency, and part of this is incident categorisation so that the impact will not directly affect the Safety Score unless it is a major incident. It’s important to remember the role of the vetting process in assessing the overall safety profile of a vessel.
Is there any definitive time period for reporting an incident, irrespective of its severity?
Any incident within the last 5 years will be considered in in the Safety Score. We encourage the pro-active submission of incidents and incident investigations and will credit a small positive adjustment to vessels with proactively supplied incident closeouts.
Is there any defining pattern for categorising the incidents?
Category A, being the most severe, covers pollution, loss of life, missing persons, fire / explosion or a total loss.
Category B includes where there is structural damage that rendered the ship unseaworthy, such as underwater penetration of the hull, immobilisation of main engines, extensive damage.
Category C is anything not covered above.
The Safety Score model
Will the Safety Score be determined on a percentile basis, or can any number of vessels achieve a score of 5/5?
There is no fixed ratio. Any vessel is capable of being 5 / 5 provided they demonstrate the required level of safety performance.
What is the rationale behind categorising incidents as high, medium, and low impact on the model?
Given the varying severity of incidents received by RightShip we feel it is fairer to operate tiered severity gradings with different levels of impact in the Safety Score for each. For example, a collision leading to loss of life is not comparable to a small hydraulic leak on deck during cargo operations.
Some PSC detentions could be severe – it is counter-intuitive to look at this as low-impact?
Detentions are recorded in the vessel detention sub score and would have a medium impact on the overall Safety Score. The performance of the Flag of the vessel has a low impact.
Do minor PSC deficiencies affect the Safety Score?
Minor PSC deficiencies still impact the safety score calculation, however it may not reduce the overall Safety Score.
How does adverse terminal feedback impact the safety score?
This does not affect the safety score directly, however it will be considered during the vetting process.
Do nil deficiency PSC reports give a positive score adjustment to the vessel, to encourage vessel to perform better?
Nil deficiency PSC reports will give a positive score to the vessel if a nil deficiency report is better than expected at that port. For example, if Port X normally averages 5 deficiencies and a vessel receives 0 deficiencies, this would be rewarded. However, if the Port always gives 0 deficiencies, a vessel receiving 0 deficiencies is meeting expectations for that port – so, in that case the inspection would have a neutral effect on the Safety Score.
How are minor incidents and negative operational vessel feedback from terminals weighted for scoring?
Minor incidents, if entered manually in our system will have no impact on the Safety Score. This also includes Terminal Feedback Reports, however it will be used in our due diligence vetting process to assess the risk the vessel presents. We took this approach as given the level of reporting of minor incidents and feedback reports we receive from just a small number of ports, the Safety Score for vessels trading in these regions would be skewed quite heavily due to the higher level of reporting.
How will DOC be evaluated? In cases where a certain management company shows good performance at cape size bulk carrier level, and poor performance with Handymax vessels, will the DOC evaluation be averaged?
At the moment the performance of the DOC is averaged across all the vessels under the DOC, regardless of type. RightShip would like to see improvements in the safety operations of all vessel types, and believe that scoring the DOC in this way and introducing greater benchmarking capabilities will encourage improvements in performance.
If a poorly maintained vessel changes her management from a poor operator to better operator, will her safety score be positively impacted with immediate effect? Is there a transition and verification process?
A change to a better manager will result in an improvement in the Safety Score the change itself is not penalised, a Management of Change (MOC) questionnaire may be required to be completed to verify details of the transfer.
If the vessel is sold, will the impact of its past detention continue to impact the DOC score?
Yes, performance whilst the vessel is under a DOC remains with the same DOC for the 5-year modelling period, regardless of if the vessel is sold or transferred. The detention will not however affect the new DOC the vessel has been transferred to.
How is operational feedback incorporated into the Safety Score calculation?
At this time, operational feedback does not feature in the Safety Score calculation, and will instead be reviewed as part of the due diligence vetting service provided by RightShip.
Upon receiving corrective action, how long does it take for the safety score to be updated?
There are no system downgrades to ratings whilst awaiting corrective action. Instead the vessels current Safety Score is displayed at all times and any updates as a result of updating or closing a PSC or Incident will be visible within a few minutes.
In critical eyes, the under-reporting of incidents could be the way to keep your safety score in check. Is there incentive for transparent reporting?
We are continually seeking ways in which to reward transparency and have considered this in the design of the Safety Score. We would love to hear your suggestions on how we can achieve this consistently.
Will a 5-star vessel achieve a Safety Score of 5 after the transition to the new model?
The new Safety Score and Qi Risk Rating are not compatible, as the inputs and the calculation methods are different. Therefore, a vessel’s Safety Score may not be the same as its Risk Rating.
Vetting, Risk Rating and charter party agreements
Can the impact of an unjust PSC detention be removed or limited from the safety score of the vessel?
During the screening process, our vetting superintendents review incidents & PSCs, along with many other factors. As all superintendents have a seafaring and senior officer background, the severity & importance of the deficiencies is assessed manually. In the case of unjustified detentions, the RighShip team will be able to exclude it from the Safety Score if appropriate.
What is the co-relation between existing Risk Rating in RightShip Qi & the Safety Score?
There is no relation between the Qi risk rating and the new Safety Score.
Could you expand on why RightShip does not support the use of the Safety Score in contracts & charter party agreements?
RightShip has never supported the use of its Risk Rating in any charter party clauses. This is one of our policies on our website. This is the same for the Safety Score. You can read more in the Safety Score Knowledge Centre.
Do we know what the port authority or shippers will accept as a minimum safety score?
We do not recommend a minimum Safety Score and are working with Port Authorities to encourage a sensible approach to their own requirements – particularly during the transition from the Risk Rating to the Safety Score.
Are we going to be able to see our DOC score, including a breakdown that will allow us to improve on areas of weakness?
RightShip customers will be able to see the Safety Score and all sub-scores. Please email email@example.com to discuss subscription options with our team.
If a vessel with a Safety Score of 5 changes DOC, how will this impact the Safety Score?
The new Safety Score will be dependent on the performance of the DOC the vessel has transferred to. If the new DOC is operating at a high level, there may be no change in Safety Score.
How do you categorise the severity of PSC deficiencies? Is there a standard risk model?
At this stage there is no categorisation of PSC deficiencies – only incidents are grouped in terms of their severity.
The number of incidents reported to the OCIMF repository remains low. Many operators are concerned that pro-active reporting may get them into hot water and penalise the prospects of the ship. Is there an incentive for reporting all incidents to RightShip?
Our Safety Score and vetting process is designed to reward transparency. We usually get data on all significant incidents through various channels. Less severe incidents will have a limited effect on the safety score.
Size, age, type and inspections
Is it correct to say that a good Safety Score can be awarded on an older vessel, even if there is no current physical inspection? Or any historical physical inspection?
Age is not a factor in the Safety Score, and therefore will not count against an older vessel. It is possible to get a Safety Score of 5 / 5 up to the maximum scorable age of the vessel. However, RightShip will still require inspections on vessels over 14 years of age. Inspection validity and the date of the last inspection will be clearly shown on our new platform.
How does a RightShip inspection affect the Safety Score?
The results of physical inspections are not being used in the model, as the new Safety Score measures all vessels in terms of their operational performance across all types. This creates a level playing field for vessels achieving the maximum 5 out of 5 Safety Score. In addition, this considers vessels that can’t have a RightShip inspection.
A RightShip Inspection remains a valuable tool in the due diligence process, and allows for an assessment of the latest physical condition of the vessel, as well as the current safety management standards being practised.
The results of the inspection do not directly contribute to the Safety Score, but the presence of an inspection is clearly identified on the vessel page to promote shipowners who are taking proactive steps to put their vessels forward for inspection.
Are the requirements for a physical inspection remaining the same?
Yes, requirements for physical inspections remain the same.
Will RightShip release their inspection checklist to the public?
We intend to make our inspection checklist available before the end of the year to support preparation.
Will a ship over 14 years of age be displayed in the RightShip platform?
A dry bulk vessel over the age of 14 will have a small alert to show they are in need of an inspection. If the vessel has a valid RightShip inspection, this will also be shown on the vessel page to highlight the investment made by the operator.
Would carrying out an office DBMS audit improve the sub-score for DOC?
At this stage the DBMS is in its first draft and is available for industry consultation. It is not a finalised standard and no audits are available at this time. Therefore, no decision has been made for it to affect the DOC score.
Will benchmarking be available for dry and wet vessels separately?
Each vessel will only be benchmarked against other vessels of the same type and size.
Is your product endorsed by any flag state administrations or class societies?
We have received positive feedback from flag state administrations and class societies.
RightShip is taking keen interest in checking on crew welfare on board. Is it limited to MLC compliance or the best practices of industry?
We start with compliance with MLC Part A as a baseline. However, we feel that in many situations this does not adequately address wellness – therefore we have a pilot project looking into how we can support those operators who invest more in this area to enhance safety and wellbeing.
What are demonstration vessels
As part of the launch of the Safety Score, our analysts have provided an overview of the impacts of the Safety Score on three demonstration vessels. These vessels have been designed to show the effects of the various sub scores and how the Safety Score can change based on the historical operational performance of a vessel, its DOC holder, flag and class.
We are providing these vessels so we can announce the Safety Score as early as possible, providing the industry with more information and time to learn about our new Safety Score.
Customers will be able to see the beta version of the Safety Score on real vessels from 30th June by logging in to the microsite with their current Qi username and password.
Let’s look at an example: The Burakowski - a vessel with a Safety Score of FIVE.
This vessel has an excellent safety record with an overall score of five.
Looking further into its sub-scores, both its incident and DOC performance, which have the highest impact on the overall Safety Score, have been exemplary with both sub-scores receiving a five.
Of medium impact on this vessel’s Safety Score, is the vessel’s PSC deficiency performance and detention performance, which are a four and five respectively. Despite the vessel’s deficiency performance being a four, a vessel can still achieve an overall Safety Score of five provided that the deficiencies were low and relatively minor – which we will see shortly when we examine the vessel’s activity timeline.
And although of lower impact, this vessel’s Flag and Class both received excellent sub-scores of five.
Let’s examine the specific safety events included in each vessel’s Safety Score in its activity timeline.
All known incidents, PSC deficiencies and detentions will be listed here.
We can observe the severity grading of each incident, where RightShip grade severity with Category A, B and C – With category A being the most severe.
We can also see the specific PSC inspection, including where and when it occurred, as well as the number of deficiencies and whether the vessel was detained.
In this example, this vessel received a sub-score of five for incidents, as it had zero incidents in the last 5 years.
Additionally, the Activity Timeline shows us the vessel had multiple clean PSC inspections, however there were two inspections with three deficiencies. The first inspection was within the last 12 months, occurring on the 9th of Sep 2019 which resulted in three deficiencies. The second inspection was in late 2017 also with three deficiencies.
Together, these inspections affected this vessel’s PSC deficiency sub-score.
We also provide visibility on benchmarking, where you can compare this vessel against those of a similar size and type.
This helps to indicate where a vessel is in comparison to its peers, and in this particular case the vessel outperforms its peers.
Let’s now look at an example of a vessel with a Safety Score of THREE.
In this example, the vessel has had an apparently very good safety record.
The vessel scores well across Incidents, PSC deficiencies, detentions, Flag and Class.
However, the DOC has performed poorly with a sub-score of one. This identifies that other vessel’s managed by this DOC have performed very poorly and this could create an associated risk factor for this vessel.
On the plus side we can see that this vessel is in possession of a valid and acceptable RightShip Inspection which gives confidence the latest physical condition of the vessel has been verified as well as the current Safety Management Standards onboard.
As we look at this vessel’s activity timeline:
It has a relatively good safety record, with no incidents and multiple clean PSC’s.
There are three PSC inspections with deficiencies, however upon closer look, the most one recent in September 2019 had just one deficiency.
There are two deficiencies in mid 2017 and mid 2016, both of which are no longer recent enough to impact this vessel’s overall Safety Score.
Despite this vessel having strong performance in many categories, the DOC performance has contributed to this vessel’s overall Safety Score being a three.
And when benchmarked, its peers are a Safety Score of four indicating that it is below those vessels of the same type and size.
Let’s now look at an example of a vessel with a Safety Score of ONE.
Overall, this vessel has a very poor safety record.
Incidents, PSC deficiencies and detention sub-scores all receiving a one.
Its DOC is a two indicating that other vessel’s managed by this DOC have also performed poorly.
However, it’s Flag and Class have strong safety records.
As we look at this vessel’s activity timeline:
A recent and severe Fire & Explosion incident that lead to a loss of life occurred in January 2020 and was graded as a Category A.
It also has multiple PSC’s with detentions and deficiencies.
All this together gives a clear explanation as to the vessel’s overall Safety Score of a one.
And when benchmarked it is of no surprise that it performs poorly against its peers.
What is happening next?
We have been speaking with our customers over the last two years and received a huge amount of input to our product development. This has focused our product schedule throughout 2020 on including more data, stability, and benchmarking to our customers. The benefits of the upgraded platform, the new customer communication channels and greater transparency of RightShip’s data, has given us the opportunity to rethink and enhance each of our current products.
We understand that this is a difficult time for the industry, as teams continue to work apart and face many new challenges in a COVID-19 environment. Therefore, we are providing as much notice as possible about the new Safety Score to our customers.
Below is the timeline of your transition to the Safety Score on the new RightShip platform.
To assist our customers during this period, we have created a series of demonstration vessels to allow our customers to learn about the Safety Score’s methodology as early as possible. You will find videos and more information in our knowledge centre.
As the develop of the Safety Score continues, we will provide existing RightShip members with access to the beta version of the platform and Safety Score from 30th June – September, when the new Safety Score will go live. RightShip members can access the beta Safety Score by logging in through the microsite with their existing RightShip username and password.
30th June - The beta version
The beta version of the Safety Score will provide an initial indication of what a vessel’s Safety Score may be on the 30th September.
Due to the impacts of Coronavirus, we want to provide as much notice as possible to the Safety Score. This means we have chosen to announce the changes as we continue to build, test and calibrate the Safety Score until it goes live in September 2020.
In order to help our members learn about the new Safety Score, we have built a "beta" or "under construction” version of the Safety Score. As we are is still in production, the beta version of the Safety Score will be correct as of the 1st March and will not consider any new safety events or data collected by RightShip after this date. Therefore, the beta version of the Safety Score will be static and may be different to a vessel’s actual Safety Score when the new model is released in September 2020.
End of July – Platform Training
To prepare your teams with our new platform communication channels and works flows, we will be providing additional training materials from the end of July. While the new platform has a simple and easy to use work flow, we understand that all change requires time and training.
We will be emailing our members with more information in July. For non RightShip members, we encourage you to register for updates to be kept up to date.
Action to take
Transitioning from the Risk Rating to the Safety Score
We are pleased to move from the Risk Rating to the Safety Score as part of our commitment to improving safety standards throughout the maritime community.
The new Safety Score uses a fundamentally different model to the Risk Rating and provides a new way to benchmark safety. This means the underlying methodology has changed and is no longer predictive. It is not specifically focused on assigning an estimated value to the risk of incidents occurring in the next 12 months. Instead, the Safety Score measures the past operational performance of a vessel in a transparent way, resulting in a powerful tool to assist users in forming their own holistic view of future operational risk.
A Safety Score does not convey the same information as the Risk Rating, therefore a “like for like” comparison of the Risk Rating and Safety Score for a particular vessel is not applicable.
While the Risk Rating and the Safety Score are fundamentally different models, they are both valuable. However, we have listened to industry feedback and designed the Safety Score to provide more transparency to an individual vessel’s score and to drive improvements in the industry. By allowing operators to see in more detail how their score has been calculated, we hope to direct the industry towards improvements in key operational areas.
Action to take
You must use the Risk Rating until the Safety Score is launched
As we phase out the Risk Rating and transition to the Safety Score, RightShip is making the new Safety Score for individual vessels available to our clients in June in a BETA phase. During this BETA phase, the current Risk Ratings in Qi will remain active and reflect the definitive RightShip evaluation of a vessel, based on our existing methodology.
Our Safety Score will be made available via the microsite only for the initial purpose of testing, user familiarisation and pre-launch feedback. During this BETA phase, vessel Safety Scores will be based on historical data and may be subject to change prior to the official launch of the new Safety Score platform. Therefore, prior to the formal launch of the new Safety Score platform, Safety Scores may not be used by any person for commercial purposes.
Safety Scores accessed through our BETA phase or as part of any demonstration of the Safety Score must not to be taken as advice and may not be relied upon by any person in any way. RightShip will not be responsible for any consequences of a person using or relying upon a Safety Score or any other data accessed via the microsite prior to launch.
We estimate this BETA phase will conclude in September, at which time the Risk Rating will be decommissioned, and the new Safety Score will be the definitive RightShip evaluation of a vessel.
Before our September launch, the Safety Score methodology will still be in testing phase, in order to provide you with the most reliable results at launch.
Action to take
Charter party and commercial agreements
RightShip maintains its long-held position that the use of a minimum Risk rating in Charter party agreements is not recommended. We therefore call on all users of the current risk rating including charterers to take this opportunity in the transition to the new platform and safety score, to remove any references to a minimum star or risk rating from their existing charter parties and commercial agreements.
Our ongoing vetting process will incorporate all updated information, consider the risk factors for the contemplated voyage and provide a clear vetting outcome and recommendation which will be logged in RightShip’s new platform.
The information provided on our new platform using our comprehensive data sets provides far more insight into a vessel when compared to what is possible in Qi today.
It is not meaningful to include any reference to our new Safety Score in commercial contracts or to use the Safety Score as a vetting rule or criteria.
Action to take
RightShip’s independent Dry Bulk inspections program provides validation of a vessel’s condition and management system. Vessels that achieve a positive inspections result receive a small positive adjustment to their Risk Rating, in order to inform the vetting and selection process of our due diligence customers.
After receiving feedback from all parts of the industry, we have spent the last two years reviewing our ability to act on our mission to improve safety across the maritime industry. Part of this review included our current inspections and Risk Rating approach. The outcome of this assessment will be to refine RightShip’s services and move towards the new goal of providing a clear path to operational excellence and promote those who invest in the highest standards across their fleet.
In order to achieve these goals, we will be separating the results of our Dry Bulk inspections program from our Safety Score.
This will allow us to enhance and expand our inspections program as a service to support best practice in vessel operational performance. It will also provide additional tools for shipowners to market their proactive investments in high safety standards and the condition of their vessels.
Once launched, the new RightShip Safety Score will measure all vessels in terms of their operational performance to the same standard. For example, an LNG vessel is scored on the same five out of five scale and sub-scores as a dry bulk vessel. This creates a level playing field for vessels to achieve the maximum Safety Score. Following our pursuit of fairness and commitment to driving improvements across the industry, the model will not take into account RightShip Dry Bulk Inspection results, as not all vessels can have a RightShip inspection.
Action to take
Our vetting process considers a range of inputs and assessments including the Safety Score. Any vessel with a Safety Score between 1 and 5 could be recommended by RightShip after completing the whole vetting process satisfactorily.
Any open items, including detentions and major incidents, if applicable will be reviewed by our expert vetting teams. Unless the necessary corrective action is provided by the operator to close out these events, we will not be in a position to make a positive recommendation on that vessel for the voyage under consideration.
Vessels with a zero Safety Score, will not be recommended to the end user until the reasons for the score have been investigated and addressed and all supporting information provided to the satisfaction of RightShip.
Vessels which are not covered by our normal due diligence and vessel screening service will not be scored and will require additional checks should they be vetted by one of our customers.
Action to take
PSC Close Outs
RightShip’s Safety Score rewards technical managers and operators for providing clarity on how they have responded to deficiencies and their plans to address problems raised during inspections. Incidents which are open within the RightShip platform will have a higher impact on a vessel’s Safety Score than closed incidents. This only applies to incidents which have occurred after the launch of the Safety Score.
RightShip provides guidance on the following actions for ship managers:
- Root Cause Analysis
Root Cause Analysis is a useful process for understanding and solving a problem. Those who are filling undertaking Root Cause Analysis of an incident are will need to assess any negative events that are occurring, then look at the complex systems around those problems and identify key points of failure. Finally, we determine solutions to address those root causes:
- PSCI Response – Good Examples
Explore some practical example to better understand what is required when responding to PSC deficiencies in consideration of root cause, corrective and preventative action,
Action to take
Verifying my GHG Rating
The first step to improve your vessel’s GHG Rating is ensuring that it is fully verified. You can find instructions for verifying your vessel here.
After this point, you should consult class and / or another appropriate third party for advice on the most effective energy saving equipment for your vessel.
Once you have established an approach, RightShip can provide you with a pre-assessment of the impact it will have on your vessel’s GHG Rating before you install the equipment.
Contact the sustainability team for a pre-assessment: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Action to take
Training on our new communications channels
Our platform provides us with new communication channels. These include new ways to submit a vet, receive requests for information from RightShip and request an inspection or verify your vessel.
To ensure vetting workflow continues as normal when we switch from Qi to the new RightShip platform, please make arrangements for your teams to train using the materials and webinars which are available on ComingSoon.RightShip.com
For more information, please contact email@example.com
The new RightShip platform: your comprehensive safety and sustainability management resource
The RightShip team is pleased to launch its new platform – here you’ll find all of our products in one place.
Our improved platform has been designed to provide you and your team with an improved and more transparent experience. The enhanced offering is an amalgamation of our comprehensive data sets, advanced analytics and the technical expertise of RightShip staff.
All RightShip services are now available through the RightShip platform, and we aim to provide greater transparency, faster responses and seamless communication between all industry participants. With just a click of a button, you can request vets, book vessel inspections, fill out terminal questionnaires, close out incidents and verify your GHG Rating all in one place. We have also improved connectivity of our platform, allowing our customers to get closer to the action. You will receive requests for information and have the option to upload the required content directly in the platform, allowing you to stay connected to our industry experts. This means our services, such as vessel vetting, are easier to use and results can be returned faster.
Through RightShip’s new platform technology, you can access these business solutions:
- RightShip vessel Inspections
- Vessel vetting
- Safety Score
- GHG Rating
- Carbon Accounting - online tool coming soon!
With enhanced cloud-based servers, plus mobile and tablet-friendly options, the platform has increased stability and provides more versatility for all industry participants. The platform is a one-stop portal giving you data access and request status updates. You can also respond to RightShip requests for information directly in the platform, allowing you to upload vessel information and certificates anywhere, while on the go.
In addition, you’re able to check the status of vets, request inspections and benchmark all vessels' Safety Score and GHG emissions from the same vessel page.
The new RightShip platform has several new features, which provide improved functionality and more streamlined communication with our experts. The improved advanced search tool provides a customisable, more efficient search for vessels. You can also set up notifications and alerts to monitor your vessels, inspections and vetting status.
Improved transparency to an individual vessel’s score and to drive improvements in the industry was a design priority. In our enhanced platform offering, you’ll find more information about the Safety Score and the GHG Rating, including how the vessel has been scored or rated as well as benchmarking each vessel within its peer group. This helps you to clearly understand where the vessel sits versus similar type and size vessels.
New ways to communicate
The RightShip platform allows you to directly request services in the platform on a vessel page. Services include requesting a vet, an inspection or a GHG verification. Your request will be added to our team’s workflow, held within the platform, which allows for faster communication and completion of our services.
The new tools also allow our staff to request additional paperwork or information to complete the service. To speed up the process, we recommend that you provide us with your preferred email addresses for your department. This will improve efficient communication between you and our team.
This could be an email address such as "Vetting@ShippingCompany.com".
Want a direct way for RightShip to get in contact? Our customer research shows that the fastest vets are processed with companies who have set up a generic RightShip email for their vetting staff, such as "RightShip@ShippingCompany.com".
This allows RightShip staff to contact your organisation for enquiries related to any vessel within your fleet and turn around vets more quickly.
Please send your preferred vetting department email to firstname.lastname@example.org
A clear path to improved safety
Through our platform, we provide an easier way for RightShip and ship owners and managers to communicate so that those in charge can take actionable steps to improve safety standards for that vessel.
Vessels found to have incidents or detention which has not been closed out with RightShip, will have alerts clearly displayed. By contrast, vessels with an acceptable RightShip inspection, achieved in the past 12 months, will be rewarded with the RightShip inspection badge.
RightShip’s new platform is easy to use, taking the confusion and stress out of the vetting process. Within the platform you can request a vet directly from the vessel page. This immediately lands in our vetting team’s workflow and gives you instant access to RightShip’s staff. Improved vetting services included:
Vet status transparency
Track your vet from within the platform – including the status, requests for additional information or if an inspection is required.
Real time notifications
You’ll receive real time notifications from RightShip superintendents. These notifications will include instructions outlining your next steps and allow you to upload required information directly into the platform.
Inspection requests are now processed digitally – linked directly to the vessel page and our vetting services. If a vessel needs an inspection as part of the vetting process, all parties will be informed through the platform’s communication tools.
RightShip provides an inspections badge on a vessel’s page to reward vessel owners who are committed to investing in best safety practices for their fleet.
Customers can request an inspection simply by filling out the required forms located within the platform. This request will be immediately added to our inspections team’s workflow. Any additional requests for information will be made through the platform.
Working towards a zero-emissions future
We encourage all vessel owners to view their ratings on the GHG Rating summary page and the GHG Rating factors page, which outlines each criterion in the GHG Rating equation. With industry support, we can ensure the data is verified and the ratings are calculated as accurately as possible.
The GHG workflow in the new RightShip platform has been built with you in mind. We’ve listened to your feedback and implemented the following workflow enhancements:
Reward for positive actions
We’ve highlighted energy saving equipment, so vessel owners who invest in efficiency are easily recognised and charterers have greater insight into these measures when selecting vessels.
We understand sustainability measures require investment and we value owners who proactively make efficiency improvements. In turn, we now reward those owners with recognition for their efforts – they’re front and centre for potential charter.
Fast-tracked GHG verification workflow
In an effort to reduce emails, we’ve built direct communications tools into our platform. You can now talk to us directly, using the Request a GHG verification button. This will help you to verify a vessel’s GHG Rating and energy saving equipment quickly and easily.
Here you will complete a questionnaire that is tailored to your vessel requirements, rather than sending several emails to our team.
Improved GHG transparency
You’ll now receive greater insight into the individual factors that make up your vessel’s GHG Rating and have full access to data sources. This bolsters transparency for both the owner and charterer, in turn ensuring more accurate ratings.
Best practice GHG benchmarking
RightShip’s new platform provides comprehensive analysis of the make-up of your fleet, and a comparison of the world fleet’s efficiency, so you gain comparative context. It also provides owners with verification status of their vessels, so they’re well placed to determine where work is needed.
Get the job done in one place
You can now complete GHG verification requests, receive outcomes and communicate with our team in one location within the RightShip platform. With GHG Ratings and vetting housed within the platform, you’ll experience a seamless, holistic vetting process.
The GHG Rating
RightShip’s GHG Rating
We’re steering the shipping industry to a sustainable future with our GHG Rating – reduce your emissions to gain a competitive advantage in a carbon constrained market.
The GHG Rating
RightShip’s GHG Emissions Rating was developed in response to the growing trend of global CO2 emissions and the industry demand to improve efficiency. It offers a systematic and transparent means of comparing the relative efficiency of the world’s shipping fleet.
Each vessel is provided with an individual GHG Rating, allowing customers to compare a ship’s theoretical CO2 emissions relative to peer vessels of a similar size and type. We use an easy-to-interpret A – G scale, with A being the most efficient rating.
The focus on supply chain emissions is growing with the environmental performance of many large corporations coming under increased scrutiny. This has a top-down impact through supply chains and operators with superior GHG Ratings are experiencing a competitive advantage in the market.
Working towards a zero-emissions future
As RightShip moves to its new digital platform, you’ll see several enhancements that strengthen our safety and sustainability ecosystem. This includes improvements to the ways the GHG Rating is calculated and incorporated with our vetting products and services.
The GHG Rating was a market-leading sustainability tool when we launched it in 2012, and in order to remain at the forefront of emissions reductions, we must continue to evolve.
How has the GHG Rating changed?
In the new platform, you’ll see the following additions and changes to our GHG Rating:
- 'We’ve included vessels with non-standard propulsion to their peer groups, which mainly impacts LNG vessels.
- The data we obtain from IHS is better integrated to automatically apply some correction factors to vessels, as per the IMO guidelines. Previously this process was completed manually as part of vessel verification.
- Our calculation formula has been updated to align with more recent developments to the IMO’s EEDI guidelines, such as the revised ice-class calculation.
Why these changes are important
We’ve expanded the scope of the GHG Rating to include more vessel types. By applying to a diverse range of vessels (such as LNG carriers with non-standard propulsion), our GHG Rating and Carbon Accounting Tool will drive significant market change.
The automatic application of correction factors strengthens our ratings, particularly for unverified vessels. Having the relevant correction factors applied prior to verification will close the gap between an unverified and verified rating, making the unverified ratings more robust.
When it comes to sustainability, we can’t afford to be complacent and must continuously improve our systems and processes. This is why we ensure our GHG Rating and EVDI calculations are updated to align with the IMO guidelines, which evolve over time based on market feedback and new research.
The GHG Rating
The RightShip’s GHG Methodology
How ships are compared
Rather than adopting a ‘one size fits all’ approach, the GHG Rating compares the theoretical CO2 emissions of a peer group of vessels, across similar size and type.
Ship types for comparison align with the IMO’s guidelines for calculation of EEDI reference lines. The peer groups for comparison include bulk carriers, chemical tankers, containerships, crude & product tankers, cruise & passenger ships, general cargo ships, LNG tankers, LPG tankers, refrigerated cargo ships and ro-ro cargo ships.
Vessels are compared in size to other vessels plus or minus 10% of their DWT.
RightShip’s GHG Rating utilises one of two sources when determining an individual vessel’s efficiency. We consider the EVDI (Existing Vessel Design Index), or the EEDI (Energy Efficiency Design Index).
The EVDI and EEDI provide an indication of a vessel's design efficiency, representing grams of CO2 per tonne nautical mile, and can be used interchangeably.
GHG Ratings across a ship type
The GHG Rating compares the relative efficiency of a ship using the EVDI (or EEDI as applicable).
This means that a vessel is assigned a rating based on how it’s EVDI compares to the average EVDI score for vessels of a similar type and size.
The rating is designed to place an average vessel in the middle of the D rating band, generally following a normal peer distribution, or bell curve. Vessels which are more efficient than the average are given a higher rating, while vessels which are less efficient are provided with a lower rating.
In general, the ratings for a vessel’s peer group fit the following fixed percentages. When we look at the distribution of ratings across a vessel type, the largest portion of vessels are D rated and only a small number are A or G rated vessels. However, this may vary depending on the makeup of the fleet.
A vessel’s size score represents where it sits within a GHG Rating band. The size score is displayed along the bottom of the bell curve below. You can see that a vessel with a size score of 1.3 is B-rated, where as a size score of -1.3 is a F-rated vessel. The ratings are dynamic and subject to change as the peer group changes, therefore it is common for a vessel’s size score and GHG Rating to slowly change over time.
The GHG Rating
You and the RightShip GHG Rating
Verifying your vessel's GHG Rating
On the RightShip platform, we display if a vessel’s GHG Rating has been verified by the shipowner. An unverified rating provides an indication of vessel performance as it is based on vessel specific IHS inputs, IMO assumptions and sister vessel data.
To help gather accurate data in the GHG Rating, RightShip provides all shipowners with the ability to submit documentation to confirm the inputs used in the calculation. Once checked through by our Sustainability team, the vessel is shown as having a verified GHG Rating on the vessel page.
Owners will benefit from verifying their vessels because the GHG Rating can be used as part of RightShip’s due diligence and risk assessment vessel vetting service. Our online vetting process notifies the owners of unverified vessels when the GHG Rating of their vessel is impacting the outcome of a vet. However, the delay associated with obtaining the relevant verification documents from the owner means that there is a commercial incentive for vessel owners to pro-actively verify their vessel’s ratings.
A fully verified vessel, which meets customer’s vetting criteria for the GHG Rating, passes through the vetting process in a seamless manner. This positions a verified vessel at competitive advantage over peer vessels that are unverified.
Incentivising new build designs
Our overarching goal is to improve sustainability standards in the maritime industry. To achieve this goal, we aim to reward owners who have prioritised efficiency with superior design, consideration of engine performance and build of their vessels.
Our GHG Rating aims to shine a light on the top tier of vessels operating in a segment, which will enable charterers, banks and shipowners to have more transparency in their decision making.
We understand that some of the biggest efficiency gains can be had at the design stage of a vessel. Therefore, we work with shipowners by providing pre-assessments of GHG Ratings prior to the final build stage, insights into efficient shipyards to build vessels, as well as benchmarking of previous vessel performance.
Continual improvement over a vessel’s life
RightShip also recognises the huge need to promote those who invest in sustainability advances in their current fleet. By investing in energy saving equipment, existing vessels can improve their efficiency and move up the GHG Rating bands.
Vessels that have been upgraded with energy saving equipment to operate more efficiently than designed are recognised through the rating. A vessel’s GHG Rating may improve and/or a plus sign (+) will appear next to the GHG Rating. The plus sign (+) increases visibility of a vessel among its peers. It also allows owners to clearly display the actions they have taken to improve their vessels environmental performance and then market them accordingly.
The GHG Rating
How can I improve?
Steps to improve a vessel's EVDI/GHG Rating
- Verify your vessel's GHG rating by requesting a GHG verification
- Speak to a class or a qualified third party about the most appropriate energy saving equipment for your vessel.
- Consult RightShip for a pre-assessment of GHG Rating change by email email@example.com
- Provide RightShip with the appropriate documentation, detailing the improvement to the EVDI.
There are various energy saving equipment options for shipowners to consider in terms of improving the GHG Rating. The energy saving equipment will need to have a positive effect on one or more of the elements contained in the EEDI/EVDI equation. (See guidelines). For example, the speed of the vessel, engine size, specific fuel consumption, etc. so that the vessel is operating more efficiently than first designed.
The main energy saving equipment categories that can lead to a GHG Rating improvement include:
- 'Major conversion' (e.g. alter ship dimensions, cargo carrying capacity or engine power)
- 'Mechanical/electrical measures' (technological measures for improved energy efficiency e.g. propulsion improvements),
Note: The benefits from ‘operational measures’ such as low friction paint, cannot usually be isolated from the EVDI equation and will generally not improve the GHG Rating. They may however qualify your vessel for a plus (+) symbol next to the GHG Rating, to signify that it is operating more efficiently than designed.
For us to include this improvement in your vessel's rating, we require documentation from class or a qualified third party detailing the improvement to the vessel. This can take the form of a re-sea trial or CFD modelling. It needs to be vessel specific and outline how the energy saving equipment improves the efficiency of the vessel under EEDI/EVDI conditions e.g. the Vref at 75% main engine MCR at summer load draught.
Most common vessel energy saving equipment