EventsThe 1st International Online Conference on Inventions
Published
This submission belongs to the session S1. Energy transition, decarbonization and environmental policy of the event The 1st International Online Conference on Inventions
Published date
22 Jun, 2026
Academic Editor
author-avatarZahid Ullah
Citation
Florin Barbu, Eugen-Victor-Cristian Rusu, Costel Ungureanu, Operational Risk Governance in LNG Bunkering: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis of Commissioning Practices, in Proceedings of The 1st International Online Conference on Inventions, 25 June–26 June 2026, MDPI: Basel, Switzerland
Share
Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Operational Risk Governance in LNG Bunkering: A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis of Commissioning Practices

Florin Barbu 1
image
1. Faculty of Engineering, “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, Galati, 47 Domneasca Street, 800008, Romania, Romania
2. National Institute for Research and Development in Environmental Protection, 294 Splaiul Independenței Blv, District 6, Zip code 060031, Bucharest, Romania, Romania
3. Faculty of Engineering, “Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, Galati, 47 Domneasca Street, 800008, Romania
4. Faculty of Naval Architecture, ”Dunărea de Jos” University of Galati, 47 Domnească Street, RO-800008, Galati, Romania, Romania
Abstract

This study presents a cross-comparative analysis of LNG bunkering operations performed in Romania, Spain, and Canada during the commissioning phase of a dual-fuel Ro-Ro vessel. The investigation examines operational sequences, safety management frameworks, and environmental safeguards implemented in three distinct maritime settings: Damen Shipyard in 2 Mai (Romania), the Port of Cartagena (Spain), and the Port of Tilbury in Vancouver (Canada). Particular attention is directed toward variations in tank cooldown strategies, LNG transfer configurations, and applied risk-control measures.

In the Romanian case, a phased thermal conditioning procedure was implemented using vaporized and liquid nitrogen to gradually reduce system temperature prior to LNG introduction. Transfer was conducted through pressure differential, emphasizing equipment preservation and procedural compliance. The Spanish operation relied on established terminal infrastructure and truck-based pumping systems, coordinated closely by the vessel’s engineering personnel within a structured port environment. By contrast, the Canadian bunkering process, executed after vessel delivery under client supervision, involved direct LNG transfer without progressive cooldown, raising concerns regarding potential thermal loading effects on critical components, including the tank loading valve.

The comparative evaluation identifies procedural strengths and operational vulnerabilities across the three contexts. The findings underline the necessity for harmonized commissioning standards and clearly defined cooldown protocols, particularly in regions lacking mature LNG bunkering infrastructure. Overall, the analysis contributes to the development of safer, standardized approaches for LNG adoption in maritime transport and supports ongoing efforts to enhance regulatory coherence and environmental responsibility in emerging LNG markets.

Keywords
LNG bunkering procedures
Vessel commissioning
Dual-fuel ships
Cryogenic risk management
Maritime safety standardization
The model for estimation of the effect of atmospheric light scattering on a wireless energy transition
Thermal Transient Control and Safety Validation During LNG Tank Cooldown Before First Marine Bunkering Operation