VISWA LAB Tel: USA (713) 842-1985

Fax: USA (713) 842-1981

8423 Almeda Road, Suite ‘S’
Email: customerhelp@viswalab.com
Houston, Texas 77054, USA Web: http://www.viswalab.com

TECHNICAL UPDATE: 2008/9/24

COMPARISON OF GRADES IFO 180, IFO 380, IFO 500 AND IFO 700 AS OF SEPTEMBER 2008

We made a comparison between these four grades of fuel in 2005 (refer technical update
2005/11/14) in order to find out if the higher viscosity grades had a higher EFN which would
mean that they have better properties from the wear and tear and corrosion potential point of
view. In 2005, we found that MFO 500 indeed had an EFN at least 5 points higher than IFO 180
and IFO 380.

A similar comparison made in 2007 (refer technical update 2007/3/4) compared IFO 180 and IFO
380 with RMK45 and RMK700. The EFN difference was only 1. The higher viscosity fuels had EFN
of 63 each, while IFO 180 and IFO 380 had EFN of 62. This indicated that the difference in quality
had indeed narrowed and this happened along with a sharp spike in the usage of higher viscosity
fuels, since more fuel users went for higher viscosity fuels because they cost less and also
because of a belief that their general quality was better.

We now carried out a very comprehensive comparison of these fuels on a very large number of
samples. The findings are very interesting. As far as RMK 45 (EFN 60.3) is concerned, the quality
has leveled up with that of RMG 380 (60.2) and in fact slightly below that of RMG 180 (EFN 61.2).
The other interesting finding is that RMK 45 fuel density jumped from 992.7 in 2007 to 1000.7 in
2008. The important point here is that any ship not having Al-Cap type of purifier should not go
for RMK 45 fuel. Only RMK 700 had an EFN of 63, which is 2 to 3 points more than RME 180, RMG
380 and RMK 45. The conclusion to be drawn is that RME 180, RMG 380 and RMK 45 have drawn
level in terms of fuel quality (EFN number). RMK 700 remains at a higher level.

Once again, we wish to caution that the higher viscosity fuels are supplied by a very limited
number of major suppliers from major ports. Therefore, the conclusions drawn above should not
be the sole criterion in deciding to switch over to a higher viscosity fuel. It is better to obtain
recommendations of the engine makers as well.

DATA FOR 2008

GRADE # DEN VIS 50 H20 MCR SUL TSE ASH Al+Si V Na EFN
RME 180 5499 974.3 162.46 0.13 11.5 2.25 0.02 0.03 18.76 74.64 20.99 61.2
RMG 380 26740 983.3 333.79 0.13 12.92 2.32 0.01 0.03 19.58 96.56 19.85 60.2
RMK45 540 1000.7 440.21 0.13 15.13 2.65 0.02 0.04 28.05 104.62 22.36 60.3
RMK 700 1098 992.8 408.26 0.15 14.21 2.66 0.02 0.04 22.6 112.78 21.72 63
Grand Total 982.5 310.2 0.13 12.77 2.32 0.02 0.03 19.68 93.66 20.13 60.5
OLDER DATA FROM 2007
GRADE # DEN VIS50 VIS100 H2O MCR SUL TSE ASH Al + Si V NA EFN
IFO 180 2091 973.9 153.87 22.10 0.12 10.82 2.37 0.02 0.03 18.31 69.46 18.18 62
IFO 380 11088 982.4 327.26 32.30 0.12 12.59 2.49 0.02 0.03 18.52 88.74 19.50 62
RMK 45 (ISO
8217:1996) 188 992.7 415.27 37.00 0.14 13.01 2.58 0.02 0.03 25.43 92.76 21.41 63
RMK 700 173 994.9 477.30 40.60 0.17 14.05 2.78 0.02 0.04 19.31 112.71 22.02 63

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

Best regards,
Dr.Vis